46054 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Notices 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Rebecca Tadesse, 

Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning 

and Uranium Recovery, Licensing Directorate, 

Division of Waste Management, and 

Environmental Protection, Office of Federal 

and State Materials, and Environmental 

Protection Programs. 

[FR Doc. E8–18186 Filed 8–6–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–423] 

Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.; 

Millstone Power Station, Unit 3; Final 

Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

Related to the Proposed License 

Amendment To Increase the Maximum 

Reactor Power Level 

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC). 

SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a final 

Environmental Assessment (EA) as its 

evaluation of a request by the Dominion 

Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., (DNC or the 

licensee), for a license amendment to 

increase the maximum thermal power at 

the Millstone Power Station, Unit 3 

(Millstone 3), from 3,411 megawatts 

thermal (MWt) to 3,650 MWt. The NRC 

staff did not identify any significant 

impact from the information provided 

in the licensee’s stretch power uprate 

(SPU) application for Millstone 3 or 

from the NRC staff’s independent 

review. Therefore, the NRC staff is 

documenting its environmental review 

in a final EA. The final EA and Finding 

of No Significant Impact are being 

published in the Federal Register. 

The NRC published a draft EA and 

finding of no significant impact on the 

proposed action for public comment in 

the Federal Register on June 4, 2008 (73 

FR 31894). There were no comments 

received by the comment period 

expiration date of July 7, 2008. 

Environmental Assessment 

The NRC is considering issuance of an 

amendment to Renewed Facility 

Operating License No. NPF–49, issued 

to DNC for operation of Millstone 3, 

located in New London County, 

Connecticut. Therefore, as required by 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) Section 51.21, the 

NRC is issuing this final environmental 

assessment and finding of no significant 

impact. 

Plant Site and Environs 

Millstone 3 is located in the Town of 

Waterford, Connecticut, about 40 miles 

east of New Haven and 40 miles 

southeast of Hartford, Connecticut. 

Millstone 3 is located on Millstone 

Point between the Niantic and Thames 

Rivers. The site sits on the edge of the 

Long Island Sound and Niantic Bay and 

is approximately 20 miles west of Rhode 

Island. 

The site is approximately 525 acres 

including the developed portion of the 

site, which is approximately 220 acres 

in size. In addition to Millstone 3, the 

site includes the shutdown Millstone 

Power Station, Unit 1 reactor and the 

operating Millstone Power Station, Unit 

2 reactor. 

The site includes approximately 50 

acres of natural area and approximately 

30 acres of recreational playing fields 

licensed to the Town of Waterford. 

Approximately 300 acres of the site are 

outside the land developed for the 

power station. The transmission lines 

that connect the Millstone Power 

Station to the New England grid along 

with the switchyard equipment are 

owned and maintained by the 

Connecticut Light and Power Company. 

The exclusion area coincides with the 

site property boundary. The nearest 

residences are approximately 2,400 feet 

from the reactors. The region, within 6 

miles of the site, includes parts of the 

towns of Waterford, New London, 

Groton, East Lyme, and Old Lyme. 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would revise the 

Millstone 3 renewed facility operating 

license and technical specifications to 

increase the licensed rated power by 

approximately 7 percent from 3,411 

MWt to 3,650 MWt. The proposed 

action is in accordance with the 

licensee’s application dated July 13, 

2007, as supplemented by letters dated 

July 13, September 12, November 19, 

December 13 and 17, 2007, January 10, 

11, 14, 18, and 31, February 25, March 

5, 10, 25, and 27, April 4, 24, and 29, 

May 15, 20, and 21, and July 10, and 16, 

2008. The proposed SPU would be 

implemented during the scheduled fall 

2008 refueling outage. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action permits an 

increase in the licensed core thermal 

power from 3,411 MWt to 3,650 MWt 

for Millstone 3, providing the flexibility 

to obtain a higher electrical output from 

the Millstone Power Station. The 

proposed action is intended to provide 

an additional supply of electric 

generation in the State of Connecticut 

without the need to site and construct 

new facilities or to impose new sources 

of air or water discharges to the 

environment. The proposed action is 

intended to supply approximately 85 

megawatts of additional electric 

capacity in a region of the New England 

Independent System Operator (ISO–NE) 

system where peak loads generally 

exceed local generation capacity. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The licensee has submitted an 

environmental evaluation supporting 

the proposed SPU and provided a 

summary of its conclusions concerning 

the radiological and non-radiological 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action. 

