Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 52 / Wednesday, March 18, 2015 / Notices 14125 

natural uranium equivalent per year 

would be acceptable. Some commenters 

favored a rate of 5 million pounds but 

suggested DOE should cease transfers 

for some period and then ramp up 

transfers to the 5 million pounds per 

year rate. One commenter focused on 

transfers of uranium hexafluoride, as 

opposed to uranium concentrates, and 

asked DOE to ensure that its transfers 

are market-neutral with respect to 

conversion. DOE is also considering 

whether to continue transfers at the rate 

covered by the 2014 determination, 

2,705 metric tons per year of natural 

uranium equivalent. 

DOE is also considering whether to 

include additional features in a 

determination that might change how a 

given set of transfers affects domestic 

industries. Some commenters proposed 

a scheme of matched sales, in which 

DOE would transfer a given tranche of 

uranium only after ensuring that a buyer 

had bought an equivalent quantity, at a 

comparable price, from U.S. producers. 

Other commenters asked that DOE 

transfer uranium in such a way that the 

uranium appears on markets only in the 

long term. The commenters do not 

appear to be suggesting that DOE simply 

not transfer uranium until some future 

date; rather, they contemplate that DOE 

would transfer uranium in the near term 

but with some restriction on use or 

availability that prevents the uranium 

from displacing other supply sources for 

some number of years. Yet the transfers 

DOE is considering would be part of 

barter transactions in exchange for 

services obtained essentially 

contemporaneously. In considering 

commenters’ suggestions about longterm as compared to short-term 

availability of DOE-sourced uranium, 

DOE will need to assess whether the 

markets could support the provision of 

services in the near term to be 

compensated by uranium available only 

in the long term. In light of the forecast 

increases in the price of uranium 

concentrates, it is conceivable that 

transactions to bridge the gap from nearto long-term could be financially 

justifiable for some entities. DOE will 

continue to analyze this possibility. 

To enable the Secretary to make a 

determination as expeditiously as 

possible, DOE is setting a deadline of 

April 6, 2015, for all comments to be 

received. DOE invites all interested 

parties to submit, in writing, comments 

and information on the factors described 

above, the information and documents 

made available through this notice, and 

the summary of information considered. 

DOE intends to make all comments 

received publicly available. Any 

information that may be confidential 

and exempt by law from public 

disclosure should be submitted as 

described below. 

V. Confidential Business Information 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 

person submitting information he or she 

believes to be confidential and exempt 

by law from public disclosure should 

submit via email, postal mail, or hand 

delivery/courier two well-marked 

copies: One copy of the document 

marked ‘‘confidential’’ including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information 

believed to be confidential deleted. 

Submit these documents via email or on 

a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own 

determination about the confidential 

status of the information and treat it 

according to its determination. Factors 

of interest to DOE when evaluating 

requests to treat submitted information 

as confidential include: (1) A 

description of the items; (2) whether 

and why such items are customarily 

treated as confidential within the 

industry; (3) whether the information is 

generally known by or available from 

other sources; (4) whether the 

information has previously been made 

available to others without obligation 

concerning its confidentiality; (5) an 

explanation of the competitive injury to 

the submitting person which would 

result from public disclosure; (6) when 

such information might lose its 

confidential character due to the 

passage of time; and (7) why disclosure 

of the information would be contrary to 

the public interest. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 13, 

2015. 

John Kotek, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Nuclear Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06189 Filed 3–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Project No. 1888–030—Pennsylvania, 

Project No. 2355–018—Pennsylvania/

Maryland, Project No. 405–106—Maryland] 

York Haven Power Company, Exelon 

Generation Company; Notice of 

Availability of the Final Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Susquehanna 

River Hydroelectric Projects 

In accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 

the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (Commission or FERC) 

regulations contained in the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) (18 CFR part 

380), the Office of Energy Projects has 

reviewed the applications for license for 

the York Haven Hydroelectric Project 

(FERC No. 1888), the Muddy Run 

Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 

2355), and the Conowingo Hydroelectric 

Project (FERC No. 405) and prepared a 

final multi-project environmental 

impact statement (EIS). 

The existing York Haven Project is 

located on the Susquehanna River at 

river mile (RM) 55 in the city of York, 

in York, Dauphin, and Lancaster 

Counties, Pennsylvania. The project 

does not occupy any federal lands. The 

Muddy Run and Conowingo Projects are 

located on the Susquehanna River at RM 

22 and RM 10, respectively, in Lancaster 

and York Counties, Pennsylvania, and 

Cecil and Harford Counties, Maryland. 

Conowingo Pond, the reservoir for the 

Conowingo Project, acts as the lower 

reservoir for the Muddy Run Project. 

The Muddy Run Project also includes 

an upper reservoir for pumped storage 

operation. The projects do not occupy 

any federal lands. 

The final EIS contains staff’s analysis 

of the applicants’ proposals and the 

alternatives for relicensing the York 

Haven, Muddy Run, and Conowingo 

Projects. The final EIS documents the 

views of governmental agencies, nongovernmental organizations, affected 

Indian tribes, the public, the license 

applicants, and Commission staff. 

A copy of the final EIS is available for 

review at the Commission or may be 

viewed on the Commission’s Web site at 

http://www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter one of the docket 

numbers, excluding the last three digits, 

to access the document. For assistance, 

contact FERC Online Support at 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or tollfree at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, 

contact (202) 502–8659. 

You may also register online at 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/

esubscription.asp to be notified via 

email of new filings and issuances 

related to this or other pending projects. 

For assistance, contact FERC Online 

Support. 

For further information, please 

contact Emily Carter at (202) 502–6512 

or at emily.carter@ferc.gov. 

Dated: March 11, 2015. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06077 Filed 3–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES