Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 59 / Thursday, March 27, 1997 / Notices 14705

cities (see below) to become Arrestee

Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM)

program sites.

The purpose of this Federal Register

announcement is to inform researchers

and analysts with an interest in assisting

the municipalities listed below with

their applications, or with being

considered as potential ADAM Site

Directors at one of the sites listed below,

that they should contact the appropriate

Sheriff or Chief of Police directly about

the municipality’s application.

Beginning in Fiscal Year 1998, ADAM

will operate in 35 sites as an expansion

and redesign of the 23-site Drug Use

Forecasting (DUF) program.

By FY 2000, ADAM is expected to

operate in 75 urban sites. ADAM will

conduct quarterly interviews and drug

tests with arrestees in urban lock-ups.

Municipalities not appearing on the list

below may be contacted in subsequent

application cycles.

Only one application will be accepted

from each municipality. The application

must come from an official agency that

has been solicited directly by NIJ. Each

ADAM site will be operated by a host

police or jail organization and a Site

Director with research and policy

analysis experience. Municipalities’

applications must include lists of, or

letters of support from, potential Site

Directors.

Applications are due at NIJ on April

15, 1997. Individuals requiring

additional information should contact

NIJ’s Response Center at 800–421–6770

(or 202–307–1480 in the Washington DC

area).

Applications are being solicited from

the following U.S. cities:

Albuquerque, NM

Anchorage, AK

Billings, MT

Boise, ID

Cheyenne, WY

Des Moines, IA

El Paso, TX

Fargo, ND

Fresno, CA

Honolulu, HI

Kansas City, MO

Laredo, TX

Las Vegas, NV

Little Rock, AR

Minneapolis, MN

Oklahoma City, OK

Sacramento, CA

Salt Lake City, UT

San Francisco, CA

Seattle, WA

Shreveport, LA

Spokane, WA

Sioux Falls, SD

Tucson, AZ

Wichita, KS

Dated: March 19, 1997.

Jeremy Travis,

Director, National Institute of Justice.

[FR Doc. 97–7769 Filed 3–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–286]

Power Authority of the State of New

York; Indian Point Nuclear Generating

Unit No. 3; Environmental Assessment

and Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. DPR–

64 issued to the Power Authority of the

State of New York (the licensee) for the

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit

No. 3, located in Westchester County,

New York.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

the licensee from the requirements of 10

CFR 70.24(a), which requires a

monitoring system that will energize

clearly audible alarms if accidental

criticality occurs in each area in which

special nuclear material is handled,

used, or stored. The proposed

amendment would also exempt the

licensee from the requirements of 10

CFR 70.24(a)(1), which specifies the

detection and sensitivity capabilities of

the monitors required by 10 CFR

70.24(a). Finally, the proposed action

would exempt the licensee from the

requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a)(3),

which states that the licensee shall

maintain emergency procedures for each

area in which this licensed special

nuclear material is handled, used, or

stored.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated December 20, 1996, as

supplemented March 5, 1997, and

March 19, 1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

Power reactor license applicants are

evaluated for the safe handling, use, and

storage of special nuclear materials. The

proposed exemption from criticality

accident requirements is based on the

original design for radiation monitoring

at Indian Point Unit 3. An exemption

from the requirements of 10 CFR

70.24(a), ‘‘Criticality Accident

Requirements,’’ was granted in the

Special Nuclear Material (SNM) licenses

for IP3 as part of the 10 CFR Part 70

license; however, with the issuance of

the Part 50 license this exemption

expired because it was not specifically

addressed in the Part 50 license. The

proposed exemption is needed for IP3 to

continue to operate in accordance with

its license and Commission regulations.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that there will be no

significant environmental impact if the

exemption is granted. The potential

environmental impact evaluated was the

increase in radiation dose as a result of

an inadvertent criticality.

Inadvertent or accidental criticality

during fuel handling will be prevented

by Technical Specifications (i.e.,

requirements on minimum soluble

boron concentration in the spent fuel

pit), by procedure (i.e., compliance with

the procedures for fuel handling), and

by design (i.e., the geometric spacing of

fuel assemblies in the new fuel storage

facility and spent fuel storage pit).

Inadvertent or accidental criticality in

the reactor vessel is prevented through

compliance with the facility Technical

Specifications, including reactivity

requirements (e.g., shutdown margin

limits and control rod movement

limits), instrumentation requirements

(e.g., power and radiation monitors),

and control on refueling operations (e.g.,

refueling boron concentration and

source range monitor requirements).

Adherence to procedures precludes

inadvertent criticality; however, the

licensee is pursuing a defense in-depth

approach. During fuel handling, the

licensee has committed to have in

operation in the IP3 Fuel Storage

Building at least one detector meeting

the requirements of Sections 5.6 and 5.7

of ANSI/ANS 8.3 (1986), ‘‘American

National Standard Criticality Alarm

System.’’ The detection and sensitivity

requirements of ANSI/ANS 8.3 are as

rigorous as those of 10 CFR 70.24(a)(1).

