Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 1998 / Notices 2425

Commission, the presiding officer or the

presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board that the petition and/or request

should be granted based upon a

balancing of the factors specified in 10

CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated December 5, 1997,

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 Coastal Region Library, 8619 W.

Crystal Street, Crystal River, Florida.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day

of January 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

L. Raghavan,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

II–3, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–1046 Filed 1–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–271]

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power

Corporation; Vermont Yankee Nuclear

Power Station; Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption

from certain requirements of its

regulations for Facility Operating

License No. DPR–28, issued to Vermont

Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (the

licensee), for operation of Vermont

Yankee Nuclear Power Station located

in Windham County, Vermont.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

the licensee from the requirements of 10

CFR 70.24, which requires in each area

in which special nuclear material is

handled, used, or stored a monitoring

system that will energize clear audible

alarms if accidental criticality occurs.

The proposed action would also exempt

the licensee from the requirements to

maintain emergency procedures for each

area in which this licensed special

nuclear material is handled, used, or

stored to ensure that all personnel

withdraw to an area of safety upon the

sounding of the alarm, to familiarize

personnel with the evacuation plan, and

to designate responsible individuals for

determining the cause of the alarm, and

to place radiation survey instruments in

accessible locations for use in such an

emergency.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated December 16, 1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The purpose of 10 CFR 70.24 is to

ensure that if a criticality were to occur

during the handling of special nuclear

material, personnel would be alerted to

that fact and would take appropriate

action. At a commercial nuclear power

plant the inadvertent criticality with

which 10 CFR 70.24 is concerned could

occur during fuel handling operations.

The special nuclear material that could

be assembled into a critical mass at a

commercial nuclear power plant is in

the form of nuclear fuel; the quantity of

other forms of special nuclear material

that is stored on site in any given

location is small enough to preclude

achieving a critical mass. Because the

fuel is not enriched beyond 5.0 weight

percent Uranium-235 and because

commercial nuclear plant licensees have

procedures and design features that

prevent inadvertent criticality, the staff

has determined that it is unlikely that

an inadvertent criticality could occur

due to the handling of special nuclear

material at a commercial power reactor.

The requirements of 10 CFR 70.24,

therefore, are not necessary to ensure

the safety of personnel during the

handling of special nuclear material at

commercial power reactors.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that there is no significant

environmental impact if the exemption

is granted. Inadvertent or accidental

criticality will be precluded through

compliance with the Vermont Yankee

Technical Specifications, the design of

the fuel storage racks providing

geometric spacing of fuel assemblies in

their storage locations, and

administrative controls imposed on fuel

handling procedures. Technical

Specifications requirements specify

reactivity limits for the fuel storage

racks and minimum spacing between

the fuel assemblies in the storage racks.

Appendix A of 10 CFR part 50,

‘‘General Design Criteria for Nuclear

Power Plants,’’ Criterion 62, requires the

criticality in the fuel storage and

handling system shall be prevented by

physical systems or processes,

preferably by use of geometrically-safe

configurations. This is met at the

Vermont Yankee Station, as identified

in the Technical Specifications and the

Updated Final Safety Analysis Report

(UFSAR).

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 does involve features located

entirely 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. 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 the Vermont Yankee

Nuclear Power Station.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on January 9, 1998, the staff consulted

with the Vermont State official, Mr.

William K. Sherman, of the Department

of Public Service, 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.
2426 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 1998 / Notices

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated December 16, 1997, which is

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

which is located at The Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and at the local public

document room located at the Brooks

Memorial Library, 224 Main Street,

Brattleboro, VT.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day

of January 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Ronald B. Eaton,

Acting Director, Project Directorate I–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–1045 Filed 1–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Regulatory Guides; Withdrawal

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission

is withdrawing several guides in its

Regulatory Guide Series. Regulatory

guides may be withdrawn when (1) they

are superseded by the Commission’s

regulations, (2) equivalent

recommendations have been

incorporated in approved codes or

standards, or (3) there have been

changes in methods, techniques, or the

need for specific guidance. Since the

methods discussed in these regulatory

guides fall into one of these categories,

the regulatory guides listed below are

being withdrawn. New applications for

licenses or amendments should address

current guidance. However, withdrawal

of these regulatory guides does not alter

any existing license conditions that

were based on these guides.

Applications that reference these

regulatory guides and are pending as of

the date of this notice do not need to be

withdrawn or amended.

