Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 1998 / Notices 3097

information collection, violate State or

Federal law, or substantially interfere

with any agency’s ability to perform its

statutory obligations. The Deputy Chief

Information Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer, publishes this

notice containing proposed information

collection requests prior to submission

of these requests to OMB. Each

proposed information collection,

grouped by office, contains the

following: (1) Type of review requested,

e.g., new, revision, extension, existing

or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary

of the collection; (4) Description of the

need for, and proposed use of, the

information; (5) Respondents and

frequency of collection; and (6)

Reporting and/or Recordkeeping

burden. OMB invites public comment at

the address specified above. Copies of

the requests are available from Patrick J.

Sherrill at the address specified above.

Dated: January 15, 1998.

Gloria Parker,

Deputy Chief Information Officer, Office of

the Chief Information Officer.

Office of Postsecondary Education

Type of Review: Revision.

Title: Fiscal Operations Report and

Application to Participate in Federal

Perkins Loan, Federal Supplemental

Educational Opportunity Grant, and

Federal Work-Study Program.

Frequency: Annually.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions; State,

local or Tribal Gov’t; SEAs or LEAs.

Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping

Hour Burden:

Responses: 4,800.

Burden Hours: 80,586.

Abstract: This application data will be

used to compute the amount of funds

needed by each institution during the

1999–2000 Award Year. The Fiscal

Operations Report data will be used to

assess program effectiveness, account

for funds expended during the 1997–98

Award Year, and as part of the

institutional funding process.

Office of Educational Research and

Improvement

Type of Review: New.

Title: 1998 National Assessment of

Educational Progress(NAEP), Writing

Special Study.

Frequency: One Time.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households.

Reporting Burden and Recordkeeping:

Responses: 6,200.

Burden Hours: 2,200.

Abstract: The 1998 NAEP writing

special study is designed to bolster the

understanding of study NAEP writing

achievement with information on

student’s best writing assignments, and

the writing process. In addition, the

study will collect information about

teachers’ emphasis on writing

curriculum and instructional

approaches. The study will be

conducted with a sample of 6000 (4th

and 8th grade) students and 200

teachers. The study will use a structured

protocol to obtain more detailed and

valid information about classroom

instructional practices than a standard

background questionnaire. Students will

be asked to select three examples of

their best writing and to fill out a brief

questionnaire describing the samples of

writing that they submit.

[FR Doc. 98–1391 Filed 1–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Intent To Prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement for

the Production of Tritium in a

Commercial Light Water Reactor

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE) announces its intent to prepare

an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) for the production of tritium using

one or more commercial light water

reactors (CLWR), pursuant to the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 USC

4321 et seq.) and the DOE Regulations

Implementing NEPA (10 CFR Part 1021).

Under the CLWR Program, tritium

production could occur in one of two

manners: (1) purchase of CLWR

irradiation services; or (2) purchase of a

CLWR. Prior to preparation of the CLWR

EIS, DOE initiated a procurement

process to evaluate the feasibility of

various CLWR alternatives, and the

alternatives described in this notice

have been derived from that

procurement process. The CLWR EIS

will evaluate the environmental impacts

associated with tritium production for

all reasonable alternatives identified

through the procurement process.

DATES: Comments on the proposed

scope of the CLWR EIS are invited from

the public. To ensure consideration in

the preparation of the EIS, comments

must be postmarked by March 20, 1998.

Late comments will be considered to the

extent practicable. Public scoping

meetings to discuss issues and receive

oral comments on the scope of the EIS

will be held in the vicinity of sites that

may be affected by the proposed action.

The public scoping meetings will

provide the public with an opportunity

to present comments, ask questions, and

discuss concerns with DOE officials

regarding CLWR activities. An

interactive format will be used. The

location, date, and time for these public

scoping meetings is as follows:

Northeast Alabama Community College,

135 Alabama Highway 35 West,

February 24, 1998, 7:00 p.m.-10:00

p.m., Rainsville, AL

Rhea County High School, February 26,

1998, 7:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m.,

Evensville, TN.

