Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Notices 32399

are no significant nonradiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes

that there are no significant

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

As an alternative to the exemption

requests listed above, the NRC staff

considered denial of the proposed

action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ alternative).

Denial of the application would result

in no significant change in current

environmental impacts.

Another alternative is to await

applicable regulations that are the result

of a future rulemaking under Option 2

of the Commission’s alternatives to risk

inform 10 CFR part 50 of the NRC’s

regulations discussed in SECY–98–300,

‘‘Options for Risk-Informed Revisions to

10 CFR part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of

Production and Utilization Facilities’.’’

The exemptions requested by the

licensee are a proof-of-concept for this

broader rulemaking effort. The

Commission plans to use the STPNOC

exemption request and other industry

pilot programs to assist with the

development of the revised riskinformed 10 CFR part 50. The only

adverse environmental impact

associated with this proposed action

would be a slight increase in the risk of

an accident, but this impact would not

be significantly changed with the

alternative of awaiting a rulemaking.

Therefore, any relief granted under a

subset of a larger set of risk-informed

regulations under Option 2 in lieu of the

exemption requests would not provide a

significant benefit to public health or

safety, or the environment. The

environmental impacts associated with

granting the exemptions found to be

acceptable by the NRC staff and the

alternatives listed above are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement (NUREG–1171) for the South

Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, dated

August 1986.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on June 1, 2001, the NRC staff consulted

with the Texas State official, Arthur C.

Tate, of the Division of Compliance and

Inspection, Bureau of Radiation Control,

Texas Department of Health, 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 staff concludes

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

NRC staff 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 July 13, 1999, as supplemented on

October 14 and 22, 1999; January 26 and

August 31, 2000; and January 15, 18,

and 23, March 19, and May 8 and 21,

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 of the NRC web site

http://www.nrc.gov (Electronic Reading

Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of June, 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Cynthia A. Carpenter,

Acting Director, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–14976 Filed 6–13–01; 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 (NRC) is considering

amending a previously granted approval

to dispose of slightly contaminated soil

under 10 CFR 20.2002 by expanding the

allowable waste stream to include low

levels of radioactively contaminated soil

generated as a residual byproduct of

other types of on-site construction

activities. This approval is requested by

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power

Corporation (the licensee), for operation

of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power

Station (Vermont Yankee), located in

Windham County, Vermont.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would amend

the previously granted approvals to

dispose of slightly contaminated septic

waste, cooling tower silt, soil/sand from

roadways and walkways, to include low

levels of radioactively contaminated

construction soil generated as a residual

byproduct of on-site construction

activities such as design change

implementation and land maintenance.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s request dated

September 11, 2000.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is needed to

dispose of slightly contaminated soil onsite. In accordance with 10 CFR

20.2002, which requires that a licensee

apply to the Commission for approval of

proposed procedures, not otherwise

authorized in the regulations, to dispose

of licensed material generated by the

licensee’s activities. The licensee

identified 28.3 cubic meters of approved

materials (i.e., soil/sand from roadways

and walkways, and soil from on-site

construction-related activities

including, but not limited to, design

change implementation and land

maintenance) to be disposed of on-site

on an annual basis until the expiration

of the plant’s operating license in 2013.

Since the previous approval did not

include disposal of soil generated as a

result of certain construction-related

activities, the licensee is requesting

approval to amend the previously

granted application pursuant to 10 CFR

20.2002, dated June 15, 2000.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The NRC has completed its evaluation

of the proposed action and concludes

that the proposed action will be bound

by the conditions for the on-site

disposals previously reviewed and

approved by the NRC. The licensee will

continue to use the designated and

approved areas on their property

(approximately 1.9 acres) and use

approximately 10 acres which have not

been previously used for disposal. The

amount of soil and soil/sand materials

that will be disposed has not increased,

and will remain at 28.3 cubic meters.

Determination of the radiological dose

impact of the new material has been

made based on the same dose

assessment models and pathway

assumptions used in the previous

submittals. The licensee’s proposal was

evaluated against the NRC staff’s

guidelines for on-site disposal and

found not to be a significant radiological

environmental impact. The bounding

dose conditions for the previously

approved materials will not be

exceeded. The potential exposure to

members of the general public from the

radionuclides in material was

32400 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Notices

determined to be less than 1 mrem/year

and meets the NRC staff’s guidelines.

The proposed action 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 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. 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. If the proposed action is denied,

the licensee may be required to ship the

material to an off-site low-level

radioactive waste disposal facility.

Transportation impacts would increase

as a result of the additional volume of

low-level waste generated for disposal.

Furthermore, the costs associated with

off-site disposal greatly exceed the cost

of on-site disposal without no

significant benefit to the environment.

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 April 12, 2001, the staff consulted

with the Vermont State Official, William

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

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 September 11, 2000. 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 Agencywide Documents

Access and Management System

(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading

Room on the Internet at the NRC web

site, http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/

index.html. If you do not have access to

ADAMS or if there are problems in

accessing the documents located in

ADAMS, contact the NRC Public

Document Room (PDR) Reference staff

at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737 or

by email to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of June 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert M. Pulsifer,

Project Manager, Section 2, Project

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–14977 Filed 6–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Notice of Opportunity To Comment on

Model Safety Evaluation on Technical

Specification Improvement To Modify

Requirements Regarding Missed

Surveillances Using the Consolidated

Line Item Improvement Process

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Request for comment.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) has prepared a

model safety evaluation (SE) relating to

the modification of requirements

regarding missed surveillances imposed

on licensees through technical

specifications. The NRC staff has also

prepared a model no significant hazards

consideration (NSHC) determination

relating to this matter. The purpose of

these models is to permit the NRC to

efficiently process amendments that

propose to modify requirements for

missed surveillances. Licensees of

nuclear power reactors to which the

models apply could request

amendments confirming the

applicability of the SE and NSHC

determination to their reactors. The

NRC staff is requesting comments on the

model SE and model NSHC

determination prior to announcing their

availability for referencing in license

amendment applications.

DATES: The comment period expires July

16, 2001. Comments received after this

date will be considered if it is practical

to do so, but the Commission is able to

ensure consideration only for comments

received on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted either electronically or via

U.S. mail.

Submit written comments to: Chief,

Rules and Directives Branch, Division of

Administrative Services, Office of

Administration, Mail Stop: T–6 D59,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001.

Hand deliver comments to: 11545

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,

between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on

Federal workdays.

Copies of comments received may be

examined at the NRC’s Public Document

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike (Room O–

1F21), Rockville, MD.

Comments may be submitted by

electronic mail to CLIIP@nrc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Dennig, Mail Stop: O–12H4,

Division of Regulatory Improvement

Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, telephone 301–415–1161.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Regulatory Issue Summary 2000–06,

‘‘Consolidated Line Item Improvement

Process for Adopting Standard

Technical Specification Changes for

Power Reactors,’’ was issued on March

20, 2000. The consolidated line item

improvement process (CLIIP) is

intended to improve the efficiency of

NRC licensing processes. This is

accomplished by processing proposed

changes to the standard technical

specifications (STS) in a manner that

supports subsequent license amendment

applications. The CLIIP includes an

opportunity for the public to comment

on proposed changes to the STS

following a preliminary assessment by

the NRC staff and finding that the

change will likely be offered for

adoption by licensees. This notice is

soliciting comment on a proposed

change to the STS that modifies

requirements regarding missed

surveillances. The CLIIP directs the

NRC staff to evaluate any comments

received for a proposed change to the

STS and to either reconsider the change

or to proceed with announcing the