Regulatory Guide 3.2, Efficiency Testing

of Air-Cleaning Systems Containing

Devices for Removal of Particles

(January 1973)

Regulatory Guide 3.9, Concrete

Radiation Shields (June 1973)

Regulatory Guide 3.33, Assumptions

Used for Evaluating the Potential

Radiological Consequences of

Accidental Nuclear Criticality in a

Fuel Reprocessing Plant (April 1977)

Regulatory Guide 3.34, Assumptions

Used for Evaluating the Potential

Radiological Consequences of

Accidental Nuclear Criticality in a

Uranium Fuel Fabrication Plant

(Revision 1, July 1979)

Regulatory Guide 3.35, Assumptions

Used for Evaluating the Potential

Radiological Consequences of

Accidental Nuclear Criticality in a

Plutonium Processing and Fuel

Fabrication Plant (Revision 1, July

1979)

Regulatory Guide 5.1, Serial Numbering

of Fuel Assemblies for Light-WaterCooled Nuclear Power Reactors

(December 1972)

Regulatory Guide 5.14, Use of

Observation (Visual Surveillance)

Techniques in Material Access Areas

(Revision 1, May 1980)

Regulatory Guide 5.24, Analysis and

Use of Process Data for the Protection

of Special Nuclear Material (June

1974)

Regulatory Guide 5.29, Nuclear Material

Control Systems for Nuclear Power

Plants (Revision 1, June 1975)

Regulatory Guide 5.30, Materials

Protection Contingency Measures for

Uranium and Plutonium Fuel

Manufacturing Plants (June 1974)

Regulatory Guide 5.45, Standard Format

and Content for the Special Nuclear

Material Control and Accounting

Section of a Special Nuclear Material

License Application (Including That

for a Uranium Enrichment Facility)

(December 1974)

Regulatory Guide 8.3, Film Badge

Performance Criteria (February 1973)

In addition, Draft Regulatory Guide

DG–0008, ‘‘Applications for the Use of

Sealed Sources in Portable Gauging

Devices’’ (May 1995), is being

withdrawn from consideration as a

regulatory guide. The NRC recently

published NUREG–1556, ‘‘Consolidated

Guidance About Materials Licenses:

Program-Specific Guidance About

Portable Gauge Licenses,’’ which

contains information on the same

subject.

Comments and suggestions in

connection with items for inclusion in

guides currently being developed or

improvements in all published guides

are encouraged at any time. Written

comments may be submitted to the

Rules and Directives Branch, Division of

Administrative Services, Office of

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555.

(5 U.S.C. 552(a))

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd

day of December 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Malcolm R. Knapp,

Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory

Research.

[FR Doc. 98–1047 Filed 1–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY

CORPORATION

Interest Assumption for Determining

Variable-Rate Premium; Interest on

Late Premium Payments; Interest on

Underpayments and Overpayments of

Single-Employer Plan Termination

Liability and Multiemployer Withdrawal

Liability; Interest Assumptions for

Multiemployer Plan Valuations

Following Mass Withdrawal

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of interest rates and

assumptions.

SUMMARY: This notice informs the public

to be used under certain Pension Benefit

Guaranty Corporation regulations. These

rates and assumptions are published

elsewhere (or are derivable from rates

published elsewhere), but are collected

and published in this notice for the

convenience of the public. Interest rates

are also published on the PBGC’s home

page (http://www.pbgc.gov).

DATES: The interest rate for determining

the variable-rate premium under part

4006 applies to premium payment years

beginning in January 1998. The interest

assumptions for performing

multiemployer plan valuations

following mass withdrawal under part

4281 apply to valuation dates occurring

in February 1998. The interest rates for

late premium payments under part 4007

and for underpayments and

overpayments of single-employer plan

termination liability under part 4062

and multiemployer withdrawal liability

under part 4219 apply to interest

accruing during the first quarter

(January through March) of 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General

Counsel, Office of the General Counsel,

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,

1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC

20005, 202–326–4024. (For TTY/TDD

users, call the Federal relay service tollfree at 1–800–877–8339 and ask to be

connected to 202–326–4024.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Variable-Rate Premiums

Section 4006(a)(3)(E)(iii)(II) of the

Employee Retirement Income Security

Act of 1974 (ERISA) and § 4006.4(b)(1)

of the PBGC’s regulation on Premium

Rates (29 CFR part 4006) prescribe use

of an assumed interest rate in

determining a single-employer plan’s

variable-rate premium. The rate is the

‘‘applicable percentage’’ (described in

the statute and the regulation) of the

annual yield on 30-year Treasury

securities for the month preceding the