Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Notices 31561

absent a determination by the

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 June 3, 1996, 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

Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers

Community-Technical College, 574 New

London Turnpike, Norwich,

Connecticut, and the Waterford Library,

ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope Ferry

Road, Waterford, Connecticut.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day

of June 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Vernon L. Rooney,

Senior Project Manager, Northeast Utilities

Project Directorate, Division of Reactor

Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–15730 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–339]

Virginia Electric and Power Company;

Notice of Withdrawal of Application for

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The United States Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request of Virginia Electric

and Power Company (the licensee) to

withdraw its October 17, 1995,

application for proposed amendment to

Facility Operating License No. NPF–7

for the North Anna Power Station, Unit

No. 2, located in Louisa County,

Virginia.

The proposed amendment would

have revised the Technical

Specifications pertaining to the

minimum number of steam generators

required to be inspected during the first

inservice inspection following steam

generator replacement.

The Commission had previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment published in

the Federal Register on November 27,

1995 (60 FR 58406). However, by letter

dated February 19, 1996, the licensee

withdrew the proposed change.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated October 17, 1995, and

the licensee’s letter dated February 19,

1996, which withdrew the application

for license amendment. The above

documents are available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and the Alderman

Library, Special Collections Department,

University of Virginia, Charlottesville,

Virginia 22903–2498.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 7th day

of June 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Bart C. Buckley,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

II–1, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–15729 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–285]

Omaha Public Power District, Fort

Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1;

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–

40, issued to Omaha Public Power

District (the licensee), for operation of

the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1, located

in Washington County, Nebraska.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would issue an

amendment to allow an increase in the

initial nominal Uranium-235 (U–235)

enrichment limit for fuel assemblies

which may be stored in the spent fuel

pool. This action would allow the

licensee to extend the biennial interval

until the first quarter of 1996. The

proposed action is in accordance with

the licensee’s application for

amendment dated February 1, 1996.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The licensee intends to store

unirradiated fuel with a maximum

initial enrichment of 4.5 w/o U–235 in

Region 1 of the spent fuel pool during

the next refueling outage (Refuel 17).

Spent fuel will be stored in Region 2 of

the spent fuel pool. At present, fuel with

a maximum initial enrichment up to 4.2

weight percent of U–235 can be stored

in Region 1 and Region 2 of the spent

fuel pool.

Environmental Impact of the Proposed

Action:

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed revision to

the technical specifications (TSs) and

concludes that the use of fuel with a

maximum enrichment of 4.5 w/o U–235

would not significantly increase the

probability or consequences of any

accident previously analyzed. The

proposed amendment would increase

the allowable fuel enrichment from 4.2

w/o to 4.5 w/o U–235 in Region 1 of the

spent fuel pool and modify the burnup/

enrichment restrictions imposed on fuel

stored in Region 2 to include fuel with

an enrichment up to 4.5 w/o.

The environmental impacts of

transportation resulting from the use of

higher enrichment and extended

irradiation are discussed in the staff

assessment entitled ‘‘NRC Assessment

of the Environmental Effects of

Transportation Resulting from Extended

Fuel Enrichment and Irradiation.’’ This

assessment was published in the

Federal Register on August 11, 1988 (53

FR 30355) as corrected on August 24,

1988 (53 FR 32322) in connection with

the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant,

Unit 1: Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact. As

indicated therein, the environmental

cost contribution of an increase in fuel

enrichment of up to 5 weight percent

U–235 and irradiation limits of up to 60

Gigawatt Days per Metric Ton (GWD/

MT) are either unchanged, or may in

fact be reduced from those summarized

in Table S–4 as set forth in 10 CFR

51.52(c). These findings are applicable

to the proposed amendment for the Ft.

Calhoun Station, Unit 1. Accordingly,

the Commission concludes that this

proposed action would result in no

significant radiological environmental

impact.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

changes involve 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.

Therefore, the Commission concludes

that there are no significant

nonradiological environmental impacts

associated with the proposed

amendment.

The Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment to Facility

Operating License, Proposed No

Significant Hazards Consideration

Determination, and Opportunity for a

Hearing in connection with this action

was published in the Federal Register

on March 13, 1996 (61 FR 10396).

