9036 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices 

license of a utilization facility, which 

does no more than conform the licenses 

to reflect the transfer action, involves no 

significant hazards consideration and no 

genuine issue as to whether the health 

and safety of the public will be 

significantly affected. No contrary 

determination has been made with 

respect to this specific license 

amendment application. In light of the 

generic determination reflected in 10 

CFR 2.1315, no public comments with 

respect to significant hazards 

considerations are being solicited, 

notwithstanding the general comment 

procedures contained in 10 CFR 50.91. 

The filing of requests for hearing and 

petitions for leave to intervene, and 

written comments with regard to the 

license transfer application, are 

discussed below. 

Within 20 days from the date of 

publication of this notice, any person 

whose interest may be affected by the 

Commission’s action on the application 

may request a hearing and, if not the 

applicant, may petition for leave to 

intervene in a hearing proceeding on the 

Commission’s action. Requests for a 

hearing and petitions for leave to 

intervene should be filed in accordance 

with the Commission’s rules of practice 

set forth in Subpart C ‘‘Rules of General 

Applicability: Hearing Requests, 

Petitions to Intervene, Availability of 

Documents, Selection of Specific 

Hearing Procedures, Presiding Officer 

Powers, and General Hearing 

Management for NRC Adjudicatory 

Hearings,’’ of 10 CFR Part 2. In 

particular, such requests and petitions 

must comply with the requirements set 

forth in 10 CFR 2.309. Untimely 

requests and petitions may be denied, as 

provided in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1), unless 

good cause for failure to file on time is 

established. In addition, an untimely 

request or petition should address the 

factors that the Commission will also 

consider, in reviewing untimely 

requests or petitions, set forth in 10 CFR 

2.309(c)(1)(I)-(viii). 

Requests for a hearing and petitions 

for leave to intervene should be served 

upon Arthur H. Domby, Troutman 

Sanders LLP, 600 Peachtree Street, 

Atlanta, GA 30308, telephone: 404–885–

3130, facsimile: 404–962–6546, e-mail: 

arthur.domby@troutmansanders.com; 

Jonathan Rogoff, Vice President, General 

Counsel and Secretary, Nuclear 

Management Company, LLC, 700 First 

Street, Hudson, WI 54016, telephone: 

715–377–3316, facsimile: 715–386–

1013, e-mail: 

jonathan.rogoff@nmcco.com; Mitchell 

S. Ross, Associate General Counsel, FPL 

Energy Point Beach, LLC, 700 Universe 

Blvd., Juno Beach, Florida 33408, 

telephone: 561–691–7126, facsimile: 

561–691–7135, e-mail: 

mitch_ross@fpl.com; the General 

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001 (e-mail address for filings 

regarding license transfer cases only: 

OGCLT@NRC.gov); and the Secretary of 

the Commission, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001, Attention: Rulemakings 

and Adjudications Staff, in accordance 

with 10 CFR 2.302 and 2.305. 

The Commission will issue a notice or 

order granting or denying a hearing 

request or intervention petition, 

designating the issues for any hearing 

that will be held and designating the 

Presiding Officer. A notice granting a 

hearing will be published in the Federal 

Register and served on the parties to the 

hearing. 

As an alternative to requests for 

hearing and petitions to intervene, 

within 30 days from the date of 

publication of this notice, persons may 

submit written comments regarding the 

license transfer application, as provided 

for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission 

will consider and, if appropriate, 

respond to these comments, but such 

comments will not otherwise constitute 

part of the decisional record. Comments 

should be submitted to the Secretary, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: 

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 

and should cite the publication date and 

page number of this Federal Register 

notice. 

For further details with respect to this 

action, see the application dated January 

26, 2007, available for public inspection 

at the Commission’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 

North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland. Publicly available records 

will be accessible electronically from 

the Agency wide Documents Access and 

Management System’s (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http:// 

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 

Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR 

Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–

397–4209, or 301–415–4737 or by e-mail 

to pdr@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 22nd day 

of February 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Patrick D. Milano, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch III–1, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E7–3474 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–259, 50–260, and 50–296] 

Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns 

Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3, 

Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an exemption from Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 

CFR), Part 50, Appendix R, for Facility 

Operating License Nos. DPR–33, DPR–

52, and DPR–68, issued to the 

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA, the 

licensee), for operation of the Browns 

Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 1, 2, 

and 3, located in Limestone County, 

Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10 

CFR 50.21, the NRC is issuing this 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would allow 

intervening combustibles such as the 

480V Reactor Building Vent Boards 1B, 

2B, and 3B; small panels in Units 1, 2 

and 3; and the 1-hour fire rated fire 

wrap (Thermo-lag) material in the 20- 

foot separation zones identified. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee’s application dated 

October 26, 2006, as supplemented by a 

letter dated January 11, 2007. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

Section III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR 

Part 50 is related to fire protection 

features to ensure that components of 

redundant trains of equipment, 

including cables and circuits, to achieve 

and maintain safe-shutdown are free of 

fire damage. Either the fire protection 

configurations must meet the specific 

requirements of Section III.G or an 

alternative fire protection configuration 

must be justified by a fire hazard 

analysis. 