Upon detection, this detector shall

automatically cause an immediate alarm

audible in all areas from which

evacuation is necessary to minimize

exposure. The licensee maintains

emergency procedures and trains

radiation workers on the proper actions

should such an alarm occur.

Because inadvertent criticality is

precluded by both design and

procedure, because adequate radiation

monitoring is present, and because the

licensee maintains emergency

procedures for the areas in which fuel

is handled, the staff has concluded that

there is adequate assurance that an

inadvertent criticality and the attendant
14706 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 59 / Thursday, March 27, 1997 / Notices

increase radiation doses will not result

from granting this exemption. No

changes are being made in the types or

amounts of any radiological effluents

that may be released offsite. 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

exemption involves systems located

within the restricted area as defined in

10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect

nonradiological plant effluents and has

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

that there is no measurable

environmental impact associated with

the proposed action, any alternatives

with equal or greater environmental

impact need not be evaluated. The

principal alternative would be to deny

the requested exemption. 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

Indian Point Unit 3 dated December

1975.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on March 12, 1997, the staff consulted

with the New York State Official, Mr.

Jack Spath of the New York State Energy

Research and Development Authority,

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 December 20, 1996, as

supplemented March 5, 1997, and

March 19, 1997, which are 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 White Plains

Public Library, 100 Martine Avenue,

White Plains, New York.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day

of March 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

George F. Wunder,

Project Manager, Project Directorate I–1,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–7913 Filed 3–26–97; 9:49 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to

submit an information collection

request to OMB and solicitation of

public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a

submittal to OMB for review of

continued approval of information

collections under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35).

Information pertaining to the

requirement to be submitted:

1. The title of the information

collection: DOE/NRC Form 742,

‘‘Material Balance Report;’’ NUREG/BR–

0007, ‘‘Instructions for Completing

Material Balance Report and Physical

Inventory Listing;’’ and DOE/NRC Form

742C, ‘‘Physical Inventory Listing.’’

2. Current OMB approval number:

DOE/NRC Form 742 and NUREG/

BR–0007: 3150–0004

DOE/NRC Form 742C: 3150–0058

3. How often the collection is

required: DOE/NRC Forms 742 and

742C are submitted semiannually

following a physical inventory of

nuclear materials.

4. Who is required or asked to report:

Persons licensed to possess specified

quantities of special nuclear or source

material.

5. The number of annual respondents:

DOE/NRC Form 742: 300 licensees

DOE/NRC Form 742C: 120 licensees

6. The number of hours needed

annually to complete the requirement or

request:

DOE/NRC Form 742: 450 hours

DOE/NRC Form 742C: 1,440 hours

7. Abstract: Each licensee authorized

to possess special nuclear material

totalling more than 350 grams of

contained uranium-235, uranium-233,

or plutonium, or any combination

thereof, and any licensee authorized to

possess 1,000 kilograms of source

material is required to submit DOE/NRC

Form 742. Reactor licensees required to

submit DOE/NRC Form 742, and

facilities subject to 10 CFR Part 75, are

required to submit DOE/NRC Form

742C. The information is used by NRC

to fulfill its responsibilities as a

participant in US/IAEA Safeguards

Agreement and bilateral agreements

with Australia and Canada, and to

satisfy its domestic safeguards

responsibilities.

Submit, by May 27, 1997, comments

that address the following questions:

1. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for the NRC to

properly perform its functions? Does the

information have practical utility?

2. Is the burden estimate accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected?

4. How can the burden of the

information collection be minimized,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology?

A copy of the draft supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room,

2120 L Street NW, (lower level),

Washington, DC. Members of the public

who are in the Washington, DC, area can

access this document via modem on the

Public Document Room Bulletin Board

(NRC’s Advance Copy Document

Library), NRC subsystem at FedWorld,

703–321–3339. Members of the public

who are located outside of the

Washington, DC, area can dial

FedWorld, 1–800–303–9672, or use the

FedWorld Internet address:

fedworld.gov (Telnet). The document

will be available on the bulletin board

for 30 days after the signature date of

this notice. If assistance is needed in

accessing the document, please contact

the FedWorld help desk at 703–487–

4608. Additional assistance in locating

the document is available from the NRC

Public Document Room, nationally at 1–

800–397–4209, or within the

Washington, DC, area at 202–634–3273.

Comments and questions about the

information collection requirements

may be directed to the NRC Clearance

Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, T–6 F33,

Washington, DC, 20555–0001, by

telephone at (301) 415–7233, or by

Internet electronic mail at

BJS1@NRC.GOV.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day

of March, 1997.