59908 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 1997 / Notices

sounding of the alarm, to familiarize

personnel with the evacuation plan, and

to designate responsible individuals for

determining the cause of the alarm, and

to place radiation survey instruments in

accessible locations for use in such an

emergency.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated April 3, 1997, as

supplemented by letter dated August 4,

1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The purpose of 10 CFR 70.24 is to

ensure that if a criticality were to occur

during the handling of special nuclear

material, personnel would be alerted to

that fact and would take appropriate

action. At a commercial nuclear power

plant the inadvertent criticality with

which 10 CFR 70.24 is concerned could

occur during fuel handling operations.

The special nuclear material that could

be assembled into a critical mass at a

commercial nuclear power plant is in

the form of nuclear fuel; the quantity of

other forms of special nuclear material

that is stored on site in any given

location is small enough to preclude

achieving a critical mass. Because the

fuel is not enriched beyond 5.0 weight

percent uranium-235 and because

commercial nuclear plant licensees have

procedures and design features that

prevent inadvertent criticality, the staff

has determined that it is unlikely that

an inadvertent criticality could occur

due to the handling of special nuclear

material at a commercial power reactor.

The requirements of 10 CFR 70.24,

therefore, are not necessary to ensure

the safety of personnel during the

handling of special nuclear materials at

commercial power reactors.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that inadvertent or accidental

criticality will be precluded through

compliance with the Diablo Canyon

Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Technical

Specifications, the design of the fuel

storage racks providing geometric

spacing of fuel assemblies in their

storage locations, and administrative

controls imposed on fuel handling

procedures.

The proposed exemption would not

result in an increase in the probability

or consequences of accidents, affect

radiological plant effluents, or cause any

significant occupational exposures.

Therefore, there are no radiological

impacts associated with the proposed

exemption.

The proposed exemption does not

result in a change in non-radiological

effluents and will have no other nonradiological environmental impact.

Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no significant

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

that there is no measurable

environmental impact associated with

the proposed action, any alternatives

with equal or greater environmental

impact need not be evaluated. As an

alternative to the proposed exemption,

the staff considered denial of the

requested exemption. Denial of the

request would result in no change in

current environmental impacts. The

environmental impacts of the proposed

action and the alternative action are

similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statements for the Diablo Canyon Power

Plant dated May 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on October 6, 1997, the staff consulted

with the California State official, Mr.

Steve Hsu of the Radiologic Health

Branch of the State Department of

Health Services, regarding the

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon 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

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated April 3, 1997, and supplemental

letter dated August 3, 1997, which are

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

which is located at The Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC., and at the local public

document room located at the California

Polytechnic State University, Robert E.

Kennedy Library, Government

Documents and Maps Department, San

Luis Obispo, California 93407.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day

of October 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Steven D. Bloom,

Project Manager, Project Directorate IV–2,

Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–29245 Filed 11–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–346]

Toledo Edison Company; Centerior

Service Company and The Cleveland

Electric Illuminating Company; DavisBesse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1;

Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption

from certain requirements of its

regulations to Facility Operating License

No. NPF–3, issued to Toledo Edison

Company, Centerior Service Company,

and The Cleveland Electric Illuminating

Company (the licensees), for operation

of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power

Station, Unit 1, located in Ottawa

County, Ohio.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

the licensees from the requirements of

10 CFR 70.24, which requires in each

area in which special nuclear material is

handled, used, or stored a monitoring

system that will energize clear audible

alarms if accidental criticality occurs.

The proposed action would also exempt

the licensees from the requirements to

maintain emergency procedures for each

area in which this licensed special

nuclear material is handled, used, or

stored to ensure that all personnel

withdraw to an area of safety upon the

sounding of the alarm, to familiarize

personnel with the evacuation plan, to

designate responsible individuals for

determining the cause of the alarm, and

to place radiation survey instruments in

accessible locations for use in such an

emergency.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensees’ application for

exemption dated January 30, 1997, as

supplemented May 28 and October 3,

1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The purpose of 10 CFR 70.24 is to

ensure that if a criticality were to occur

during the handling of special nuclear

material, personnel would be alerted to

that fact and would take appropriate
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 1997 / Notices 59909

action. At a commercial nuclear power

plant, the inadvertent criticality with

which 10 CFR 70.24 is concerned could

occur during fuel handling operations.

