Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 38 / Monday, February 26, 2001 / Notices 11609

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement for CCNPP2.

Agencies and Persons Contacted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on January 18, 2001, the staff consulted

with the Maryland State official, Mr.

Richard McLean of the Department of

Natural Resources, 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 exemption.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the licensee’s letters dated

September 14, 2000, and December 21,

2000, which are available for public

inspection at the Commission’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 Electronic

Reading Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day

of February 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Donna M. Skay,

Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–4628 Filed 2–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–286]

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.;

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit

No. 3; Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is considering

issuance of an amendment to Facility

Operating License No. DPR–64, issued

to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the

licensee), for operation of the Indian

Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3

(IP3) located in Westchester County,

New York.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would modify

the Technical Specifications (TSs) by

replacing them with Improved Standard

Technical Specifications (ISTS). The

amendment would also change

requirements regarding setpoints or

allowable values associated with power

range flux, pressurizer pressure,

overtemperature delta T, overpower

deltaT, low reactor coolant loop flow,

high pressurizer water level, steam

generator water level, containment

pressure, auto stop oil pressure, high

steam line differential pressure and high

steam flow; it would extend the

allowable time to restore an inoperable

power operated relief valve to service; it

would extend the frequency for the

pressure isolation valve leakage testing

surveillance from 18 to 24 months; it

would change current TS requirements

by focusing on ensuring containment

integrity at individual component level

rather than at a zone level; and it would

add main steam check valve operability

conditions.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

amendment dated December 11, 1998,

as supplemented by letters dated

December 15, 1998, May 17, 1999,

August 16, 2000, September 8, 2000,

September 14, 2000, September 27,

2000, November 30, 2000, January 8,

2001, and January 11, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is necessary to

allow the licensee to implement the

ISTS. The ISTS are based on standard

Westinghouse Technical Specifications

and have been implemented by several

utilities. They are widely considered an

improvement over current TSs.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The NRC has completed its evaluation

of the proposed action and concludes

that the proposed amendment will have

no significant environmental impact.

The ISTS are based on the standard

Westinghouse TSs and are widely used

throughout the industry.

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 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 IP3.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on January 24, 2001, the staff consulted

with the New York State official, Jay

Dunkelberger of the New York

Department of Radiation 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 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 December 11, 1998, as

supplemented by letters dated

December 15, 1998, May 17, 1999,

August 16, 2000, September 8, 2000,

September 14, 2000, September 27,

2000, November 30, 2000, January 8,

2001, and January 11, 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 Electronic Reading

Room).

11610 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 38 / Monday, February 26, 2001 / Notices

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day

of February 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

George F. Wunder,

Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–4625 Filed 2–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 72–11]

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

Issuance of Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or the Commission)

is considering issuance of an exemption,

pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the

provisions of 10 CFR 72.72(d) to

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

(SMUD or applicant). The requested

exemption would allow SMUD to

maintain a single set of spent fuel

records at a records storage facility that

satisfies the requirements set forth in

ANSI/ASME, NQA–1–1983,

Supplement 17S–1 and the standards in

ANSI N45.2.9–1974, for the

Independent Spent Fuel Storage

Installation (ISFSI) at the Rancho Seco

Nuclear Generating Station (Docket No.

72–11) in Sacramento County,

California.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action

By letter dated December 13, 2000,

SMUD requested an exemption from the

requirement in 10 CFR 72.72(d) which

states in part that, ‘‘Records of spent

fuel and high level radioactive waste in

storage must be kept in duplicate. The

duplicate set of records must be kept at

a separate location sufficiently remote

from the original records that a single

event would not destroy both sets of

records.’’ The applicant proposes to

store a single set of spent fuel records

at a records storage facility that satisfies

the requirements set forth in ANSI/

ASME, NQA–1–1983, Supplement 17S–

1 including the standards in ANSI

N45.2.9–1974.

The proposed action before the

Commission is whether to grant this

exemption pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7.

Need for the Proposed Action

The applicant stated that, pursuant to

10 CFR 72.140(d), the Rancho Seco

Quality Manual will be used to satisfy

the Quality Assurance (QA)

requirements for the ISFSI. The Quality

Manual states that QA records are

maintained in accordance with

commitments to ANSI/ASME, NQA–1–

1983, Supplement 17S–1 as well as

ANSI N45.2.9–1974. ANSI/ASME NQA–

1–1983, Supplement 17S–1 and ANSI

N45.2.9–1974 allow for the storage of

QA records in a duplicate storage

location sufficiently remote from the

original records or in a single records

storage facility subject to certain

provisions designed to protect the

records from fire and other adverse

conditions. The applicant seeks to

provide uniform and consistent

recordkeeping procedures and processes

for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating

Station and ISFSI spent fuel records.

The applicant states that requiring a

separate method of record storage for

ISFSI records diverts resources

unnecessarily.

ANSI/ASME NQA–1–1983,

Supplement 17S–1 and ANSI N45.2.9–

1974 provide requirements for the

protection of nuclear power plant QA

records against degradation. They

specify design requirements for use in

the construction of record storage

facilities when use of a single storage

facility is desired. They include specific

requirements for protection against

degradation mechanisms such as fire,

humidity, and condensation. The

requirements in ANSI/ASME NQA–1–

1983, Supplement 17S–1 and ANSI

N45.2.9–1974 have been endorsed by

the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.88,

‘‘Collection, Storage and Maintenance of

Nuclear Power Plant Quality Assurance

Records,’’ as adequate for satisfying the

recordkeeping requirements of 10 CFR

Part 50, Appendix B. ANSI/ASME

NQA–1–1983, Supplement 17S–1 and

ANSI N45.2.9–1974 also satisfy the

requirements of 10 CFR 72.72 by

providing for adequate maintenance of

records regarding the identity and

history of the spent fuel in storage. Such

records would be subject to and need to

be protected from the same types of

degradation mechanisms as nuclear

power plant QA records.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

Exemption from the requirement to

store ISFSI records at a duplicate facility

has no impact on the environment.

Storage of records does not change the

methods by which spent fuel will be

handled and stored at the Rancho Seco

Nuclear Generating Station and ISFSI

and does not change the amount of any

effluents, radiological or nonradiological, associated with the ISFSI.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

Since there are no environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action, alternatives are not evaluated

other than the no action alternative. The

alternative to the proposed action would

be to deny approval of the exemption

and, therefore, not allow storage of

ISFSI spent fuel records at a single

qualified record storage facility.

However, the environmental impacts of

the proposed action and the alternative

would be the same.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

On January 23, 2001, California State

official, Steven Hsu of the Radiological

Health Branch of the California

Department of Health, was contacted

regarding the environmental assessment

for the proposed action and had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

The environmental impacts of the

proposed action have been reviewed in

accordance with the requirements set

forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based upon the

foregoing EA, the Commission finds that

the proposed action of granting an

exemption from 10 CFR 72.72(d), so that

SMUD may store spent fuel records at

the ISFSI in a single record storage

facility which meets the requirements of

ANSI/ASME, NQA–1–1983,

Supplement 17S–1 and the standards in

ANSI N45.2.9–1974, will not

significantly impact the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined that an

environmental impact statement for the

proposed exemption is not necessary.

The request for exemption was

docketed under 10 CFR Part 72, Docket

72–11. For further details with respect

to this action, see the exemption request

dated December 13, 2000, which is

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

One White Flint North Building, 11555

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland

20852, or from the publicly available

records component of NRC’s

Agencywide Document Access and

Management System (ADAMS).

ADAMS is accessible from the NRC

web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/

ADAMS/index.html (the Public

Electronic Reading Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day

of February 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

E. William Brach,

Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 01–4630 Filed 2–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P