Alternative to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission concluded that

there are no significant environmental

effects that would result from the

proposed action, any alternative with

equal or greater environmental impacts

need not be evaluated.
31562 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Notices

The principal alternative would be to

deny the requested amendment. This

would not reduce environmental

impacts of plant operation and would

result in reduced operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement (FES) for the Fort Calhoun

Station, Unit 1, dated August 1972.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on June 13, 1996, the staff consulted

with the Nebraska State official, Ms.

Cheryl Rodgers of the Department of

Health, 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 February 1, 1996, 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 W.

Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th

Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68102.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day

of June 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

L. Raynard Wharton,

Project Manager, Project Directorate IV–2,

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–15728 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–302]

Florida Power Corporation, Crystal

River Nuclear Generating Plant

(License No. DPR–72); Receipt of

Petition for Director’s Decision Under

10 CFR 2.206

Notice is hereby given that the staff of

the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) has received a

petition dated March 28, 1996, filed by

Louis D. Putney, Esq., on behalf of Barry

L. Bennett (petitioner). The petition

requests, pursuant to section 2.206 of

Title 10 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (10 CFR 2.206), that the

NRC investigate concerns regarding

security deficiencies at Florida Power

Corporation’s Crystal River Nuclear

Generating Plant (Crystal River). The

petition also requests that, upon a

determination that these concerns are

valid, the NRC institute a proceeding to

suspend or revoke the operating license

of Crystal River pursuant to 10 CFR

2.202 until such time as these concerns

are corrected.

As the basis for his petition, Mr.

Bennett claims that during his

employment with SBI Inc., a company

that provided contract nuclear security

services for Florida Power Corporation,

he observed various security

deficiencies at Crystal River.

The petition is being treated pursuant

to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission’s

regulations. The petition has been

referred to the Director of the Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation. As

provided by 10 CFR 2.206, appropriate

action will be taken on the petition

within a reasonable time.

A copy of the petition is available for

inspection and copying in the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC

20555.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th day

of June 1996.

Frank J. Miraglia,

Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–15727 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

POSTAL SERVICE

Privacy Act of 1974; System of

Records

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Notice of modifications to an

existing system of records.

SUMMARY: This document publishes

notice of modifications to Privacy Act

System of Records USPS 120.070,

Personnel Records-General Personnel

Folder (Official Personnel Folders and

Records Related Thereto). The proposed

modifications expand the categories of

records covered by the system, add a

system manager, and enhance the

system description, especially with

regard to procedures for filing and

retaining records.

DATES: Any interested party may submit

written comments on the proposed

modifications. This proposal will

become effective without further notice

on July 30, 1996, unless comments

received on or before that date result in

a contrary determination.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

proposal should be mailed or delivered

to Payroll Accounting and Records,

United States Postal Service, 475

L’Enfant Plaza SW, Room 8650,

Washington, DC 20260–5243. Copies of

all written comments will be available

at the above address for public

inspection and photocopying between 8

a.m. and 4:45 p.m., Monday through

Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Betty E. Sheriff, (202) 268–2608.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Privacy

Act System of Records USPS 120.070,

Personnel Records-General Personnel

Folder (Official Personnel Folders and

Records Related Thereto) collects

information contained within

employees’ official personnel folders

and related information. Such

information consists of documents that

reflect an employee’s status, salary,

benefits, service, and career history.

This notice enhances the categories of

records in the system by including

further examples of records historically

covered by the system. It expands the

categories to the extent that reference

copies of discipline or adverse action

records are kept for a period beyond the

copy historically kept within the official

personnel folder. Such maintenance is

also reflected in a revision to the

retention and disposal segment of the

system notice. Because these records are

kept within Labor Relations offices, the

Vice President, Labor Relations has been

added as a System Manager.

All records within this system

continue to be kept in a secured

environment. The system modifications

do not alter the character of information

contained in the system or the

safeguards applied in the maintenance

of that information.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(11),

interested persons are invited to submit

written data, views, or arguments on

this proposal. A report of the proposed

system has been sent to Congress and to

the Office of Management and Budget

for their evaluation.

USPS Privacy Act system 120.070 was

last published in its entirety in the

Federal Register on June 19, 1991 (56

FR 28181) and amended on December 4,

1992 (57 FR 57515) and on November

24, 1993 (58 FR 62171). The Postal

Service proposes amending that system

as shown below.

USPS 120.070

SYSTEM NAME:

Personnel Records-General Personnel

Folder (Official Personnel Folders and

Records Related Thereto), 120.070.