Non-Radiological Impacts 

Land Use Impacts 

The proposed SPU would not affect 

land use at the site. No new 

construction is planned outside of the 

existing facilities, and no expansion of 

buildings, roads, parking lots, 

equipment storage areas, or 

transmission facilities would be 

required to support the proposed SPU. 

The proposed SPU would not require 

the storage of additional industrial 

chemicals or storage tanks on the site. 

Transmission Facilities 

The proposed SPU would not require 

any new transmission lines, 

transmission line conductor 

modifications, or new equipment to 

support SPU operation and would not 

require changes in the maintenance and 

operation of existing transmission lines, 

switchyards, or substations. 

The licensee did not provide an 

estimate of the increase in the operating 

voltage due to the proposed SPU. Based 

on experience from SPUs at other 

plants, the NRC staff concludes that the 

increase in the operating voltage would 

be negligible. Because the voltage would 

not change significantly, there would be 

no significant change in the potential for 

electric shock. 

The proposed SPU would increase the 

current. The National Electric Safety 

Code (NESC) provides design criteria 

that limit hazards from steady-state 

currents. The NESC limits the shortcircuit current to the ground to less than 

5 milliamperes. The transmission lines 

meet the applicable shock prevention 

provision of the NESC. Therefore, even 

with the slight increase in current 

attributable to the SPU, adequate 

protection is provided against hazards 

from electrical shock. 

There would be an increase in current 

passing through the transmission lines 

associated with the increased power 

level of the proposed SPU. The 

increased electrical current passing 

through the transmission lines would 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Notices 46055 

cause an increase in electromagnetic 

field (EMF) strength. However, there is 

no scientific consensus regarding the 

health effects of EMFs produced by 

operating transmission lines. Therefore, 

the licensee did not quantify the chronic 

effects of EMF on human and biota. The 

potential for chronic effects for these 

fields continues to be studied and is not 

known at this time. The National 

Institute of Environmental Health 

Sciences (NIEHS) directs related 

research through the U.S Department of 

Energy. A 2003 NIEHS study published 

in Environmental Health Perspectives, 

Volume 111, Number 3, dated March 

2003, titled ‘‘Power-Line Frequency 

Electromagnetic Fields Do Not Induce 

Changes in Phosphorylation, 

Localization, or Expression of the 27- 

Kilodalton Heat Shock Protein in 

Human Keratinocytes,’’ by Biao Shi, 

Behnom Farboud, Richard Nuccitelli, 

and R. Rivkah Isseroff of the University 

of California, contains the following 

conclusion: 

The linkage of the exposure to the powerline frequency (50–60 Hz) electromagnetic 

fields (EMF) with human cancers remains 

controversial after more than 10 years of 

study. The in vitro studies on the adverse 

effects of EMF on human cells have not 

yielded a clear conclusion. In this study, we 

investigated whether power-line frequency 

EMF could act as an environmental insult to 

invoke stress responses in human 

keratinocytes using the 27–kDa heat shock 

protein (HSP27) as a stress marker. After 

exposure to 1 gauss (100 μT) EMF from 20 

min to 24 hr, the isoform pattern of HSP27 

in keratinocytes remained unchanged, 

suggesting that EMF did not induce the 

phosphorylation of this stress protein. EMF 

exposure also failed to induce the 

translocation of HSP27 from the cytoplasm to 

the nucleus. Moreover, EMF exposure did 

not increase the abundance of HSP27 in 

keratinocytes. In addition, we found no 

evidence that EMF exposure enhanced the 

level of the 70–kDa heat shock protein 

(HSP70) in breast or leukemia cells as 

reported previously. Therefore, in this study 

we did not detect any of a number of stress 

responses in human keratinocytes exposed to 

power-line frequency EMF. 

To date, there is not sufficient data to 

cause the NRC staff to change its 

position with respect to the chronic 

effects of EMFs. If, in the future, the 

NRC staff finds that, contrary to current 

indications, a consensus has been 

reached by appropriate Federal health 

agencies that there are adverse health 

effects from electromagnetic fields, the 

NRC staff will recommend the 

Commission change its current position 

regarding EMF. 

