Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. 30-595]

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from 10 CFR 55.59 for Facility Operating License No. NPF-12, issued to South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G, the licensee), for operation of the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, located in Jenkinsville, South Carolina. 

## Environmental Assessment 

### Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would allow the licensed operator requalification examinations for the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station to be rescheduled. The requested exemption would extend the completion date for the examinations from May 31, 2001, to August 31, 2001. 

The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for exemption dated January 12, 2001. 

### The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action would extend the current V.C. Summer Nuclear Station requalification program from May 31, 2001, to August 31, 2001. On October 13, 2000, during routine shutdown inspections, SCE&G discovered a leak in a weld in the reactor coolant system. Activities to determine the root cause and extent of condition and to repair the leak extended through the end of February 2001, months beyond the original scheduled plant restart. To provide the necessary level of licensed operator support to ensure safety throughout the extended plant outage, SCE&G postponed the training and other requalification program activities originally planned during that time. 

### Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes, as set forth below, that there are no environmental impacts associated with the extension of the operator requalification examinations from May 31, 2001, to August 31, 2001. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. 

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. 

### Alternatives to the Proposed Action

As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the “no-action” alternative). 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 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station. 

### Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy, on May 18, 2001, the staff consulted with the South Carolina State official, Henry Porter of the Division of Waste Management, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. 

## Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC 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 January 12, 2001. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC Web site,                     *http:www.nrc.gov*                     (the Public Electronic Reading Room).                 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of May 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Karen R. Cotton, 

Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 01-13399 Filed 5-25-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P