Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Notices 66947

Commission’s Public Document Room,

located at One White Flint North, 11555

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,

Maryland, or on the NRC Web site from

the NRC’s Agencywide Documents

Access and Management System

(ADAMS). The ADAMS Public

Electronic Reading Room is accessible

from the NRC Web site at http://

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.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.

The staff has verified that a copy of

the license renewal application for the

St. Lucie Nuclear Plant has been

provided to the Indian River

Community College library.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, the 19th day

of December, 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Stephen T. Hoffman,

Acting Chief, License Renewal and

Standardization Branch, Division of

Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–31807 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket 72–20]

U.S. Department of Energy Three Mile

Island 2 Independent Spent Fuel

Storage Installation, Materials License

No. SNM–2508; Issuance of

Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption,

pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from a specific

provision of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12) to the

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the

Three Mile Island 2 (TMI–2)

Independent Spent Fuel Storage

Installation (ISFSI) located in Idaho.

The requested exemption would allow

DOE to deviate from the requirement of

10 CFR 72.32(a)(12) for a biennial onsite

emergency preparedness (EP) exercise.

The requested exemption would allow

the onsite exercise to be performed prior

to June 30, 2002, instead of prior to

December 31, 2001, which is the

expiration of the biennial period for the

conduct of an EP exercise at the TMI–

2 ISFSI.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action: By

letter dated November 21, 2001, DOE

requested an extension of time in which

to perform the next onsite biennial EP

exercise required by 10 CFR

72.32(a)(12)(i). Staff has considered an

exemption from this provision of 10

CFR 72.32(a)(12). DOE holds Materials

License No. SNM–2508, issued March

19, 1999, for operation of the TMI–2

ISFSI located within the Idaho National

Engineering and Environmental

Laboratory (INEEL).

On March 16, 1999, DOE performed

the first onsite EP exercise for the TMI–

2 ISFSI. The requirement of 10 CFR

72.32(a)(12) is that onsite EP exercises

be conducted biennially, that is every

other calendar year. With the last

performance of the TMI–2 ISFSI EP

exercise on March 16, 1999, the next

required performance of the exercise

would be prior to December 31, 2001.

DOE had scheduled its next biennial

exercise for September 12, 2001.

However, due to the tragic events of

September 11, 2001, the exercise was

postponed.

By exempting DOE from the provision

of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12) requiring a

biennial exercise, DOE will be

authorized to delay performance of the

biennial onsite EP exercise at the TMI–

2 ISFSI until June 30, 2002. The

proposed action before the Commission

is whether to grant this exemption

under 10 CFR 72.7.

Need for the Proposed Action:

Conduct of an exercise of an ISFSI’s

onsite emergency plan every 2 years is

required by 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12). The

licensee had initially planned to

conduct an exercise of its onsite

emergency plan on September 12, 2001,

within the required 2-year interval.

However, due to heavy demands on

INEEL security and emergency

preparedness resources pursuant to the

tragic events of September 11, 2001, and

the prospect of continued terrorist

threats against the United States, and

the need for those resources to remain

focused on assessing the security and

emergency preparedness/response

posture at INEEL, the licensee decided

to postpone the exercise.

Environmental Impacts of the

Proposed Action: The proposed action

involves an administrative activity (a

scheduler change in conducting an

exercise) unrelated to ISFSI operations.

The last EP exercise was conducted

on March 16, 1999. NRC reviews and

inspections since the 1999 exercise have

not identified a decline in the

effectiveness of DOE’s emergency

response capability. The postponement

should have no impact on the

effectiveness of DOE’s emergency

response capability. Moreover, as DOE

points out, the re-scheduled exercise

may be of more value after any

additional security and/or emergency

response measures are put into effect in

light of the tragic events of September

11, 2001.

The proposed action will not increase

the probability or consequences of

accidents, no changes are being made in

the amounts or types of any effluents

that may be released offsite, and there

is no 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 affect non-radiological

effluents and has no other

environmental impact. Therefore, there

are no significant non-radiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no significant

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternative 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 the

same.

Agencies and Persons Consulted: On

December 19, 2001, Mr. Doug Walker

and Ms. Kathleen Trever of the State of

Idaho, INEEL Oversight Program, were

contacted about the Environmental

Assessment for the proposed action. The

state officials had no comments related

to the appropriateness of issuance of the

exemption, or the Staff’s basis for

issuance of the exemption. The state

officials discussed several comments

related to additional information in

DOE’s letter request dated November 21,

2001, that were unrelated to the Staff’s

basis for issuance of the exemption. The

state officials mentioned they will

follow up on those concerns with a

letter to DOE, and will provide a copy

of that letter to the NRC. However, the

state officials agreed that issuance of the

exemption need not be delayed due to

the unrelated concerns.

Finding of No Significant Impact

On the basis of 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.

66948 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Notices

The licensee’s letter was docketed

under 10 CFR part 72, Docket 72–20.

For further details with respect to this

action, see DOE’s request dated

November 21, 2001. The NRC maintains

an Agencywide Documents Access and

Management System (ADAMS), which

provides text and image files of NRC’s

public documents. These documents

may be accessed through the NRC’s

Public Electronic Reading Room on the

Internet at 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 19th day

of December, 2001.

Charles L. Miller,

Acting Director, Spent Fuel Project Office,

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and

Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 01–31804 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–10, 50–237 and 50–249]

Exelon Generation Company, LLC,

Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units

1, 2, and 3; Environmental Assessment

and Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is considering

issuance of an exemption from Title 10

of the Code of Federal Regulations (10

CFR) Part 50, Appendix E, Item IV.F.2.c

to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

2, DPR–19 and DPR–25, issued to

Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the

licensee), for operation of the Dresden

Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2 and 3

(DNPS), located in Grundy County,

Illinois. Therefore, as required by 10

CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this

environmental assessment and finding

of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would allow a

one-time exemption from the

requirements of 10 CFR part 50,

Appendix E, Item IV.F.2.c, regarding

conduct of a full-participation exercise

of the offsite emergency plan every 2

years. Under the proposed exemption,

the licensee would reschedule the

exercise originally scheduled for

September 18, 2001, and complete the

exercise requirements by December 31,

2002.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for an

exemption dated December 18, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

Currently under 10 CFR part 50,

Appendix E, Item IV.F.2.c, each licensee

at each site is required to conduct a fullparticipation exercise of its offsite

emergency plan every 2 years. Federal

agencies, including the Federal

Emergency Management Agency,

observe these exercises and evaluate the

performance of the licensee, state, and

local authorities having a role under the

emergency plan.

The licensee had initially scheduled a

full participation biennial exercise of its

onsite and offsite emergency plans for

May 26, 2001, within the required 2-

year interval. However, due to flooding

conditions within the state and the need

for state and local officials to address

these needs, the exercise was conducted

with participation by only the Illinois

Department of Nuclear Safety and the

licensee. The offsite portion of the

exercise was rescheduled for September

18, 2001. However, as a result of the

national security events occurring in the

United States on September 11, 2001,

this exercise was canceled after

consultations with the Federal

Emergency Management Agency and the

Illinois Emergency Management

Agency. Future full participation

exercises for DNPS will be performed on

the existing biennial schedule and are

not affected by the requested exemption.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The NRC has completed its evaluation

of the proposed action and concludes

that the proposed action involves an

administrative activity unrelated to

plant operations.

The proposed action will not

significantly 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 have the potential to

affect 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.

Environmental Impacts of the

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 proposed

action 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 different than those

previously considered in the Final

Environmental Statement for DNPS,

dated 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

On December 19, 2001, the staff

consulted with the Illinois State official,

Frank Niziolek, of the Illinois

Department of Nuclear Safety, 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

revised proposed action.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated December 18, 2001. 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 (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). 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 at pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day

of December 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Anthony J. Mendiola,

Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate III,

Division of Licensing Project Management,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–31805 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P