The Tennessee Valley Authority has

been designated as a cooperating agency

for this EIS. Any other agency that

desires to be designated as a cooperating

agency should contact the CLWR

Program Office at the address listed

below by March 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: General questions

concerning the CLWR Project can be

asked by calling the toll-free telephone

number at 1–800–332–0801, or by

writing to: Stephen M. Sohinki,

Director, CLWR Project Office, U.S.

Department of Energy, P.O. Box 44539,

Washington, DC 20026–4539.

As an alternative, comments can also

be submitted by fax to: 1–800–631–

0612; or electronically to the CLWR

Web Site: http://www.dp.doe.gov/dp62. Please mark envelopes, faxes, and Email: ‘‘CLWR EIS Comments.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information on the DOE NEPA

process, please contact: Ms. Carol M.

Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA

Policy and Assistance (EH–42), U.S.

Department of Energy, 1000

Independence Avenue, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20585, 202–586–4600;

or telephone 800–472–2756 to leave a

message.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All of the

nuclear weapons currently in the United

States’ stockpile must contain tritium, a

radioactive isotope of hydrogen, to

function as designed. Tritium decays at

a rate of 5.5 percent per year, giving it

a half-life of 12.3 years. Because of this

decay, the tritium contained in the

nuclear weapons must be periodically

replenished. Tritium is not a fissile

material and cannot be used alone to

construct a nuclear weapon. Tritium

also has commercial uses such as watch

dials, exit signs, and medical research.

Tritium is so rare in nature that useful

quantities must be man-made. The

United States stopped producing new

tritium in 1988 when the last

government-owned nuclear materials

production reactor at the Savannah

River Site (SRS) was shut down.

Currently, there is no capability to
3098 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 1998 / Notices

produce the required amounts of tritium

within the Nuclear Weapons Complex.

Previously, the Department evaluated

the programmatic need for a new tritium

source in a Programmatic

Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)

for Tritium Supply and Recycling (DOE/

EIS–0161, October 1995). Based on the

findings in that PEIS and other

technical, cost, and schedule

evaluations, the Department issued a

Record of Decision (ROD) on December

5, 1995 (60 FR 63877). In the ROD, the

Department announced a decision to

pursue a dual-track approach on the two

most promising tritium supply

alternatives: (1) To initiate purchase of

an existing commercial reactor

(operating or partially complete) or

irradiation services with an option to

purchase the reactor for conversion to a

defense facility; and (2) to design, build,

and test critical components of an

accelerator system for tritium

production (SRS was selected as the

location for an accelerator, should one

be built). The Department will select

one of these approaches by the end of

1998 to serve as the primary source of

tritium. The other alternative, if feasible,

would continue to be developed as a

backup tritium source.

In recent years, international arms

control agreements have caused the

nuclear weapons stockpile to be

reduced in size. This, in turn, has

allowed DOE to recycle the tritium

removed from dismantled weapons for

use in supporting the remaining

stockpile. However, due to the decay of

tritium, the current inventory of tritium

will not meet the national security

needs that are projected for the future.

The most recent Presidential direction,

which is contained in the 1996 Nuclear

Weapons Stockpile Plan and an

accompanying Presidential Decision

Directive, mandates that new tritium be

available by 2005 if a CLWR is the

selected option for tritium production. If

the accelerator is the selected option for

tritium production, the Presidential

direction mandates that new tritium be

available by 2007.

The Department’s strategy for

compliance with NEPA has been to

make decisions on programmatic

alternatives in the ROD for the Tritium

Supply and Recycling PEIS (now

completed), followed by site-specific

analyses to implement the

programmatic decisions. The decisions

made in the December 5, 1995, Tritium

Supply and Recycling ROD have

resulted in the Department’s preparation

of the following NEPA documents:

1. An EIS for the Selection of One or

More Commercial Light Water Reactors

for Tritium Production (the subject of

this Notice of Intent);

2. An EIS for the Construction and

Operation of an Accelerator for the

Production of Tritium at the Savannah

River Site (Draft EIS issued in December

1997);

3. An Environmental Assessment for

the Consolidation of Tritium Recycling

Facilities at the Savannah River Site

(currently under preparation);

4. An EIS for the Construction and

Operation of a Tritium Extraction

Facility at the Savannah River Site

(Notice of Intent issued September 5,

1996 (61 FR 46790);

5. An Environmental Assessment for

the Lead Test Assembly Irradiation and

Analysis (completed in July 1997).

