Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Notices 37413

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office of the

Library of Congress is announcing the

suspension of the proceeding to

distribute the 1995–98 digital audio

recording technology (‘‘DART’’)

royalties in the Musical Works Funds

from May 16, 2000, to June 16, 2000.

The 180-day arbitration period for the

proceeding will resume on June 16,

2000.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 16, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All hearings and meetings

for the 1995–98 DART distribution

proceeding shall take place in the James

Madison Memorial Building, Room LM–

414, First and Independence Avenue,

SE, Washington, DC 20540.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David O. Carson, General Counsel, or

Tanya M. Sandros, Senior Attorney,

Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel

(‘‘CARP’’), P.O. Box 70977, Southwest

Station, Washington, DC 20024.

Telephone: (202) 707–8380. Telefax:

(202) 252–3423.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On April 10, 2000, the Copyright

Office published a notice in the Federal

Register announcing that the initiation

of the 180-day arbitration period for the

distribution of the 1995–98 digital audio

recording technology (‘‘DART’’)

royalties in the Musical Works Funds

would begin on April 10, 2000. 65 FR

19025 (April 10, 2000). The notice also

announced the two arbitrators selected

by the Librarian to serve on the

Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel

(‘‘CARP’’) for the proceeding. In

accordance with 17 U.S.C. 802(b), the

two arbitrators selected a third arbitrator

to serve as the chairperson of the panel.

However, on May 25, 2000, the third

arbitrator resigned from the position of

chairperson out of concern that

potential conflicts of interest, which

were not known to the arbitrator at the

time of selection, may exist under

§ 251.32. Because of these concerns, the

Copyright Office canceled the initial

meeting between the parties and the

original panel of arbitrators that had

been set for May 16, 2000.

Section 251.6(f) provides that when

an arbitrator is unable to continue to

serve on a CARP before the

commencement of hearings in a

proceeding, the Librarian ‘‘will suspend

the proceeding.’’ The notice published

today serves as notice that the

proceeding is suspended from May 16,

2000, to June 16, 2000. The 180-day

arbitration period will resume on June

16, 2000. Section 251.6(f) further

provides that if the resulting vacancy

was ‘‘previously occupied by the

chairperson, the two remaining

arbitrators shall select, the replacement

from the arbitrator list, and the person

chosen shall serve as chairperson.’’

Accordingly, the remaining two

arbitrators selected a new chairperson.

Selection of Arbitrators

In accordance with § 251.64 of the

CARP rules, the arbitrators selected for

this proceeding are: The Honorable

Cheryl I. Niro (Chairperson), The

Honorable John B. Farmakides, The

Honorable Harold Himmelman.

Initiation of the Proceeding

In accordance with § 251.8(a) of the

CARP rules, which provides that a

suspended proceeding will resume

‘‘from the time and point at which it

was suspended,’’ the 180-day period to

determine the distribution of the 1995–

98 digital audio recording technology

(‘‘DART’’) royalties in the Musical

Works Funds, resumes on June 16, 2000.

Thus, the 180-day period arbitration

period recommences on June 16, 2000,

and the arbitrators shall file their

written report with the Librarian of

Congress by November 13, 2000, in

accordance with § 251.53 of 37 CFR.

A meeting between the participants in

the distribution proceeding and the

arbitrators shall take place on Monday,

June 19, 2000, at 1 p.m. at the Library

of Congress, James Madison Building,

LM–414, First and Independence

Avenue, SE, Washington, DC, to discuss

the hearing schedule and any other

procedural matters. The meeting is open

to the public. Scheduling of the 1995–

98 DART royalty distribution

proceedings, as required by 37 CFR

251.11(b), as soon as it is available.

Dated: June 9, 2000.

David O. Carson,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–14976 Filed 6–13–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–33–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–458]

Entergy Operations, Inc.; Notice of

Consideration of Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License and Opportunity for a Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. NPF–

47, issued to Entergy Operations, Inc.

(the licensee), for operation of the River

Bend Station, Unit 1, located

approximately two miles east of the

Mississippi River in West Feliciana

Parish, Louisiana.

The proposed amendment would

allow an increase in power level from

2894 megawatts thermal to 3039

megawatts thermal.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendment, the Commission

will have made findings required by the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

(the Act) and the Commission’s

regulations.

By July 14, 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 a 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

37414 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Notices

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.

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

Mark Wetterhahn, Esq., Winston &

Strawn, 1400 L. Street, NW,

Washington, DC, 20005–3502, attorney

for the licensee.

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).

If a request for a hearing is received,

the Commission’s staff may issue the

amendment after it completes its

technical review and prior to the

completion of any required hearing if it

publishes a further notice for public

comment of its proposed finding of no

significant hazards consideration in

accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and

50.92.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated July 30, 1999, as

supplemented by letters dated April 3

and May 9, 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 5th day

of June 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Stuart A. Richards,

Director, Project Directorate IV and

Decommissioning, Division of Licensing

Project Management, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation

[FR Doc. 00–15003 Filed 6–13–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–440]

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating

Company; Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment to Facility

Operating License, Proposed No

Significant Hazards Consideration

Determination, and Opportunity for a

Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. NPF–

58, issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear

Operating Company (the licensee), for

operation of the Perry Nuclear Power

Plant, Unit 1, located in Lake County,

Ohio.

The proposed amendment would

permit changes to the Perry Nuclear

Power Plant Updated Safety Analysis

Report (USAR) to incorporate

descriptions (in the form of text, tables,

and drawings) of modifications to the

Emergency Service Water (ESW)

alternate intake sluice gate. The

modifications will include: (1)

Installation of a safety-related Class 1E

selector switch that will be used to

disable the automatic opening function

of the sluice gate during warm weather

and (2) installation of a non-safety

inflatable sealing device on the gates

between the ESW forebay and the

alternate intake tunnel. The

modifications are designed to increase

overall reliability of the ESW system

and to eliminate undesired operation of

the ESW pumps.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendment, 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

amendment 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. The proposed change does not involve

a significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

The new selector switch is procured as

safety-related Class 1E, is fully qualified

environmentally and seismically, and is also

qualified in regard to mechanical and

electrical operational cycles. Based on these

characteristics, the switch is deemed to be

highly reliable and will not introduce any

new failure modes to the gate control circuit.

In addition, the key operated feature of the

selector switch ensures that inadvertent

positioning of the switch, i.e., an operator

error, is not possible. Re-positioning of the

switch will be procedurally controlled and

will require conscious operator action along

with use of a key. Therefore, it is concluded

that addition of the new selector switch will

not introduce any new failure modes and it

will not cause or create any malfunctions of

equipment.

The new inflatable seal and supporting

mechanical equipment was procured as nonsafety. The frequent verification of sluice gate

seal integrity assures that the seals will be