57408 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Notices

40,000 MWD/MTU, and heat generation

of ≤ 0.847 Kw/assembly. This

amendment requests the limits be

amended to match those approved for

the TN–32 storage cask per the

Certificate of Compliance (CoC) and

Safety Evaluation Report (SER) issued in

March 2000. Those approved limits are

as follows: initial enrichment of ≤

4.05% (wt U–235), assembly average

burnup ≤ 45,000 MWD/MTU, and heat

generation of ≤ 1.02 Kw/assembly.

Need for the Proposed Action: The

proposed action is necessary to allow

continued storage of spent fuel in dry

casks. Without this amendment Surry

will be unable to load spent fuel in TN–

32 casks because their remaining fuel

has the higher enrichment and burnup.

If unable to store spent fuel in TN–32’s,

Surry will not be able to retain full core

offload capability. Surry would

eventually have to find an alternate

means to store fuel, or shut down.

Environmental Impacts of the

Proposed Action: The NRC has

completed its evaluation of the

proposed action and concludes that

granting the request for amendment to

allow the storage of spent fuel

assemblies with burnup and initial

enrichment of up to 45,000 MWD/MTU

and 4.05% (wt U–235), respectively, in

TN–32 casks used at the Surry ISFSI,

will not increase the probability or

consequence of accidents beyond that

bounded by previous analysis. In March

2000, the NRC issued a CoC and SER for

the TN–32 allowing storage of spent fuel

in the TN–32 under a general license,

with the higher enrichment and burnup,

resulting in no significant

environmental impact. No changes are

being made in the types of any effluents

that may be released offsite. With regard

to radiological impacts, the addition of

higher burnup and initial enrichment

spent fuel assemblies was calculated to

yield an average surface dose rate of 224

mrem/hour at the TN–32 cask side

surface. A reevaluation of occupational

doses based on actual operating

experience from loading 39 casks,

indicates that the overall exposure to

workers during cask loading, transport,

and emplacement will decrease from the

original estimate of 21.2 person-rem to

11.9 person-rem. The dose to the closest

real receptor due to Surry ISFSI

operations was calculated to be 6×10¥1

mrem/year. This dose is several ordersof-magnitude below natural background

radiation levels and is an insignificant

amount when compared to the 10 CFR

Part 72.104 whole-body dose limit of 25

mrem/year. The annual whole-body

dose to the closest real receptor from all

Surry operations is 16 mrem, which is

below the 10 CFR Part 72.104 limit.

Based on the occupational and public

dose analysis results, there are no

significant radiological environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action.

The amendment only affects the

requirements associated with the

content of the casks and does not affect

non-radiological plant effluents or any

other aspects of the environment.

Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts

associated with the proposed action.

Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no significant

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternative to the Proposed Action:

The alternative to the proposed action

would be to deny the request for

amendment (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’

alternative). Denial of the proposed

action would result in Surry storing

spent fuel in the spent fuel pool.

Without dry cask storage, Surry would

lose the capability to maintain full core

offload and eventually would have to

shut down due to lack of storage space.

Increased storage in the spent fuel

pool could potentially lead to greater

occupational exposure than dry cask

storage due to the proximity of workers

to the fuel. The environmental impacts

of the alternative action could be greater

than the proposed action.

Given that the alternative action of

denying the approval for amendment

has no lesser environmental impacts

associated with it, and considering that

the proposed action would result in

storage of fuel in the TN–32 casks at

Surry ISFSI as already approved for

storage under a general license, the

Commission concludes that the

preferred alternative is to grant this

amendment.

Agencies and Persons Consulted: On

August 18, 2000, Mr. Les Foldese of the

Virginia Department of Health,

Radiological Health Programs, was

contacted regarding the proposed action

and had no concerns.

Finding of No Significant Impact

The environmental impacts of the

proposed action have been reviewed in

accordance with the requirements set

forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based upon the

foregoing Environmental Assessment,

the Commission finds that the proposed

action of granting an amendment to

permit the use of the TN–32 dry storage

cask to store spent fuel with a higher

initial enrichment (≤ 4.05% wt U–235)

and burnup (≤ 45,000 MWD/MTU) at

the Surry ISFSI will not significantly

impact the quality of the human

environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed exemption.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the amendment application

dated November 15, 1999, as

supplemented. In accordance with 10

CFR 2.790 of the NRC’s ‘‘Rules of

Practice,’’ a copy of the application, as

supplemented, will be available

electronically for public inspection in

the NRC Public Document Room, 2120

L Street NW. (Lower Level),

Washington, DC, or from the Publically

Available Records (PARS) components

of the NRC’s document system

(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from

the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/

NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public

Electronic Reading Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of September 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

E. William Brach,

Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 00–24363 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

NAME OF AGENCY: Postal Rate

Commission.

TIME AND DATE: Daily, or as needed,

starting after 9:30 a.m., from September

25, 2000, through November 8, 2000.

PLACE: Commission conference room,

1333 H Street, NW., Suite 300,

Washington, DC 20268–0001.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Recommendations in Docket No.

R2000–1.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,

Postal Rate Commission, Suite 300,

1333 H Street, NW, Washington, DC

20268–0001, 202–789–6820.

Dated: September 19, 2000.

Margaret P. Crenshaw,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–24548 Filed 9–20–00; 12:39 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710–FN–M

POSTAL SERVICE BOARD OF

GOVERNORS

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIMES AND DATES: 9 a.m., Monday,

October 2, 2000; 8:30 a.m., Tuesday,

October 3, 2000.