CLWR Production of Tritium

The production of tritium in a CLWR

is technically straightforward. As

discussed in the Tritium Supply and

Recycling PEIS, most existing

pressurized water reactors utilize

twelve-foot long rods containing an

isotope of boron in ceramic form that is

inserted in their fuel elements to absorb

excess neutrons produced by the

uranium fuel in the fission process.

These rods are sometimes called

burnable absorber rods. DOE’s tritium

program has developed another type of

burnable absorber rod in which

neutrons are absorbed by a lithium

aluminate ceramic rather than the boron

ceramic. These rods would be placed in

the same locations in the reactor core as

the standard burnable absorber rods.

There is no fissile material (uranium or

plutonium) in the DOE burnable

absorber rods.

While the two types of rods function

in a very similar manner to absorb

excess neutrons in the reactor core,

there is one notable difference: when

neutrons strike the lithium aluminate

ceramic material in the DOE burnable

absorber rod, tritium is produced. This

tritium is then captured almost

instantaneously in a solid zirconium

material in the rod, called a ‘‘getter.’’

Thus, there is virtually no free tritium

in the rod. In fact, the solid material that

captures the tritium as it is produced in

the rod is so effective that the rod will

have to be heated to temperatures in

excess of 1800 degrees Fahrenheit in the

extraction process to recover the tritium

for eventual use in the nuclear weapons

stockpile. Depending upon tritium

needs, as many as 1000–3000 tritiumproducing burnable absorber rods could

be placed in each of one or more CLWRs

for irradiation.

Relationship of the CLWR EIS and the

CLWR Procurement Process

Prior to preparation of the CLWR EIS,

DOE initiated a procurement process to

evaluate the feasibility of various CLWR

alternatives. DOE anticipated that it

would enter into a contract/agreement

with the owner/operator of one or more

commercial reactors for the purpose of

producing tritium. Such a contract/

agreement could result in DOE

purchasing CLWR irradiation services

and/or purchasing a CLWR. A partially

completed reactor could be utilized for

tritium production if the owner/operator

were to first complete construction of

the reactor.

In June 1997, DOE requested

proposals for producing tritium using

existing and partially completed

reactors. The proposals received from

the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

in September were the only proposals

that were determined to be responsive

to the requirements in the procurement

request. Consequently, the TVA

proposals were the only proposals that

were determined to be in the

competitive range. The alternatives

listed below, which were identified

through the procurement process,

currently constitute the reasonable

alternatives that will be evaluated in the

CLWR EIS. Through the procurement

process, DOE may enter into an

agreement with the TVA, contingent

upon completion of the NEPA process,

for the production of tritium required to

support the nuclear weapons stockpile.

However, before completion of the EIS

and its associated Record of Decision,

the Department and TVA will take

appropriate actions, e.g., studies and

analyses, related to the potential

submission of licensing documents to

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC). Only those actions that are

determined to be allowable interim

actions would be permitted prior to the

completion of the NEPA process. The

NRC must issue regulatory approval for

the use of tritium production rods in its

licensed reactors.

Proposed Action and Alternatives

The CLWR EIS will evaluate the

environmental impacts associated with

producing tritium at one or more of the

following reactor plants:

Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Units #1 and/

or #2 (Hollywood, Alabama)

Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit #1 (Spring

City, Tennessee)

Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Units #1 and/or

#2 (Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee)

All of these plants are owned and

operated by the Tennessee Valley

Authority.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 1998 / Notices 3099

As required by the Council on

Environmental Quality regulations, the

CLWR EIS will also evaluate the No

Action alternative. Under this

alternative, the stockpile demand for

tritium would have to be met by other

means, such as constructing and

operating an accelerator at the Savannah

River Site.

Identification of Environmental and

Other Issues

The Department has identified the

following issues for analysis in the EIS.

Additional issues may be identified as

a result of the scoping process.

1. Public and Worker Safety, Health

Risk Assessment: Radiological and

nonradiological impacts, including

projected effects on workers and the

public from construction, operation and

accident conditions associated with

tritium production.

2. Impacts from releases to air, water,

and soil associated with tritium

production.

3. Impacts to plants, animals, and

habitats, including threatened or

endangered species and their habitats

associated with tritium production.

4. The consumption of natural

resources and energy associated with

tritium production.

5. Socioeconomic impacts to affected

communities from construction and

operation associated with tritium

production.

6. Environmental justice:

Disproportionately high and adverse

human health or environmental effects

on minority and low-income

populations associated with tritium

production.

7. Impacts to cultural resources such

as historic, archaeological, scientific, or

culturally important sites associated

with tritium production.

8. Impacts associated with

transportation of nuclear materials.

9. Status of compliance with all

applicable Federal, state, and local

statutes and regulations; required

Federal and state environmental

consultations and notifications; and

DOE Orders on waste management,

waste minimization, and environmental

protection.

10. Cumulative impacts from the

proposed action and other past, present,

and reasonably foreseeable actions at

the alternative sites.

11. Potential irreversible and

irretrievable commitments of resources

associated with tritium production.

12. Pollution prevention and waste

management practices, including

characterization, storage, treatment and

disposal of wastes associated with

tritium production.

Public Scoping Process

To assist in defining the appropriate

scope of the EIS and to identify

significant environmental issues to be

addressed, DOE will conduct public

scoping meetings at the locations, dates,

and times described above under

DATES. DOE will begin each scoping

meeting with an overview of the CLWR

program. Following the initial

presentation, DOE will answer

questions and accept comments. Copies

of handouts from the meetings will be

available to those unable to attend, by

contacting the DOE CLWR project

described above under ADDRESSES.

Issued in Washington, D.C., this 15th day

of January 1998.

Peter N. Brush,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment,

Safety and Health.

[FR Doc. 98–1398 Filed 1–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Fossil Energy

[FE Docket Nos. 97–104–NG et al.]

TPC Corporation, et al.; Orders

Granting and Transferring Blanket

Authorizations To Import and/or Export

Natural Gas

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of orders.

SUMMARY: The Office of Fossil Energy of

the Department of Energy gives notice

that it has issued Orders granting and

transferring various natural gas import

and export authorizations. These Orders

are summarized in the attached

appendix.

These Orders are available for

inspection and copying in the Office of

Natural Gas & Petroleum Import and

Export Activities, Docket Room, 3F–056,

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585,

(202) 586–9478. The Docket Room is

open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on January 14,

1998.

John W. Glynn,

Manager, Natural Gas Regulation, Office of

Natural Gas & Petroleum Import and Export

Activities, Office of Fossil Energy.

APPENDIX—BLANKET IMPORT/EXPORT AUTHORIZATIONS GRANTED

[DOE/FE Authority]

Order

No.

Date

issued Importer/Exporter FE Docket No.

Two-year maximum

Import Comments

Volume

Bcf

Export

Volume

Bcf

1337 ..... 12/02/97 TPC Corporation, 97–104–NG .......................... 73 Import and export up to a combined total from

and to Canada beginning January 1, 1998,

through December 31, 1999.

1338 ..... 12/04/97 Phibro Inc., 97–106–NG .................................... 200 200 Import including LNG from Canada and, to export to Canada beginning on first delivery

after December 31, 1997.

1339 ..... 12/04/97 Phibro Inc., 97–105–NG .................................... 200 200 Import including LNG from Canada and, to export to Canada beginning on first delivery

after December 31, 1997.

1340 ..... 12/04/97 Puget Sound Energy, Inc., 97–103–NG ............ 50 ................ Import from Canada beginning on first delivery

after December 5, 1997.

1341 ..... 12/12/97 Direct Energy Marketing Inc., 97–111–NG ....... 200 ................ Import from Canada beginning February 1,

1998, through January 31, 2000.

1342 ..... 12/12/97 UtiliCorp United Inc., 97–107–NG ..................... 400 Import and export up to a combined total from

and to Canada beginning January 1, 1998,

through December 31, 1999.