Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2018 / Notices 26501 

treated as objections to the grant of the 

contemplated partially exclusive patent 

license. Objections submitted in 

response to this notice will not be made 

available to the public for inspection 

and, to the extent permitted by law, will 

not be released under the Freedom of 

Information Act. 

ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the 

prospective license may be submitted to 

Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, 

NASA Langley Research Center, MS 30, 

Hampton, Virginia 23681. Phone (757) 

864–3221. Facsimile (757) 864–9190. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonathan B. Soike, Patent Attorney, 

Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Langley 

Research Center, MS 30, Hampton, 

Virginia 23681. Phone (757) 864–7863. 

Facsimile (757) 864–9190. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice of intent to grant a partially 

exclusive patent license is issued in 

accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 

CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). The patent rights in 

these inventions have been assigned to 

the United States of America as 

represented by the Administrator of the 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. The prospective 

partially exclusive patent license will 

comply with the requirements of 35 

U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. 

Information about other NASA 

inventions available for licensing can be 

found online at http://

technology.nasa.gov. 

Mark Dvorscak, 

Agency Counsel for Intellectual Property. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12231 Filed 6–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 72–26; NRC–2018–0108] 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Fuel 

Storage Installation 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Environmental assessment and 

finding of no significant impact; 

issuance. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuing an environmental assessment 

(EA) and a finding of no significant 

impact (FONSI) for its review and 

approval of the decommissioning 

funding plans (DFPs) submitted by 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

(PGEC) on December 17, 2012, and 

December 17, 2015, for the independent 

spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) at 

Diablo Canyon in Avila Beach, 

California. 

DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in 

this document are available on June 7, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID 

NRC–2018–0108 when contacting the 

NRC about the availability of 

information regarding this document. 

You may obtain publicly-available 

information related to this document 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2018–0108. Address 

questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer 

Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; 

email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions, contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the 

ADAMS Public Documents collection at 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. To begin the search, select 

‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then 

select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS 

Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, 

please contact the NRC’s Public 

Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 

1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by 

email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The 

ADAMS accession number for each 

document referenced in this document 

(if it is available in ADAMS) is provided 

the first time that it is mentioned in this 

document. In addition, for the 

convenience of the reader, the ADAMS 

accession numbers are provided in a 

table in the ‘‘Availability of Documents’’ 

section of this document. 

• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and 

purchase copies of public documents at 

the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pamela Longmire, Office of Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 

301–415–7465, email: 

Pamela.Longmire@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The NRC is considering the approval 

of the DFPs for the Diablo Canyon ISFSI. 

PGEC submitted an initial DFP and an 

updated DFP for NRC review and 

approval by letters dated December 17, 

2012 (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML12353A315), and December 17, 2015 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML15351A502), 

respectively. The NRC staff has 

prepared a final EA (ADAMS Accession 

No. ML18131A047) in support of its 

review of PGEC’s DFPs in accordance 

with the NRC regulations in part 51 of 

title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Environmental 

Protection Regulations for Domestic 

Licensing and Related Regulatory 

Functions,’’ which implements the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.). Based on the EA, the NRC staff has 

determined that approval of the DFPs 

for the Diablo Canyon ISFSI will not 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment, and accordingly, 

the staff has concluded that a FONSI is 

appropriate. The NRC staff further finds 

that preparation of an environmental 

impact statement is not warranted. 

II. Environmental Assessment 

Background 

The Diablo Canyon ISFSI is located in 

Avila Beach, California. PGEC is 

authorized by the NRC, under License 

No. SNM–2511, to store spent nuclear 

fuel at the Diablo Canyon ISFSI. 

The NRC requires its licensees to plan 

for the eventual decommissioning of 

their licensed facilities prior to license 

termination. On June 17, 2011, the NRC 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register amending its decommissioning 

planning regulations (76 FR 35512). The 

final rule amended the NRC regulation, 

10 CFR 72.30, which concerns financial 

assurance and decommissioning for 

ISFSIs. This regulation now requires 

each holder of, or applicant for, a 

license under 10 CFR part 72 to submit, 

for NRC review and approval, a DFP. 

The purpose of the DFP is to 

demonstrate the licensee’s financial 

assurance (i.e., that funds will be 

available to decommission the ISFSI). 

The NRC staff is reviewing the DFPs 

submitted by PGEC on December 13, 

2012, and December 17, 2015. 

Specifically, the NRC must determine 

whether PGEC’s DFPs contain the 

information required by §§ 72.30(b) and 

(c), and whether PGEC has provided 

reasonable assurance that funds will be 

available to decommission the ISFSI. 

Description of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action is the NRC’s 

review and approval of PGEC’s DFPs 

submitted in accordance with 

§§ 72.30(b) and (c). To approve the 

DFPs, the NRC will evaluate whether 

the decommissioning cost estimate 

adequately estimates the cost to conduct 

the required ISFSI decommissioning 

activities prior to license termination, 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
26502 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2018 / Notices 

including identification of the volume 

of onsite subsurface material containing 

residual radioactivity that will require 

remediation to meet the license 

termination criteria in §§ 20.1402 or 

20.1403. The NRC will also evaluate 

whether the aggregate dollar amount of 

PGEC financial instruments provides 

adequate financial assurance to cover 

the decommissioning cost estimate and 

that the financial instruments meet the 

criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(e). Finally, the 

NRC will evaluate whether the effects of 

the following events have been 

considered in PGEC’s submittal: (1) 

Spills of radioactive material producing 

additional residual radioactivity in 

onsite subsurface material; (2) facility 

modifications; (3) changes in authorized 

possession limits; and (4) actual 

remediation costs that exceed the 

previous cost estimate, consistent with 

10 CFR 72.30(c). 

The proposed action does not require 

any changes to the ISFSI’s licensed 

routine operations, maintenance 

activities, or monitoring programs, nor 

does it require any new construction or 

land-disturbing activities. The scope of 

the proposed action concerns only the 

NRC’s review and approval of PGEC’s 

DFPs. The scope of the proposed action 

does not include, and will not result in, 

the review and approval of any 

decontamination or decommissioning 

activity or license termination for the 

ISFSI or any other part of Diablo 

Canyon. 

Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action provides a 

means for PGEC to demonstrate that it 

will have sufficient funding to cover the 

costs of decommissioning the ISFSI, 

including the reduction of the residual 

radioactivity at the ISFSI to the level 

specified by the applicable NRC license 

termination regulations concerning 

release of the property (10 CFR 20.1402 

or 10 CFR 20.1403). 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC’s approval of the DFPs will 

not change the scope or nature of the 

operation of the ISFSI and will not 

authorize any changes to licensed 

operations or maintenance activities. 

The NRC’s approval of the DFPs will not 

result in any changes in the types, 

characteristics, or quantities of 

radiological or non-radiological 

effluents released into the environment 

from the ISFSI, or result in the creation 

of any solid waste. Moreover, the 

approval of the DFPs will not authorize 

any construction activity or facility 

modification. Therefore, the NRC staff 

concludes that the approval of PGEC’s 

DFPs is a procedural and administrative 

action that will not result in any 

significant impact to the environment. 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966, as amended 

(NHPA), requires Federal agencies to 

consider the effects of their 

undertakings on historic properties. In 

accordance with the NHPA 

implementing regulations at 36 CFR part 

800, ‘‘Protection of Historic Properties,’’ 

the NRC’s approval of PGEC’s DFPs 

constitutes a Federal undertaking. The 

NRC, however, has determined that the 

approval of the DFPs is a type of 

undertaking that does not have the 

potential to cause effects on historic 

properties, assuming such historic 

properties were present, because the 

NRC’s approval of PGEC’s DFPs will not 

authorize or result in changes to 

licensed operations or maintenance 

activities, or changes in the types, 

characteristics, or quantities of 

radiological or non-radiological 

effluents released into the environment 

from the ISFSI, or result in the creation 

of any solid waste. Therefore, in 

accordance with 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), no 

consultation is required under Section 

106 of the NHPA. 

Under Section 7 of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, prior to taking a 

proposed action, a Federal agency must 

determine whether (i) endangered and 

threatened species or their critical 

habitats are known to be in the vicinity 

of the proposed action and, if so, 

whether (ii) the proposed Federal action 

may affect listed species or critical 

habitats. The NRC has determined that 

the proposed action will have no effect 

on any listed species or their critical 

habitats because the NRC’s approval of 

PGEC’s DFPs will not authorize or result 

in changes to licensed operations or 

maintenance activities, or changes in 

the types, characteristics, or quantities 

of radiological or non-radiological 

effluents released into the environment 

from the ISFSI, or result in the creation 

of any solid waste. 

Alternative to the Proposed Action 

In addition to the proposed action, the 

NRC evaluated the no-action alternative. 

The no-action alternative is to deny 

PGEC’s DFPs. A denial of a DFP that 

meets the criteria of §§ 72.30(b) or (c) 

does not support the regulatory intent of 

the 2011 rulemaking. As noted in the 

EA for the 2011 rulemaking (ADAMS 

Accession No. ML090500648), not 

promulgating the 2011 final rule would 

have increased the likelihood of 

additional legacy sites. Thus, denying 

PGEC’s DFPs, which the NRC has found 

to meet the criteria of §§ 72.30(b) and 

(c), will undermine the licensee’s 

decommissioning planning. On this 

basis, the NRC has concluded that the 

no-action alternative is not a viable 

alternative. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

The NRC staff consulted with other 

agencies and parties regarding the 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action. The NRC provided a draft of its 

EA to the California Energy Commission 

(CEC or State) by letter dated April 25, 

2016 (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML17107A273), and gave the CEC 30 

days to respond. The State did not 

respond. The NRC also consulted with 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by 

letter dated April 25, 2016 (ADAMS 

Accession No. ML16120A606). 

However, the NRC staff has determined 

that consultation under Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 is not 

required because the proposed action is 

administrative/procedural in nature and 

will not affect listed species or critical 

habitat (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML17135A062). 

III. Finding of No Significant Impact 

The NRC staff has determined that the 

proposed action, the review and 

approval of PGEC’s DFPs submitted in 

accordance with §§ 72.30(b) and (c), will 

not authorize or result in changes to 

licensed operations or maintenance 

activities, or changes in the types, 

characteristics, or quantities of 

radiological or non-radiological 

effluents released into the environment 

from the ISFSI, or result in the creation 

of any solid waste. Moreover, the 

approval of the DFPs will not authorize 

any construction activity, facility 

modification, or any other landdisturbing activity. The NRC staff has 

concluded that the proposed action is a 

procedural and administrative action 

and, as such, that the proposed action 

will not have a significant effect on the 

quality of the human environment. 

Therefore, the NRC staff has determined 

not to prepare an environmental impact 

statement for the proposed action but 

will issue this FONSI. In accordance 

with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), the FONSI 

incorporates the EA by reference. 

IV. Availability of Documents 

The following documents, related to 

this Notice, can be found using any of 

the methods provided in the following 

table. Instructions for accessing ADAMS 

were provided under the ADDRESSES

section of this notice. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2018 / Notices 26503 

Date Document ADAMS Accession No. 

December 17, 2012 ........ Submission of PGEC DFP ..................................................................................................... ML12353A315 

December 17, 2015 ........ Submission of PGEC Triennial DFP ...................................................................................... ML15351A502 

February 1, 2009 ............ Environmental Assessment for Final Rule—Decommissioning Planning ............................. ML090500648 

May 15, 2017 .................. Note to File Re: Section 7 Consultations for ISFSI DFPs ..................................................... ML17135A062 

April 25, 2016 ................. Consultation Letter (ML16120A553–RLSO) .......................................................................... ML17107A273 

April 25, 2016 ................. Letter to M. Fris, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Re: NRC Preliminary Determination of No 

Effects Regarding the Diablo Canyon ISFSI DFP.

ML16120A606 

May 11, 2018 .................. Final EA for the Approval of the DFP .................................................................................... ML18131A047 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day 

of June, 2018. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

John McKirgan, 

Branch Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, 

Division of Spent Fuel Management, Office 

of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12249 Filed 6–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Advisory Committee on the Medical 

Uses of Isotopes: Meeting Notice 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) will convene a 

teleconference meeting of the Advisory 

Committee on the Medical Uses of 

Isotopes (ACMUI) on July 16, 2018, to 

discuss the draft report of the ACMUI 

Subcommittee on Training and 

Experience Requirements for All 

Modalities. This report will include the 

subcommittee’s comments on the NRC 

staff’s evaluation of the training and 

experience requirements for different 

categories of radiopharmaceuticals in 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, part 35, ‘‘Medical Use of 

Byproduct Material,’’ Subpart E, 

‘‘Unsealed Byproduct Material—Written 

Directive Required.’’ Meeting 

information, including a copy of the 

agenda and handouts, will be available 

at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/acmui/meetings/2018.html. 

The agenda and handouts may also be 

obtained by contacting Ms. Maryann 

Ayoade using the information below. 

DATES: The teleconference meeting will 

be held on Monday, July 16, 2018, 2:00 

p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. 

Public Participation: Any member of 

the public who wishes to participate in 

the teleconference should contact Ms. 

Ayoade using the contact information 

below or may register for the 

GoToWebinar at https://

attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/ 

2201638285137455618. 

Contact Information: Maryann 

Ayoade, email: Maryann.Ayoade@

nrc.gov, telephone: (301) 415–0862. 

Conduct of the Meeting 

Dr. Christopher Palestro, ACMUI 

Chairman, will preside over the 

meeting. Dr. Palestro will conduct the 

meeting in a manner that will facilitate 

the orderly conduct of business. The 

following procedures apply to public 

participation in the meeting: 

1. Persons who wish to provide a 

written statement should submit an 

electronic copy to Ms. Ayoade at the 

contact information listed above. All 

submittals must be received by July 11, 

2018, three business days prior to the 

meeting, and must pertain to the topic 

on the agenda for the meeting. 

2. Questions and comments from 

members of the public will be permitted 

during the meetings, at the discretion of 

the Chairman. 

3. The draft transcript and meeting 

summary will be available on the 

ACMUI’s website http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/doc-collections/acmui/ 

meetings/2018.html on or about August 

27, 2018. 

This meeting will be held in 

accordance with the Atomic Energy Act 

of 1954, as amended (primarily Section 

161a); the Federal Advisory Committee 

Act (5 U.S.C. App); and the 

Commission’s regulations in Title 10 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations, part 7, 

‘‘Advisory Committees.’’ 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day 

of June, 2018. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Russell E. Chazell, 

Federal Advisory Committee Management 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12269 Filed 6–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2018–0109] 

Draft Letter to the Nuclear Energy 

Institute Regarding the Clarification of 

Regulatory Paths for Lead Test 

Assemblies 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; 

opportunity for comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is soliciting public 

comments on a draft letter to the 

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) clarifying 

the regulatory paths for the use of lead 

test assemblies (LTAs). This draft letter 

would finalize the NRC staff’s views on 

the preliminary positions regarding 

LTAs provided in a letter to NEI dated 

June 29, 2017. The NRC does not 

currently have consolidated regulatory 

guidance regarding the use of LTAs. 

Therefore, the NRC has drafted this 

letter to clarify its positions regarding 

the use of LTAs. These positions would 

affect light-water reactor licensees who 

wish to irradiate LTAs. 

DATES: Submit comments by June 27, 

2018. Comments received after this date 

will be considered if it is practical to do 

so, but the Commission is able to ensure 

consideration only for comments 

received before this date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2018–0109. Address 

questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer 

Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; 

email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions, contact the 

individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• Mail comments to: May Ma, Office 

of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– 

A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001. 

For additional direction on obtaining 

information and submitting comments, 

see ‘‘Obtaining Information and 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES