35966 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 6, 2000 / Notices

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to

submit an information collection

request to OMB and solicitation of

public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a

submittal to OMB for review of

continued approval of information

collections under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. chapter 35).

Information pertaining to the

requirement to be submitted:

1. The title of the information

collection: NRC Form 790,

‘‘Classification Record’’.

2. Current OMB approval number:

NRC Form 790.

3. How often the collection is

required: On occasion.

4. Who will be required or asked to

report: NRC employees, NRC

contractors, NRC licensees, and its only

certificate holder who classify and

declassify NRC information.

5. The estimated number of annual

respondents: 324.

6. An estimate of the total number of

hours needed annually to complete the

requirement or request: 27.

7. Abstract: Completion of the NRC

Form 790 is a mandatory requirement

for licensees, contractors, and only

certificate holders who classify and

declassify NRC information in

accordance with Executive Order 12958,

‘‘Classified National Security

Information,’’ the Atomic Energy Act,

and implementing directives.

Submit, by August 7, 2000, comments

that address the following questions:

1. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for the NRC to

properly perform its functions? Does the

information have practical utility?

2. Is the burden estimate accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected?

4. How can the burden of the

information collection be minimized,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology?

A copy of the draft supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW., (lower level),

Washington, DC. OMB clearance

requests are available at the NRC

worldwide web site (http://

www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/OMB/

index.html). The document will be

available on the NRC home page site for

60 days after the signature date of this

notice.

Comments and questions about the

information collection requirements

may be directed to the NRC Clearance

Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, T–6 E6,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, by

telephone at 301–415–7233, or by

Internet electronic mail at

BJS1@NRC.GOV.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of May 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brenda Jo. Shelton,

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–14192 Filed 6–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301]

Wisconsin Electric Power Company;

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of

Amendments to Facility Operating

Licenses, Proposed No Significant

Hazards Consideration Determination,

and Opportunity for a Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of amendments to

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–24

and DPR–27, issued to Wisconsin

Electric Power Company (the licensee)

for operation of the Point Beach Nuclear

Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in

Manitowoc County, Wisconsin.

The proposed amendments would

eliminate one of the license conditions

and associated implementation dates

from Appendix C to the licenses. The

license condition currently requires the

licensee to submit a license amendment

application and supporting radiological

dose analyses demonstrating

compliance with General Design

Criterion (GDC) 19 dose limits without

reliance on potassium iodide (KI). By

letter dated April 7, 2000, the NRC staff

concurred with the licensee that the use

of KI to reduce operator dose during a

radiological emergency was not

precluded in the licensing basis for

Point Beach, Units 1 and 2.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendments, the Commission

will have made findings required by the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

(the Act) and the Commission’s

regulations.

The Commission has made a

proposed determination that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration. Under

the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR

50.92, this means that operation of the

facility in accordance with the proposed

amendments would not (1) involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated; or

(3) involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR

50.91(a), the licensee has provided its

analysis of the issue of no significant

hazards consideration, which is

presented below:

1. Operation of the Point Beach Nuclear

Plant in accordance with the proposed

amendments will not create a significant

increase in the probability or consequences

of an accident previously evaluated.

The license condition that is proposed for

deletion is an administrative condition

related to analyses to demonstrate

conformance to 10 CFR 50, GDC 19 dose

limits, and the requirements for design and

operation of the control room ventilation

system as assumed in the analyses. The

license condition proposed for deletion is not

related to any factor or event that is an

initiator of any accident and thus, deletion

will not affect the probability of any accident

previously evaluated.

The dose analyses and the resultant

required changes to the control room

ventilation system were based in part on

making changes to the licensing basis for the

control room ventilation system and

analyses. These changes were not solely to

demonstrate compliance with GDC 19. The

existing analysis of record for control room

dose demonstrates that regulatory limits are

met with the present design and

assumptions. Therefore, deletion of the

license condition does not result in a

significant increase in the consequences of an

accident previously evaluated.

2. Operation of the Point Beach Nuclear

Plant in accordance with the proposed

amendments will not create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

The license condition imposed

administrative requirements for analyses of

radiological consequences of presently

analyzed events. Deletion of the license

condition will not result in a change in the

operation of any system as presently

assumed. Therefore, no new accident

initiators can result. Thus, the deletion of the

license condition cannot result in a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.P≤3. Operation of the

Point Beach Nuclear Plant in accordance

with the proposed amendments does not

create a significant reduction in a margin of

safety.

Deletion of the existing license condition

will not result in a change in the way the

plant is presently designed and operated.

Operation will continue in accordance with

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 6, 2000 / Notices 35967

presently approved analyses. Therefore,

existing approved margins of safety are

maintained. Operation in accordance with

the proposed amendment does not create a

reduction in a margin of safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed the

licensee’s analysis and, based on this

review, it appears that the three

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff

proposes to determine that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration.