Water Use Impacts 

Millstone 3 uses a once-through 

cooling water system, discharging its 

cooling water into an existing quarry, 

and then to Long Island Sound. The 

proposed SPU would increase the 

temperature of water discharged from 

Millstone 3. Temperatures at the 

discharge point would range from 

50.5 °F in January through February to 

90.6 °F in August through September. 

The maximum expected discharge 

temperature at 100 percent power under 

SPU conditions is 94.5 °F. Under all 

SPU conditions, Millstone Power 

Station will continue to operate in 

conformance with the existing National 

Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permit conditions. The site 

NPDES permit limits the maximum 

temperature of the circulating water 

discharge to the quarry to 98 °F, the 

maximum change in temperature from 

Niantic Bay to the quarry to 24 °F, and 

the maximum temperature of water 

entering Long Island Sound at the 

quarry cut is 105 °F. The discharge is 

not allowed to increase the temperature 

of Long Island Sound beyond the plant’s 

8,000-ft radius mixing zone by more 

than an average of 4 °F and not to 

exceed a maximum of 83 °F. The 

maximum temperature rise across the 

condenser under SPU conditions is 

19.5 °F, which remains below the 

NPDES permit limit of 24 °F. With the 

ocean temperature at its design 

maximum temperature of 75 °F, the 

circulating water discharge temperature 

increases to a maximum of 94.5 °F 

during normal 100-percent power 

operation, which remains below the 

NPDES discharge limit of 98 °F. Because 

the increase under SPU conditions 

remains well below the facility’s NPDES 

permit limits, the NRC staff determined 

that this increase is not significant and 

is bounded by previous NRC analysis of 

thermal discharge as documented in the 

‘‘Generic Environmental Impact 

Statement for License Renewal of 

Nuclear Power Plants: Regarding 

Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3,’’

dated July 2005. No effects on the 

aquatic or terrestrial habitat in the 

vicinity of the plant, or to endangered 

or threatened species, or to the habitats 

of endangered or threatened species are 

expected as a result of the increase in 

thermal discharge. 

Socioeconomic Impacts 

The socioeconomic impacts 

associated with implementing the 

proposed SPU at Millstone 3 include a 

minor positive contribution in relation 

to the contribution of the overall outage 

scope to local and regional economies. 

The proposed SPU has a small positive 

impact on the continuation of 

employment of the local population 

with the associated expenditures for 

goods and services. The amount of 

future property tax payments are 

dependent on the future market value of 

the units, future valuations of other 

properties in these jurisdictions, and 

other factors according to the licensee’s 

proposed SPU amendment, dated July 

13, 2007. 

No measurable changes in the 

character, source, or intensity of noise 

generated at Millstone Power Station are 

expected as a result of the SPU, either 

inside or outside the plant. 

Historic and Archaeological Resources 

at and Near Millstone Power Station 

There are 181 properties in New 

London County listed in the National 

Register of Historic Places, with 62 

falling within a radius of 6 miles of the 

Millstone Power Station site, according 

to the licensee’s proposed SPU 

application, dated July 13, 2007. The 

licensee also performed an 

archaeological records search for the 

Millstone Power Station site according 

to the licensee’s proposed SPU 

application, dated July 13, 2007. The 

proposed SPU is not expected to impact 

historic or archaeological resources. 

Summary 

The proposed SPU would not result 

in a significant change in nonradiological impacts in the areas of land 

use, transmission facility operation, 

water use, socioeconomic factors, or 

historical or archaeological resources. 

Radiological Impacts 

Liquid Radioactive Waste and Offsite 

Doses 

The licensee evaluated the impacts of 

the proposed SPU on radioactive liquid 

waste production, processing, discharge 

into the environment, resultant dose to 

members of the public, and impact to 

the quarry and Long Island Sound into 

which water is discharged. There will 

be a small increase (approximately 9.1 

percent for long-lived activity) in the 

equilibrium radioactivity in the reactor 

coolant, which in turn will result in a 

maximum increase of 9.1 percent in the 

radioactivity content of the liquid 

releases, since input activities are based 

on long-term reactor coolant activity. 