During the September 2006 NRC audit 

of the Unit 1 Fire Protection Program, it 

was identified that 20-foot separation 

zones included intervening 

combustibles that were not specifically 

addressed in an approved exemption by 

the NRC dated October 21, 1988. TVA 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices 9037 

has requested this exemption in order to 

revise the October 1988 exemption to 

include additional combustibles such as 

the 480V Reactor Building Vent Boards 

1B, 2B, and 3B; small panels in Units 1, 

2 and 3; and the one hour fire rated fire 

wrap (Thermo-lag) material for the 20- 

foot separation zones identified. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The proposed action will not 

significantly increase the probability or 

consequences of accidents. The NRC 

staff has completed its evaluation of the 

proposed exemption and associated 

amendment and finds that the 

calculated total doses remain within the 

acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.67 and 

General Design Criterion 19, and there 

is no significant increase in 

occupational or public radiation 

exposure. The NRC staff, thus, 

concludes that granting the proposed 

exemption would result in no 

significant radiological environmental 

impact. 

The proposed action does not affect 

nonradiological plant effluents or 

historical sites, and has no other 

environmental impact. Therefore, there 

are no significant nonradiological 

impacts associated with the proposed 

exemption. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. 

Alternative to the Proposed Action 

As an alternative to the proposed 

action, the NRC staff considered denial 

of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no 

action’’ alternative). Denial of the 

exemption would result in no change in 

current environmental impacts. Thus, 

the environmental impacts of the 

proposed action and the alternative 

action are similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

previously considered in the Final 

Environmental Statement for the BFN 

dated September 1, 1972, for Units 1, 2, 

and 3. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on February 6, 2007, the NRC staff 

consulted with the Alabama State 

official, Kirk Whatley of the Office of 

Radiological Control, regarding the 

environmental impact of the proposed 

action. The State official had no 

comments. 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the environmental 

assessment, the Commission concludes 

that the proposed action will not have 

a significant effect on the quality of the 

human environment. Accordingly, the 

Commission has determined not to 

prepare an environmental impact 

statement for the proposed action. 

For further details with respect to the 

purposed action, see the licensee’s letter 

dated October 26, 2006. Documents may 

be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at 

the NRC’s Public Document Room 

(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 

Public File Area O–1 F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland. Publicly available records 

will be accessible electronically from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http:// 

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 

Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR 

Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–

397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or send an 

e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day 

of February 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Eva A. Brown, 

Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II–

2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E7–3476 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL 

REVIEW BOARD 

Privacy Act of 1974; Systems of 

Records 

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical 

Review Board. 

ACTION: Notice of modification to two 

existing systems of records. 

SUMMARY: 5 U.S.C. 552a requires that 

each federal agency review its systems 

of records containing personal 

information covered by the Privacy Act 

of 1974. As a result of its latest review, 

the Board is amending both of the 

systems of records that it maintains. A 

description of these systems was 

published in November 22, 2006 (71 FR 

67654–67655). The Board proposed 

amending NWTRB–1 and expanding 

NWTRB–2 to include other information 

useful to the Board. In the first system, 

Administrative Files, some categories 

were overlooked in the previous notice. 

The Board further proposed expanding 

the second system, Mailing List, to 

become the Contact List. The Board 

determined that the changes to 

NWTRB–1 were important enough to 

republish the notice with the changes 

and that the changes to NWTRB–2 were 

substantial enough to accept comments 

on the proposed expansion until 

January 15, 2007. The Board received no 

comments on the proposed expansion. 

DATES: The changes to NWTRB–2 will 

become effective on February 28, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Victoria Reich, 703–235–4473. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board 

currently maintains two systems of 

records , NWTRB–1 and NWTRB–2, that 

contain information covered by the 

Privacy Act of 1974. In its review of 

these systems, the Board has found 

classes of information that were not 

included in its previous notice and on 

November 22, 2006, republished 

NWTRB–1 with the corrections added. 

The Board further found that expanding 

the records in NWTRB–2 would make it 

more useful and requested comments 

from the public from November 22, 

2006, until January 15, 2007. No 

comments were received during this 

period. Accordingly, the Board plans to 

proceed with the proposed changes on 

February 28, 2007. 

Dated: February 23, 2007. 

William D. Barnard, 

Executive Director, U.S. Nuclear Waste 

Technical Review Board. 

[FR Doc. 07–885 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–AM–M 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 

MANAGEMENT 

Proposed Demonstration Project; Pay 

Banding and Performance-Based Pay 

Adjustments in the National Nuclear 

Security Administration 

ACTION: Notice of a proposed 

demonstration project plan. 

SUMMARY: Chapter 47 of title 5, United 

States Code, authorizes the Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM), directly 

or in agreement with one or more 

agencies, to conduct demonstration 

projects that experiment with new and 

different human resources management 

concepts to determine whether changes 

in human resources policy or 

procedures would result in improved 

Federal human resources management. 

The National Nuclear Security 

Administration (NNSA) and OPM 

propose to test a pay banding system in 

which within-band pay progression is 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES