42608 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 152 / Thursday, August 7, 1997 / Notices

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs (3150–0101), NEOB–10202,

Office of Management and Budget,

Washington DC 20503.

Comments can also be submitted by

telephone at 202–395–3084.

The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda

Jo. Shelton, 301–415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day

of July 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Arnold E. Levin,

Acting Designated Senior Official for

Information Resources Management.

[FR Doc. 97–20877 Filed 8–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Application for a License To Export

Nuclear Material

Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70 (b) ‘‘Public

notice of receipt of an application’’,

please take notice that the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission has received the

following application for an export

license. Copies of the application are on

file in the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission’s Public Document Room

located at 2120 L Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C.

A request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene may be filed within

30 days after publication of this notice

in the Federal Register. Any request for

hearing or petition for leave to intervene

shall be served by the requestor or

petitioner upon the applicant, the Office

of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

D.C. 20555; the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

D.C. 20555; and the Executive Secretary,

U.S. Department of State, Washington,

D.C. 20520.

In its review of the applications for

licenses to export nuclear grade graphite

and heavy water as defined in 10 CFR

Part 110 and noticed herein, the

Commission does not evaluate the

health, safety or environmental effects

in the recipient nation of the material to

be exported. The information

concerning the application follows.

NRC EXPORT LICENSE APPLICATION

Name of applicant, date of application, date received, application

No. Description of Items to be exported

Country

of destination

Cambridge Isotope Labs, 07/14/97, 07/16/97, XMAT0395 .............. Heavy Water to Canada for upgrading and return to U.S. ............. Canada

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Dated this first day of August 1997 at

Rockville, Maryland.

Ronald D. Hauber,

Director, Division of Nonproliferation,

Exports and Multilateral Relations, Office of

International Programs.

[FR Doc. 97–20891 Filed 8–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–369 and 50–370]

In the Matter of Duke Power Company;

(McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and

2); Exemption

I

The Duke Power Company (the

licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License Nos. NPF–9 and

NPF–17, for the McGuire Nuclear

Station, Units 1 and 2. The licenses

provide, among other things, that the

licensee is subject to all rules,

regulations, and orders of the

Commission now or hereafter in effect.

These facilities consist of two

pressurized water reactors located at the

licensee’s site in Mecklenburg County,

North Carolina.

II

Title 10 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (10 CFR) at subsection (a) of

10 CFR 70.24, ‘‘Criticality Accident

Requirements,’’ requires that each

licensee authorized to possess special

nuclear material shall maintain in each

area where such material is handled,

used, or stored, a criticality accident

monitoring system ‘‘using gamma-or

neutron-sensitive radiation detectors

which will energize clearly audible

alarm signals if accidental criticality

occurs.’’ Subsection (a)(1) and (a)(2) of

10 CFR 70.24 specify the detection,

sensitivity, and coverage capabilities of

the monitors required by 10 CFR

70.24(a). Subsection (a)(3) of 10 CFR

70.24 requires that the licensee shall

maintain emergency procedures for each

area in which this licensed special

nuclear material is handled, used, or

stored and provides (1) that the

procedures ensure that all personnel

withdraw to an area of safety upon the

sounding of a criticality monitor alarm,

(2) that the procedures must include

drills to familiarize personnel with the

evacuation plan, and (3) that the

procedures designate responsible

individuals for determining the cause of

the alarm and placement of radiation

survey instruments in accessible

locations for use in such an emergency.

Subsection (b)(1) requires licensees to

have a means to quickly identify

personnel who have received a dose of

10 rads or more. Subsection (b)(2)

requires licensees to maintain personnel

decontamination facilities, to maintain

arrangements for a physician and other

medical personnel qualified to handle

radiation emergencies, and to maintain

arrangements for the transportation of

contaminated individuals to treatment

facilities outside the site boundary.

Subsection (c) exempts Part 50 licensees

(such as McGuire) from the

requirements of paragraph (b).

Subsection (d) states that any licensee

who believes that there is good cause

why he should be granted an exemption

from all or part of 10 CFR 70.24 may

apply to the Commission for such an

exemption and shall specify the reasons

for the relief requested.

By letter dated February 4, 1997, as

supplemented March 19, 1997, Duke

Power Company requested an

exemption for all its nuclear plants from

the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24. The

staff has reviewed the licensee’s

submittal, and documented its detailed

review in a Safety Evaluation. The staff

found that existing procedures and

design features make an inadvertent

criticality in special nuclear materials

handling or storage at McGuire unlikely.

The licensee has thus met the intent of

10 CFR 70.24(d) by the low probability

of an inadvertent criticality in areas

where fresh fuel could be present, by

the licensee’s adherence to General

Design Criterion 63 regarding radiation

monitoring, and by provisions for

personnel training and evacuation.

III

Section 70.14 of 10 CFR, ‘‘Specific

exemptions,’’ states that

The Commission may, upon application by

any interested person or upon its own

initiative, grant such exemptions from the

requirements of the regulations in this part as

it determines are authorized by law and will

not endanger life or property or the common
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 152 / Thursday, August 7, 1997 / Notices 42609

defense and security and are otherwise in the

public interest.

Section 70.24(d) of 10 CFR states that

Any licensee who believes that good cause

exists why he should be granted an

exemption in whole or in part from the

requirements of this section may apply to the

Commission for such exemption.

Accordingly, the Commission has

determined that good cause is present as

defined in 10 CFR 70.24(d). The

Commission has further determined

that, pursuant to 10 CFR 70.14, the

exemption is authorized by law and will

not endanger life or property or the

common defense and security and are

otherwise in the public interest.

Therefore, the Commission hereby

grants Duke Power Company an

exemption from the requirement of 10

CFR 70.24(a)(1), (2), and (3) for

McGuire, Units 1 and 2, on the bases as

stated in Section II above.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the

Commission has determined that

granting of this exemption will have no

significant effect on the quality of the

human environment (62 FR 41101).

This exemption is effective upon

issuance.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of July 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Samuel J. Collins,

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–20878 Filed 8–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Public Service Electric and Gas

Company, Philadelphia Electric

Company, Delmarva Power and Light

Company, Atlantic City Electric

Company, Salem Nuclear Generating

Station, Units 1 and 2 and Public

Service Electric and Gas Company,

Atlantic City Electric Company, Hope

Creek Generating Station; Exemption

[Docket Nos. 50–272 and 50–311; Docket

No. 50–354]

I.

The Public Service Electric and Gas

Company, et al. (PSE&G, the licensee),

is the holder of Facility Operating

License Nos. DPR–70, DPR–75 and

NPF–57, which authorize operation of

the Salem Nuclear Generating Station,

Units 1 and 2, and Hope Creek

Generating Station (Salem/Hope Creek).

The licenses provide, among other

things, that the licensee is subject to all

rules, regulations, and orders of the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the

Commission) now and hereafter in

effect.

The facilities consist of two

pressurized water reactors, Salem Units

1 and 2, and a boiling water reactor,

Hope Creek, located at the licensee’s site

in Salem County, New Jersey.

II.

It is stated in 10 CFR 73.55,

‘‘Requirements for physical protection

of licensed activities in nuclear power

reactors against radiological sabotage,’’

paragraph (a), ‘‘General performance

objective and requirements,’’ that ‘‘The

licensee shall establish and maintain an

onsite physical protection system and

security organization which will have as

its objective to provide high assurance

that activities involving special nuclear

material are not inimical to the common

defense and security and do not

constitute an unreasonable risk to the

public health and safety.’’

It is specified in 10 CFR 73.55(d),

‘‘Access Requirements,’’ paragraph (1),

that ‘‘The licensee shall control all

points of personnel and vehicle access

into a protected area.’’ It is specified in

10 CFR 73.55(d)(5) that ‘‘A numbered

picture badge identification system shall

be used for all individuals who are

authorized access to protected areas

without escort. . . .’’ It also states that

an individual not employed by the

licensee (i.e., contractors) may be

authorized access to protected areas

without escort provided the individual

‘‘receives a picture badge upon entrance

into the protected area which must be

returned upon exit from the protected

area. . .’’

The licensee proposed to implement

an alternative unescorted access control

system which would eliminate the need

to issue and retrieve badges at each

entrance/exit location and would allow

all individuals with unescorted access

to keep their badge with them when

departing the site.

An exemption from 10 CFR

73.55(d)(5) is required to allow

contractors who have unescorted access

to take their badges offsite instead of

returning them when exiting the site. By

letter dated January 17, 1997, the

licensee requested an exemption from

certain requirements of 10 CFR

73.55(d)(5) for this purpose.

III

Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5, ‘‘Specific

exemptions,’’ the Commission may,

upon application of any interested

person or upon its own initiative, grant

such exemptions in this part as it

determines are authorized by law and

will not endanger life or property or the

common defense and security, and are

otherwise in the public interest.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55, the

Commission may authorize a licensee to

provide measures for protection against

radiological sabotage provided the

licensee demonstrates that the measures

have ‘‘the same high assurance

objective’’ and meet ‘‘the general

performance requirements’’ of the

regulation, and ‘‘the overall level of

system performance provides protection

against radiological sabotage

equivalent’’ to that which would be

provided by the regulation.

At the Salem/Hope Creek site,

unescorted access into protected areas is

controlled through the use of a

photograph on a combination badge and

keycard. (Hereafter, these are referred to

as a ‘‘badge’’). The security officers at

the entrance station use the photograph

on the badge to visually identify the

individual requesting access. The

badges for both licensee employees and

contractor personnel who have been

granted unescorted access are issued

upon entrance at the entrance/exit

location and are returned upon exit. The

badges are stored and are retrievable at

the entrance/exit location. In

accordance with 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5),

contractor individuals are not allowed

to take badges offsite. In accordance

with the plant’s physical security plan,

neither licensee employee nor

contractors are allowed to take badges

offsite.

Under the proposed system, each

individual who is authorized for

unescorted access into protected areas

would have the physical characteristics

of their hand (hand geometry) registered

with their badge number in the access

control system. When an individual

enters the badge into the card reader

and places the hand on the measuring

surface, the system would record the

individual’s hand image. The unique

characteristics of the extracted hand

image would be compared with the

previously stored template in the access

control system to verify authorization

for entry. Individuals, including

licensee employees and contractors,

would be allowed to keep their badges

with them when they depart the site and

thus eliminate the process to issue,

retrieve and store badges at the entrance

stations to the plant. Badges do not

carry any information other than a

unique identification number.

All other access processes, including

search function capability, would

remain the same. This system would not

be used for persons requiring escorted

access, i.e., visitors.

Based on a Sandia report entitled, ‘‘A

Performance Evaluation of Biometric

Identification Devices’’ (SAND91—0276