Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 84 / Monday, May 1, 2000 / Notices 25395

and/or the NRC Regional Incident

Response Centers (IRCs). If

communication with the NRC

Headquarters Operations Center is not

possible, then the licensee should

contact the IRC in NRC Region IV to

discuss enforcement discretion.

Similarly, if the Region IV IRC cannot be

reached, then the licensee should

attempt to contact the Region I, II and

III IRCs. Although it is considered

highly unlikely, if communication with

NRC is not possible, the licensee should

follow the plant license conditions,

including technical specifications.

In conducting its assessments, the

licensee should follow, to the extent

practicable, the guidance in NRC

Inspection Manual Part 9900 for Notices

of Enforcement Discretion. Contrary to

Part 9900 Section B.3 guidance, it is not

necessary for an emergency to be

declared by a government entity.

Licensees are encouraged to contact

NRC early in their evaluation process,

particularly if time is of the essence,

even though complete information as

specified in Part 9900 may not be

available.

The decision to exercise enforcement

discretion does not change the fact that

the licensee will be in noncompliance

nor does it imply that enforcement

discretion is being exercised for any

noncompliance that may have led to the

noncompliance at issue. To the extent

noncompliance was involved, the NRC

staff will normally take enforcement

action for the root causes that led to the

noncompliance for which enforcement

discretion was granted. Enforcement

action will also be considered in those

cases in which incorrect or incomplete

information was provided to the NRC

staff by a licensee in its justification.

The NRC recognizes that a licensee will

need to exercise judgement in making a

determination under this discretion

provision. Consistent with the NRC’s

position involving 10 CFR 50.54(x),

enforcement action for a violation of a

license condition, including a TS, will

not be taken unless a licensee’s action

was clearly unreasonable considering all

the relevant circumstances. Enforcement

action could include assessment of civil

penalties and the issuance of orders.

Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding

Enforcement Discretion for Inaccurate

or Incomplete Performance Indicator

Data for Nuclear Power Plants

This section sets forth the interim

enforcement policy that the NRC will

follow to exercise enforcement

discretion for inaccurate or incomplete

performance indicator (PI) data

submitted to the NRC as part of the Part

50 Reactor Oversight Process. The

policy is effective until January 31,

2001.

Because both the NRC and licensees

are in a learning process for the

submission and review of PI data, some

errors are expected. Therefore, in

accordance with Section VII.B.6 of the

Enforcement Policy, the NRC will

refrain from issuing enforcement action

for all non-willful violations of 10 CFR

50.9 for the submittal of inaccurate or

incomplete PI data. Non-willful

violations will be documented in

inspection reports followed by an

explanation that the NRC is exercising

this discretion. Violations involving

inaccurate or incomplete PI data

submitted to the NRC that would not

have caused a PI to change color do not

normally warrant documentation given

the minimal safety significance.

Consistent with existing policy, no

enforcement action will be taken for

these minor violations.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day

of April, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Annette L. Vietti-Cook,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–10394 Filed 4–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft

Supplement to the Generic

Environmental Impact Statement on

Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities

and To Hold a Public Meeting for the

Purpose of Scoping and To Solicit

Public Input Into the Process

Notice is hereby given that the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC,

the Commission) intends to prepare a

draft supplement to the Final Generic

Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS)

on Decommissioning of Nuclear

Facilities (NUREG–0586, August 1988)

and to hold public scoping meetings for

the purpose of soliciting comments.

Although NUREG–0586 covered all

NRC-licensed facilities, this supplement

will address only the decommissioning

of nuclear power reactors.

The NRC will hold a public scoping

meeting on May 17, 2000, at the Boston

Marriott Copley Place, 110 Huntington

Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02116

(telephone: 617–236–5800) to present an

overview of the proposed supplement to

the GEIS and to accept public comment

on its proposal. The public scoping

meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. and

continue to 10:00 p.m.

The meeting will be transcribed and

will include (1) a presentation by the

NRC staff on the reasons for preparing

a supplement to the GEIS and the

environmental issues related to power

reactor decommissioning to be

addressed in the GEIS, and (2) the

opportunity for interested government

agencies, private organizations, and

individuals to provide comments.

Anyone wishing to attend or present

oral comments at this meeting may

preregister by contacting Mr. Dino C.

Scaletti by telephone at 1–800–368–

5642, extension 1104, or by Internet to

the NRC at DGEIS@nrc.gov, 1 week prior

to a specific meeting. Members of the

public may also register to provide oral

comments up to 15 minutes prior to the

start of each meeting. Individual oral

comments may be limited by the time

available, depending on the number of

persons who register. If special

equipment or accommodations are

needed to attend or present information

at the public meeting, the need should

be brought to Mr. Scaletti’s attention no

later than 1 week prior to a specific

meeting, so that the NRC staff can

determine whether the request can be

accommodated.

Any interested party may submit

comments related to the NRC’s intent to

supplement the GEIS for consideration

by the NRC staff. To be certain of

consideration, comments on the intent

to prepare the supplement must be

received by July 15, 2000. Comments

received after the due date will be

considered if it is practical to do so. At

this time, comments are being sought

only on the intent to prepare the

supplement. The NRC staff currently

projects issuance of the draft

supplement for comment in early 2001.