Tritium levels are also expected to 

increase by 9.1 percent in the 

discharged liquid. This will result in 

increased aqueous tritium 

concentrations in the quarry. The 

releases, excluding tritium, would 

remain bounded by Table D–4a 

(Calculated Release of Radioactive 

Materials in Liquid Effluents from 

Millstone Unit 3) of the ‘‘Final 

Environmental Statement [FES] related 

to the operation of Millstone Nuclear 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
46056 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Notices 

Power Station, Unit 3,’’ dated December 

1984, which estimates liquid effluent 

releases, excluding tritium, of about 

0.56 curies per year. The licensee’s 

evaluation estimates the annual average 

release of tritium to be 1,100 curies 

based on values from 2001 through 

2005, which is reasonable and 

consistent with the value reported in the 

‘‘Generic Environmental Impact 

Statement [GEIS] for License Renewal of 

Nuclear Plants’’ (1996). 

The evaluation shows that even with 

the small increase in the radioactivity 

being discharged into the environment, 

the projected dose to the maximally 

exposed member of the public, while 

slightly increased, (2.61E–03 millirem 

(mrem) for the Whole Body and 1.26E–

02 mrem for the Critical Organ) will 

remain well below the ‘‘as low as is 

reasonably achievable’’ (ALARA) guides 

on design objectives in Section IIA of 

criteria in Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 

(3 mrem to the total body and 10 mrem 

to any organ). 

Gaseous Radioactive Wastes and Offsite 

Doses 

The licensee evaluated the impacts of 

the proposed SPU on gaseous 

radioactive wastes. Gaseous radioactive 

wastes are activation gases and fission 

product radioactive noble gases which 

come from radioactive system leakage, 

continuous degasification, volume 

control tank (VCT) venting, gases used 

for tank cover gas, and gases generated 

in the radiochemistry laboratory. The 

evaluation shows that the proposed SPU 

would not significantly increase the 

inventory of gases normally processed 

in the gaseous waste management 

system. This is based on no change to 

the plant system functions and no 

change to the gas volume inputs 

occurring under SPU conditions. 

The activity of radioactive gaseous 

nuclides present in the waste gas system 

will increase as a result of the SPU. This 

is due to the increased levels of gases in 

the reactor coolant system and the 

actions performed in the VCT. However, 

the operation of the waste gas system 

will not change and will continue to 

allow for decay of the short-lived 

radionuclides. Tritium will remain the 

largest component of the gaseous 

effluents, the largest contributor being 

from evaporation from the spent fuel 

pools. The proposed SPU will result in 

a small increase (approximately 9.5 

percent for noble gases and 9.1 percent 

for particulates, iodine, and tritium) in 

the equilibrium radioactivity in the 

reactor coolant, which in turn increases 

the activity in the gaseous waste 

disposal systems and the activity 

released to the atmosphere. 

The evaluation shows that even with 

the small increase in the gaseous 

radioactivity being discharged into the 

environment, the projected dose to the 

maximally exposed member of the 

public, while slightly increased (2.03E–

02 mrem to the total body or 2.11E–02 

mrem to the skin), will remain well 

below the ALARA guides in Appendix 

I to 10 CFR Part 50 (annual dose: 10 

millirads for gamma radiation in air, 20 

millirads for beta radiation in air, 5 

mrem to the total body, and 15 mrem to 

the skin). 

Solid Radioactive Waste and Offsite 

Doses 

Solid radioactive waste (radwaste) 

includes solids used in the reactor 

coolant system operation, solids 

recovered from the reactor coolant 

systems, and solids in contact with the 

reactor process system liquids or gases. 

While the SPU will slightly increase the 

activity level of radioactive isotopes in 

the reactor coolant system and the 

volume of radioactive liquid generated 

from leakage and planned drainage, 

there will only be a minimal effect on 

the generation of radioactively 

contaminated sludge and resin solids 

processed as radwaste. The currently 

installed radwaste system and its total 

volume capacity for handling solid 

radwaste will not be affected. The 

activity of radwaste would increase 

proportionately to the increase in long 

half-life coolant activity, which would 

be bounded by a 9.1 percent increase 

under SPU conditions. This increase 

remains well below the solids activity 

level of 9,100 curies identified in Table 

5–21 (Summary Table S–3 Uranium 

Fuel Cycle Environmental Data) of the 

FES for Millstone 3. This table takes 

into account the environmental factors 

of the fuel cycle as related to the 

operation of the Millstone 3 facility. The 

increase in solids volume generated is 

expected to be minor under SPU 

conditions (139.7 curies). 

For the long-term operation of the 

plant under SPU conditions, the dose to 

an offsite member of the public from the 

onsite storage of solid radwaste is 

estimated to increase by approximately 

10.22 percent. This is based on several 

assumptions, which are: (1) The current 

waste decays and its contribution 

decreases; (2) stored radwaste is 

routinely moved offsite for disposal; (3) 

waste generated post-SPU enters into 

storage; and (4) the plant capacity factor 

approaches the target of 1.0. The 

radiation dose from direct shine is 

cumulative based on the waste 

generated and stored onsite from all 

units over the plant’s lifetime. The 

Millstone Power Station Offsite Dose 

Calculation Manual contains the 

requirements to ensure compliance with 

the radiation dose limits of 40 CFR 190 

and 10 CFR 20.1301. Therefore, while a 

small increase in offsite radiation dose 

is expected (0.17 mrem to the whole 

body in a year; the pre-SPU whole body 

in a year was approximately 0.12 

mrem), it will remain within regulatory 

limits of 40 CFR 190 and 10 CFR 

20.1301. 

Occupational Radiation Doses 

The radiation exposure to plant 

workers from the SPU is expected to be 

kept to a minimum based on the design 

features at the Millstone Power Station 

site and the Radiation Protection 

Program. The design features include: 

(1) Shielding, which is provided to 

reduce levels of radiation; (2) 

ventilation, which is arranged to control 

the flow of potentially contaminated air; 

(3) an installed radiation monitoring 

system, which is used to measure levels 

of radiation in potentially occupied 

areas and measure airborne radioactivity 

throughout the plant; and (4) respiratory 

protective equipment, which is used as 

prescribed by the Radiation Protection 

Program. The Radiation Protection 

Program contains procedures for all 

radiological work performed at the 

Millstone Power Station to ensure doses 

are maintained ALARA and in 

compliance with regulatory limits in 10 

CFR Part 20. 

Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts 

The environmental impacts of the fuel 

cycle and transportation of fuel and 

waste are described in 10 CFR 51.51, 

Table S–3 (Uranium Fuel Cycle Data), 

and 10 CFR 51.52, Table S–4 

(Environmental Impact of 

Transportation of Fuel and Waste To 

and From One Light-Water-Cooled 

Nuclear Power Reactor), respectively. 

An NRC generic EA (53 FR 6040, dated 

February 29, 1988) evaluated the 

applicability of Tables S–3 and S–4 to 

a higher burn-up fuel cycle and 

concluded that there would be no 

significant change in environmental 

impact from the parameters evaluated in 

Tables S–3 and S–4 for fuel cycles with 

uranium enrichments up to 5 weight 

percent uranium-235 and burn-ups less 

than 60,000 MW days per metric ton of 

uranium-235 (MWd/MTU). 

The proposed SPU would increase the 

power level to 3,650 MWt, which is 

below the reference power level of 3,800 

MWt for Table S–4. The fuel enrichment 

and burn-up after the SPU will continue 

to be no greater than 5 weight percent 

uranium-235, and the fuel burn-up will 

be maintained less than 60,000 MWd/ 

MTU. The NRC staff concludes that the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Notices 46057 

Millstone 3 SPU is bounded by the 

analysis of the environmental effects of 

the transportation of fuel and waste as 

described in the ‘‘Extended Burnup Fuel 

Use in Commercial [Light Water 

Reactors] LWRs; Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact,’’ dated February 29, 

1988 (53 FR 6040). 

Summary 

Based on the NRC staff review of 

licensee’s submission, it is concluded 

that the proposed SPU would not result 

in a significant increase in occupational 

or public radiation exposure, and would 

not result in significant additional fuel 

cycle environmental impacts. 

Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes 

that there would be no significant 

radiological environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed action. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

As an alternative to the proposed 

action, the NRC staff considered denial 

of the proposed SPU (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the 

application would result in no change 

in the current environmental impacts. 

However, if the proposed SPU were not 

approved, other agencies and electric 

power organizations may be required to 

pursue alternative means of providing 

electric generation capacity to offset the 

increased power demand forecasted for 

the ISO–NE regional transmission 

territory. 

A reasonable alternative to the 

proposed SPU would be to purchase 

power from other generators in the ISO–

NE network. In 2008, generating 

capacity in ISO–NE consisted primarily 

of Combined-cycle generators: 

combined-cycle generated 37.8 percent 

of ISO–NE capacity; fossil—29.9 

percent; nuclear—13.6 percent; 

hydroelectric—10.4 percent; 

combustion turbine—7.4 percent; 

diesel—0.7 percent; and 

miscellaneous—0.2 percent. This 

indicates that the majority of purchased 

power in the ISO–NE territory would 

likely be generated by a combined-cycle 

facility. Construction (if new generation 

is needed) and operation of a combinedcycle plant would create impacts in air 

quality, land use, and waste 

management significantly greater than 

those identified for the proposed SPU at 

Millstone 3. Millstone 3 does not emit 

sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon 

dioxide, or other atmospheric pollutants 

that are commonly associated with 

combined-cycle plants. Conservation 

programs such as demand-side 

management could feasibly replace the 

proposed SPU’s additional power 

output. However, forecasted future 

energy demand in the ISO–NE territory 

may exceed conservation savings and 

still require additional generating 

capacity. Furthermore, the proposed 

SPU does not involve environmental 

impacts that are significantly different 

from those originally identified in the 

1984 Millstone Power Station FES for 

operation. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

previously considered in the ‘‘Final 

Environmental Statement Related to the 

Operation of Millstone Nuclear Power 

Station, Unit 3,’’ dated December 1984, 

or the ‘‘Generic Environmental Impact 

Statement for License Renewal of 

Nuclear Power Plants: Regarding 

Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3,’’

dated July 2005. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on July 11, 2008, via electronic mail, 

(Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) 

Accession No. ML081980598), the NRC 

staff consulted with the Connecticut 

State Official, Mr. Denny Galloway of 

the Department of Environmental 

Protection, regarding the environmental 

impact of the proposed action. The state 

official did not submit 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 July 13, 2007, as supplemented by 

letters dated July 13, September 12, 

November 19, December 13 and 17, 

2007, January 10, 11, 14, 18, and 31, 

February 25, March 5, 10, 25, and 27, 

April 4, 24, and 29, May 15, 20, and 21, 

and July 10 and 16, 2008. Publicly 

available records are accessible 

electronically via the Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) Public Electronic 

Reading Room on the Internet at the 

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

reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who 

do not have access to ADAMS or who 

encounter problems in accessing the 

documents located in ADAMS should 

contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by 

telephone at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–

415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

Additionally, documents may be 

examined and/or copied for a fee, at the 

NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR), 

located at One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 

20852. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day 

of July, 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

John G. Lamb, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch I–2, Division of Operating Reactors, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E8–18179 Filed 8–6–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE 

Notice of Effective Dates 

AGENCY: Office of the United States 

Trade Representative. 

ACTION: Notice of effective dates for 

CAFTA–DR amendment and rule of 

origin for woven apparel. 

SUMMARY: In Proclamation 8213 of 

December 20, 2007, as modified by 

Proclamation 8272 of June 30, 2008, the 

President modified the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States (the 

‘‘HTS’’) to implement (1) an amendment 

to the Dominican Republic-Central 

America-United States Free Trade 

Agreement (‘‘CAFTA–DR’’) and (2) a 

rule of origin under the CAFTA–DR 

with respect to certain woven apparel. 

The proclamations provide for each set 

of modifications to enter into effect on 

a date that the United States Trade 

Representative (the ‘‘USTR’’) announces 

in the Federal Register and to apply to 

goods that are entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse for consumption, on or 

after that date. This Notice announces 

that the effective date for both sets of 

modifications is August 15, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, please contact 

Rachel Alarid, Special Trade Assistant, 

Office of Textiles and Apparel, Office of 

the United States Trade Representative, 

600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20508, fax number, (202) 395–5639. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. Amendment to CAFTA–DR 

The CAFTA–DR parties signed an 

amendment of the CAFTA–DR on July 

27, August 6, and August 14, 2007 (the 

‘‘Amendment’’). The terms of the 

Amendment are contained in letters of 

understanding between the United 

States and the CAFTA–DR signatories 

described in sections 1634(a)(2) and 

1634(b)(2) of the Pension Protection Act 

of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–280). In 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES