64602 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Notices

subsidiaries. Atlantic Energy, Inc., will

cease to exist. PECO Energy Company,

Public Service Electric and Gas

Company (PSE&G), DP&L, and ACE are

co-holders of Facility Operating

Licenses Nos. DPR–44 and DPR–56,

issued for operation of PBAPS, Units 2

and 3, located in Peach Bottom

Township, York County, Pennsylvania.

PECO, the licensed operator of the

facilities, and PSE&G are not involved

in the proposed merger and

restructuring. An application filed by

ACE and DP&L under cover of a letter

dated April 30, 1997, from John H.

O’Neill, Jr., of Shaw, Pittman, Potts &

Trowbridge, Counsel for ACE and DP&L,

informed the Commission of the

proposed merger and corporate

restructuring.

According to the proposed plan, there

will be no significant change in

ownership, management, or sources of

funds for operation, maintenance, or

decommissioning of PBAPS, Units 2

and 3, due to the corporate

restructuring. ACE and DP&L will

continue to hold the licenses, and no

direct transfer of the licenses will occur.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, the

Commission may approve the transfer of

control of a license after appropriate

notice to interested persons. Such

approval is contingent upon the

Commission’s determination that the

holder of the license following the

transfer is qualified to hold the license

and that the transfer is otherwise

consistent with applicable provisions of

law, regulations, and orders of the

Commission.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the application

filed by ACE and DP&L under cover of

a letter dated April 30, 1997, as

supplemented November 7, 1997, from

John H. O’Neill, Jr., Shaw, Pittman,

Potts & Trowbridge (counsel for ACE

and DP&L), which is available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, The Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,

and at the local public document room

located at the Government Publications

Section, State Library of Pennsylvania,

(REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Education

Building, Walnut Street and

Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601,

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of December 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John F. Stolz,

Director, Project Directorate I–2, Division of

Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–32021 Filed 12–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–272 and 50–311]

Public Service Electric and Gas

Company; Atlantic City Electric

Company; Philadelphia Electric

Company; Delmarva Power and Light

Company; Salem Nuclear Generating

Station, Units 1 and 2 Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering approval, by issuance of an

order, under 10 CFR 50.80, of the

indirect transfer of control of the

interests in the Salem Nuclear

Generating Station (SNGS), Units 1 and

2, licenses to the extent effected by a

proposed merger of Atlantic Energy, Inc.

(the parent holding company of Atlantic

City Electric Company (ACE) and

Delmarva Power & Light Company

(DP&L), resulting in the formation of a

new holding company, Conectiv, Inc.

ACE is co-holder of Facility Operating

Licenses Nos. DPR–70 and DPR–75,

along with Public Service Electric and

Gas Company (PSE&G), Philadelphia

Electric Company (PECo), and DP&L

issued for operation of the SNGS, Units

1 and 2, located in Lower Alloways

Creek Township, Salem County, New

Jersey.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would consent to

the transfer of the interests in SNGS to

the extent effected by the proposed

merger of Atlantic Energy, Inc. and

DP&L, resulting in the formation of a

new holding company, Conectiv, Inc.,

under which ACE and DP&L would

become wholly owned subsidiaries. No

direct transfer of the licenses as held by

ACE and DP&L would occur. PSE&G,

the licensed operator of the facilities,

and PECo are not involved in the merger

and restructuring.

The proposed action is in accordance

with an application filed by ACE and

DP&L under cover of a letter dated April

30, 1997, from John H. O’Neill, Jr., of

Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge,

Counsel for ACE and DP&L.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is required to

enable the proposed merger and

restructuring of Atlantic Energy, Inc.,

ACE, and DP&L to occur to the extent

indirect transfers of control of the

licenses will be effected by the merger

and restructuring.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that there will be no physical

or operational changes as a result of the

proposed action. The corporate merger

and restructuring will not affect the

qualifications or organizational

affiliation of the personnel who operate

the facilities, as PSE&G, not involved in

the merger, will continue to be

responsible for the operation of SNGS,

Units 1 and 2.

The change will not increase the

probability or consequences of

accidents, no changes are being made in

the types of any effluents that may be

released offsite, and there is no

significant increase in the allowable

individual or cumulative occupational

radiation exposure. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant radiological environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

action will not affect nonradiological

plant effluents and will have no other

environmental impact. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant nonradiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

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 action, the staff considered

denial of the proposed action. Denial of

the application 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’’ for Salem Nuclear

Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, April

1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on October 21, 1997, the staff consulted

with the New Jersey State official, Mr.

R. Pinney of the State of New Jersey,

Department of Environmental

Protection, regarding the environmental

impact of the proposed action. The State

official had no comments.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Notices 64603

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 application

filed by ACE and DP&L under cover of

a letter dated April 30, 1997, as

supplemented November 7, 1997, from

John H. O’Neill, Jr., of Shaw, Pittman,

Potts & Trowbridge (Counsel for ACE

and DP&L), which is available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, The Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,

and at the local public document room

located at the Salem Free Public Library,

112 West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of December 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John F. Stolz,

Director, Project Directorate I–2, Division of

Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–32019 Filed 12–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–354]

Public Service Electric and Gas

Company and Atlantic City Electric

Company; Hope Creek Generating

Station, Environmental Assessment

and Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering approval, by issuance of an

order, under 10 CFR 50.80 of the

indirect transfer of control of Atlantic

City Electric Company’s (ACE) interests

in the Hope Creek Generating Station

(HCGS) license to the extent effected by

a proposed merger of Atlantic Energy,

Inc. (the parent holding company of

ACE) and Delmarva Power & Light

Company (DP&L), resulting in the

formation of a new holding company,

Conectiv, Inc. ACE is co-holder of

Facility Operating License No. NPF–57,

along with Public Service Electric and

Gas Company (PSE&G), issued for

operation of the HCGS, located in Lower

Alloways Creek Township, Salem

County, New Jersey.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would consent to

the indirect transfer of the interest in

HCGS to the extent effected by the

proposed merger of Atlantic Energy, Inc.

and DP&L, resulting in the formation of

a new holding company, Conectiv, Inc.,

under which ACE and DP&L would

become wholly owned subsidiaries.

ACE would continue to be a co-licensee

of HCGS, and no direct transfer of the

license would occur. PSE&G is not

involved in the proposed merger.

The proposed action is in accordance

with an application filed by ACE under

cover of a letter dated April 30, 1997,

from John H. O’Neill, Jr., of Shaw,

Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, Counsel

for ACE and DP&L.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is required to

enable the proposed merger and

restructuring of Atlantic Energy, Inc.,

ACE, and DP&L to occur to the extent

an indirect transfer of the license will be

effected by the merger and restructuring.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that there will be no physical

or operational changes as a result of the

proposed action. The corporate merger

and restructuring will not affect the

qualifications or organizational

affiliation of the personnel who operate

the facilities, as PSE&G, not involved in

the merger, will continue to be

responsible for the operation of HCGS.

The change will not increase the

probability or consequences of

accidents, no changes are being made in

the types of any effluents that may be

released offsite, and there is no

significant increase in the allowable

individual or cumulative occupational

radiation exposure. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant radiological environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

action will not affect nonradiological

plant effluents and will have no other

environmental impact. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant nonradiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

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 action, the staff considered

denial of the proposed action. Denial of

the application 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

the Hope Creek Generating Station,’’

NUREG–1074, December 1984.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on October 21, 1997, the staff consulted

with the New Jersey State official, Mr.

R. Pinney of the State of New Jersey,

Department of Environmental

Protection, 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 application

filed by ACE under cover of a letter

dated April 30, 1997, as supplemented

November 7, 1997, from John H. O’Neill,

Jr., of Shaw, Pittman, Potts &

Trowbridge (Counsel for ACE and

DP&L), which is available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, The Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,

and at the local public document room

located at the Pennsville Public Library,

190 S. Broadway, Pennsville, New

Jersey.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of December 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John F. Stolz,

Director, Project Directorate I–2, Division of

Reactor Projects—I/II Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–32023 Filed 12–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P