The Commission is seeking public

comments on this proposed

determination. Any comments received

within 30 days after the date of

publication of this notice will be

considered in making any final

determination.

Normally, the Commission will not

issue the amendment until the

expiration of the 30-day notice period.

However, should circumstances change

during the notice period such that

failure to act in a timely way would

result, for example, in derating or

shutdown of the facility, the

Commission may issue the license

amendment before the expiration of the

30-day notice period, provided that its

final determination is that the

amendment involves no significant

hazards consideration. The final

determination will consider all public

and State comments received. Should

the Commission take this action, it will

publish in the Federal Register a notice

of issuance and provide for opportunity

for a hearing after issuance. The

Commission expects that the need to

take this action will occur very

infrequently.

Written comments may be submitted

by mail to the Chief, Rules and

Directives Branch, Division of

Administrative Services, Office of

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, and should cite the publication

date and page number of this Federal

Register notice. Written comments may

also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two

White Flint North, 11545 Rockville

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30

a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.

Copies of written comments received

may be examined at the NRC Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By July 6, 2000, the licensee may file

a request for a hearing with respect to

issuance of the amendment to the

subject facility operating license and

any person whose interest may be

affected by this proceeding and who

wishes to participate as a party in the

proceeding must file a written request

for a hearing and a petition for leave to

intervene. Requests for a hearing and a

petition for leave to intervene shall be

filed in accordance with the

Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for

Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10

CFR part 2. Interested persons should

consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714

which is available at the Commission’s

Public Document Room, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and accessible

electronically through the ADAMS

Public Electronic Reading Room link at

the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov).

If a request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene is filed by the above

date, the Commission or an Atomic

Safety and Licensing Board, designated

by the Commission or by the Chairman

of the Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board Panel, will rule on the request

and/or petition; and the Secretary or the

designated Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board will issue a notice of hearing or

an appropriate order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a

petition for leave to intervene shall set

forth with particularity the interest of

the petitioner in the proceeding, and

how that interest may be affected by the

results of the proceeding. The petition

should specifically explain the reasons

why intervention should be permitted

with particular reference to the

following factors: (1) The nature of the

petitioner’s right under the Act to be

made party to the proceeding; (2) the

nature and extent of the petitioner’s

property, financial, or other interest in

the proceeding; and (3) the possible

effect of any order which may be

entered in the proceeding on the

petitioner’s interest. The petition should

also identify the specific aspect(s) of the

subject matter of the proceeding as to

which petitioner wishes to intervene.

Any person who has filed a petition for

leave to intervene or who has been

admitted as a party may amend the

petition without requesting leave of the

Board up to 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, but such an amended

petition must satisfy the specificity

requirements described above.

Not later than 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, a petitioner shall file a

supplement to the petition to intervene

which must include a list of the

contentions which are sought to be

litigated in the matter. Each contention

must consist of a specific statement of

the issue of law or fact to be raised or

controverted. In addition, the petitioner

shall provide a brief explanation of the

bases of the contention and a concise

statement of the alleged facts or expert

opinion which support the contention

and on which the petitioner intends to

rely in proving the contention at the

hearing. The petitioner must also

provide references to those specific

sources and documents of which the

petitioner is aware and on which the

petitioner intends to rely to establish

those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner

must provide sufficient information to

show that a genuine dispute exists with

the applicant on a material issue of law

or fact. Contentions shall be limited to

matters within the scope of the

amendment under consideration. The

contention must be one which, if

proven, would entitle the petitioner to

relief. A petitioner who fails to file such

a supplement which satisfies these

requirements with respect to at least one

contention will not be permitted to

participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become

parties to the proceeding, subject to any

limitations in the order granting leave to

intervene, and have the opportunity to

participate fully in the conduct of the

hearing, including the opportunity to

present evidence and cross-examine

witnesses.

If a hearing is requested, the

Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no

significant hazards consideration. The

final determination will serve to decide

when the hearing is held.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration, the

Commission may issue the amendment

and make it immediately effective,

notwithstanding the request for a

hearing. Any hearing held would take

place after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves a

significant hazards consideration, any

hearing held would take place before

the issuance of any amendment.

A request for a hearing or a petition

for leave to intervene must be filed with

the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or

may be delivered to the Commission’s

Public Document Room, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, by the above date. A

copy of the petition should also be sent

to the Office of the General Counsel,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and to

John H. O’Neill, Jr., Shaw, Pittman,

Potts, and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20037, attorney

for the licensee.

35968 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 6, 2000 / Notices

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for hearing will not be entertained

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

amendments dated May 19, 2000, which

is available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, and accessible

electronically through the ADAMS

Public Electronic Reading Room link at

the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day

of June 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Beth A. Wetzel,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

III–1, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–14189 Filed 6–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Public Meeting on 10 CFR Part 70,

Integrated Safety Analysis Guidance

Document, Standard Review Plan

Chapter 11 and Streamlining Licensing

Reviews

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: NRC will host a public

meeting in Rockville, Maryland. The

meeting will provide an opportunity for

discussion of: (1) The Draft Integrated

Safety Analysis guidance document

prepared by the industry; and (2)

Chapter 11, Management Measures, in

the Standard Review Plan (SRP) for fuel

cycle facilities (NUREG–1520) that was

made available during April 2000.

The revised SRP can be reviewed on

the internet at the following website:

http://techconf.llnl.gov/cgi-bin/

downloader/Partl70llib/073–

0098.htm. At the end of the SRP

discussion, a program developed by the

Fuel Cycle staff to streamline licensing

reviews and actions will be discussed.

Purpose

This meeting will provide an

opportunity to discuss: (1) The Draft

Integrated Safety Analysis guidance

document prepared by the industry; and

(2) Chapter 11, Management Measures,

in the Standard Review Plan (SRP) for

fuel cycle facilities (NUREG–1520) that

was made available during April 2000.

At the end of the SRP discussion, a

program developed by the Fuel Cycle

staff to streamline licensing reviews and

actions will be presented.

DATES: The meeting is scheduled for

Thursday, June 8, 2000, from 9:30–4 and

Friday, June 9, 2000, from 9–4. The

discussion of the Draft Integrated Safety

Analysis guidance document is

scheduled for June 8 from 9:30–11:30

followed by the SRP Chapter 11

discussion from 1–4, and continuing on

the morning of June 9, 2000, if needed.

This meeting is open to the public.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in

the Atomic Safety Licensing Board

Hearing Room at Two White Flint

North, Room T–3–B–45, 11545

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

Visitor parking around the NRC

building is limited; however, the

meeting site is located adjacent to the

White Flint Station on the Metro Red

line.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Persinko, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, telephone: (301)

415–7190, e-mail axp1@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 1st day

of June 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Theodore S. Sherr,

Chief, Licensing and International Safeguards

Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and

Safeguards, NMSS.

[FR Doc. 00–14190 Filed 6–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL

REVIEW BOARD

Panel Meeting: July 10, 2000—Idaho

Falls, Idaho: Discussions of Technical

Issues Related to Managing and

Transporting Spent Nuclear Fuel and

High-Level Radioactive Waste;

Presentations on Human Factors

Involved in Transporting the Waste

and Manufacturing Waste Casks;

Update on Transportation Modal Study

Pursuant to its authority under

section 5051 of Public Law 100–203,

Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act

of 1987, on Monday, July 10, 2000, the

Nuclear Waste Technical Review

Board’s (Board) Panel on the Waste

Management System will meet in Idaho

Falls, Idaho, to discuss technical issues

related to managing spent nuclear fuel

and high-level radioactive waste,

including human factors involved in

transporting such waste. The Board is

charged by Congress with reviewing the

technical and scientific aspects of the

Department of Energy’s (DOE) civilian

radioactive waste management program,

including disposing of, packaging, and

transporting the waste.

The panel meeting will be held at the

Shilo Inn, 780 Lindsay Blvd., Idaho

Falls, Idaho 83402–1822. The telephone

number is (208) 523–0088; the fax

number is (208) 522–7420. The meeting

will start at 8 a.m. and will be open to

the public.

An overview on transportation

protocols by the DOE’s Office of Civilian

Radioactive Waste Management will

begin the meeting. This discussion will

be followed by updates on a

transportation modal study by a

representative of the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission and on naval spent fuel

disposal and transportation by a

representative of the Naval Nuclear

Propulsion Program. A representative of

the Association of American Railroads

(AAR) and a manufacturer of nuclear

waste casks will then discuss human

factors related to railroad operations and

cask manufacturing. Next will be a

presentation on performance

specifications for transportation of spent

fuel by another representative of the

AAR. In midafternoon, the Panel will

hear from state, local, and Tribal

representatives on their views of

technical issues related to transporting

and managing spent nuclear fuel and

high-level radioactive waste.

Time will be set aside at the end of

the day for public comments. Those

wanting to speak are encouraged to sign

the ‘‘Public Comment Register’’ at the

check-in table. A time limit may have to

be set on individual remarks, but

written comments of any length may be

submitted for the record. Interested

parties also will have the opportunity to

submit questions in writing to the

Board. As time permits, the questions

will be answered by one or more Board

members during the meeting.

A detailed agenda will be available

approximately one week before the

meeting. Copies of the agenda can be

requested by telephone or obtained from

the Board’s Web site at www.nwtrb.gov.

Transcripts of the meeting will be

available on the Board’s Web site, via email, on computer disk, and on a

library-loan basis in paper format from

Davonya Barnes of the Board staff,

beginning on August 7, 2000.

A block of rooms has been reserved at

the Shilo Inn. When making a

reservation, please state that you are

attending the Nuclear Waste Technical