The special nuclear material that could

be assembled into a critical mass at a

commercial nuclear power plant is in

the form of nuclear fuel; the quantity of

other forms of special nuclear material

that is stored onsite in any given

location is small enough to preclude

achieving a critical mass. Because the

fuel is not enriched beyond 5.0 weight

percent uranium-235, and because

commercial nuclear plant licensees have

procedures and design features that

prevent inadvertent criticality, the staff

has determined that it is unlikely that

an inadvertent criticality could occur

due to the handling of special nuclear

material at a commercial power reactor.

Therefore, the requirements of 10 CFR

70.24 are not necessary to ensure the

safety of personnel during the handling

of special nuclear materials at

commercial power reactors.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that inadvertent or accidental

criticality will be precluded through

compliance with the Davis-Besse

Technical Specifications, the design of

the fuel storage racks providing

geometric spacing of fuel assemblies in

their storage locations, and

administrative controls imposed on fuel

handling procedures.

The proposed exemption would not

result in an increase in the probability

or consequences of accidents, affect

radiological plant effluents, or cause any

significant occupational exposures.

Therefore, there are no radiological

impacts associated with the proposed

exemption.

The proposed exemption does not

result in a change in nonradiological

effluents and will have no other

nonradiological environmental impact.

Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no significant

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

that there is no measurable

environmental impact associated with

the proposed action, any alternatives

with equal or greater environmental

impact need not be evaluated. As an

alternative to the proposed exemption,

the staff considered denial of the

requested exemption. Denial of the

request would result in no change in

current environmental impacts. The

environmental impacts of the proposed

action and the alternative action are

similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement related to the operation of

Davis-Besse dated October 1975.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on July 30, 1997, the staff consulted

with the Ohio State official, Carol

O’Claire, of the Ohio Emergency

Management Agency, regarding the

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon 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

proposed action, see the licensees’

letters dated January 30, May 28, and

October 3, 1997, which are available for

public inspection at the Commission’s

Public Document Room located at the

Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and at the local public

document room located at the

University of Toledo, William Carlson

Library, Government Documents

Collection, 2801 West Bancroft Avenue,

Toledo, OH 43606.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day

of October 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Gail H. Marcus,

Director, Project Directorate III–3, Division

of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–29243 Filed 11–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Advisory Committee on Nuclear

Waste; Notice of Meeting

The Advisory Committee on Nuclear

Waste (ACNW) will hold its 96th

meeting on November 20–22, 1997, in

Room T–2B3, at 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland.

The entire meeting will be open to

public attendance.

The schedule for this meeting is as

follows:

Thursday, November 20, 1997—8:30

a.m. until 6 p.m.

Friday, November 21, 1997—8:30 a.m.

until 6 p.m.

Saturday, November 22, 1997—8:30

a.m. until 4 p.m.

A. Meeting with NRC’s Director,

Division of Waste Management, Office

of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards—The Committee will meet

with the Director to discuss

developments at the Yucca Mountain

project, resources, rules under

development, and other items of mutual

interest.

B. Waste Classification at West Valley,

Hanford and Savannah River—The NRC

staff will brief the Committee on its

evaluation of the DOE methodology for

classification of waste resulting from

treatment, bulk high-level waste

removal and cleaning of tanks.

Background and history will be

discussed along with current status,

review schedules and criteria for the

classification of wastes as incidental.

C. Standard Review Plan on Dry Cask

Storage Facility—The Committee will

review and provide comments on this

Standard Review Plan.

D. HLW Issue Resolution Status

Reports and Acceptance Criteria—The

NRC staff will update the Committee on

the progress of staff reviews related to

the high-level waste key technical

issues. (Tentative)

E. NRC’s Division of Waste

Management Priorities—The Committee

will review the Division of Waste

Management’s priorities and planned

interactions with the ACNW for the

coming year.

F. Prepare for Next Meeting with the

Commission—The Committee will

prepare for its next formal meeting with

the Commission. The Committee is

scheduled to discuss items of mutual

interest with the Commission on

December 17, 1997.

G. Preparation of ACNW Reports—

The Committee will discuss planned

reports, including comments on the

Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel

Dry Storage Facilities, comments on

NRC Waste Related Research, ACNW

Priorities, and other topics discussed

during the meeting as the need arises.

H. Committee Activities/Future

Agenda—The Committee will consider

topics proposed for future consideration

by the full Committee and Working

Groups. The Committee will discuss

ACNW-related activities of individual

members.

I. Miscellaneous—The Committee will

discuss miscellaneous matters related to

the conduct of Committee activities and

organizational activities and complete