Comments on the draft supplement will

be solicited at that time. Written

comments should be sent to:

Chief, Rules and Directives Branch,

Division of Administrative Services,

Mail Stop T–6 D59, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555–0001

Comments may be hand-delivered to

the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 a.m.

and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.

Submittal of electronic comments may

be sent by the Internet to the NRC at

DGEIS@nrc.gov. All comments received

by the Commission, including those

made by Federal, State, and local

agencies, Indian tribes, or other

interested persons, will be made

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW, in Washington, DC.

Also, publicly available records will be

accessible electronically from the

ADAMS Public Library component on

25396 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 84 / Monday, May 1, 2000 / Notices

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

(the Public Electronic Reading Room).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Dino C. Scaletti, Decommissioning

Section, Project Directorate IV &

Decommissioning, Division of Licensing

Project Management, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555. Mr. Scaletti can be contacted

at the aforementioned telephone

number.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day

of April 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Dino C. Scaletti,

Senior Project Manager, Decommissioning

Section, Project Directorate IV and

Decommissioning, Division of Licensing

Project Management, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–10741 Filed 4–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas

Nuclear One, Unit No. 1; Notice of

Correction to Biweekly Notice

Applications and Amendments to

Operating Licenses Involving No

Significant Hazards Considerations

On April 19, 2000 (65 FR 21034), the

Federal Register published the

Biweekly Notice of Applications and

Amendments to Operating Licenses

Involving No Significant Hazards

Considerations. On page 21042, under

Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50–

313, the amendment number was

incorrectly noted. It should read,

‘‘Amendment No.: 205.’’

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day

of April 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

M. Christopher Nolan,

Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate IV & Decommissioning, Division

of Licensing Project Management, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–10740 Filed 4–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Proposed New Appendix to Standard

Review Plan (NUREG–0800), Chapter

19, ‘‘Use of Probablistic Risk

Assessment in Plant-Specific, RiskInformed Decisionmaking: General

Guidance’’

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Workshop.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) will host a public

workshop to discuss the proposed new

appendix to Chapter 19 of the Standard

Review Plan (NUREG–0800), entitled

‘‘Appendix D—Use of Risk Information

in Review of Non-Risk Informed License

Amendment Requests.’’ The appendix is

being developed to provide guidance to

the NRC staff on the use of risk

information in those rare instances

where license amendment requests

appear to meet regulatory requirements

but raise significant risk concerns due to

some special circumstances associated

with the request. The workshop is open

to the public.

DATES: The workshop will be held on

May 16, 2000, from 9 am to 12 noon.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Room T–8A1, Two White

Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Egan Y. Wang, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555,

telephone (301) 415–1076, e-mail

eyw@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

proposed new appendix and a Notice of

Opportunity for Public Comment on the

appendix was issued in the Federal

Register on April 10, 2000 (FR, Vol. 65,

No. 69, 19030–19034). This workshop

will provide an opportunity to discuss

topics related to the appendix. Anyone

interested in providing a presentation

on this topic should contact Egan Wang

at (301) 415–1076.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 20th day

of April 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Steven K. West,

Acting Chief, Generic Issues, Environmental,

Financial and Rulemaking Branch, Division

of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–10739 Filed 4–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND

BUDGET

OMB Circular A–110, ‘‘Grants and

Agreements with Institutions of Higher

Education, Hospitals and Other NonProfit Organizations’’

AGENCY: Office of Management and

Budget, Executive Office of the

President.

ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed

Revision.

SUMMARY: This advance notice seeks

comments on a proposal by the Grants

Management Committee of the Chief

Financial Officer’s Council that would

ask OMB to amend Circular A–110,

‘‘Uniform Administrative Requirements

for Grants and Agreements with

Institutions of Higher Education,

Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit

Organizations.’’ The amendment would

require Federal awarding agencies to

offer recipients the option to request

cash advances on a ‘‘pooled’’ basis.

Before making this recommendation, the

Council seeks comments from recipients

and Federal agencies on the merits of

pooled payment systems and grant-bygrant payment systems.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 30, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to: F. James Charney, Policy

Analyst, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 6025, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

Comments may be submitted via e-mail

(grants@omb.eop.gov), but must be

made in the text of the message and not

as an attachment. The full text of

Circular A–110 may be obtained by

accessing OMB’s home page (http://

www.whitehouse.gov/omb), under the

heading ‘‘Grants Management.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary

Maupin, Chief Financial Officer, Food

and Nutrition Service, United States

Department of Agriculture, at (703) 305–

2046.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

22(c) of the Circular provides that

‘‘whenever possible, advances shall be

consolidated to cover anticipated cash

needs for all awards made by the

Federal awarding agency to the

recipient.’’ The Chief Financial Officers

Council (Council) is considering

whether to recommend an amendment

to the Circular that would expand on

this provision by requiring agencies to

offer a pooled payment procedure

(where cash advances are requested

from a ‘‘pool’’ of grants rather than on

a grant-by-grant basis) as an option for

recipients in requesting cash advances

under Federal awards. Under either

method, however, a recipient must

maintain systems that minimize the

time elapsing between the receipt of

Federal advance payments and their

disbursement for program purposes.

This issue emerged from the work of the

Council’s Grants Management

Committee as it considered a proposal

to formally incorporate a pooled

payment process into the Federal

Government’s body of accounting

standards.