51642 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 30, 2006 / Notices 

and accurate information possible to 

policymakers in Congress and 

throughout government and academia, 

NSF/SRS conducts many surveys to 

obtain the data for these purposes. The 

Generic Clearance will be used to 

ensure that the highest quality data is 

obtained from these surveys. State-ofthe-art methodology will be used to 

develop, evaluate, and test 

questionnaires and survey concepts as 

well as to improve survey methodology. 

This may include field or pilot tests of 

questions for future large-scale surveys, 

as needed. 

Expected Respondents: The 

respondents will be from industry, 

academia, nonprofit organizations, 

members of the public, and state, local, 

and federal governments. Respondents 

will be either individuals or 

institutions, depending upon the survey 

under investigation. Qualitative 

procedures will generally be conducted 

in person or over the phone, but 

quantitative procedures may be 

conducted using mail, web, e-mail, or 

phone modes, depending on the topic 

under investigation. Up to 19,150 

respondents will be contacted across the 

survey improvement projects. No 

respondent will be contacted more than 

twice in one year under this generic 

clearance. Every effort will be made to 

use technology to limit the burden on 

respondents from small entities. 

Both qualitative and quantitative 

methods will be used to improve NSF’s 

current data collection instruments and 

processes and to reduce respondent 

burden, as well as to develop new 

surveys. Qualitative methods include, 

but are not limited to, expert review; 

exploratory, cognitive, and usability 

interviews; focus groups; and 

respondent debriefings. Cognitive and 

usability interviews may include the use 

of scenarios, paraphrasing, card sorts, 

vignette classifications, and rating tasks. 

Quantitative methods include, but are 

not limited to, telephone surveys, 

behavior coding, split panel tests, and 

field tests. 

Information being collected is not 

considered sensitive. In general, 

assurances of data confidentiality will 

not be provided to respondents in the 

pretests. Instead, respondents have the 

option of requesting that any and all 

data they provide be kept confidential. 

Use of the Information: The purpose 

of these studies is to use the latest and 

most appropriate methodology to 

improve NSF surveys. The data will be 

used internally to improve NSF surveys. 

Methodological findings may be 

presented externally in technical papers 

at conferences, published in the 

proceedings of conferences, or in 

journals. Improved NSF surveys will 

help policy makers in decisions on 

research and development fundings, 

graduate education, scientific and 

technical workforce, regulations, and 

reporting guidelines, as well as 

contributing to reduced survey costs. 

Burden on the Public: NSF estimates 

that a total reporting and recordkeeping 

burden of 14,950 hours will result from 

activities to improve its surveys. The 

calculation is: 

TABLE 1.—ANTICIPATED SURVEYS TO UNDERTAKE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, ALONG WITH THE NUMBER OF

RESPONDENTS AND BURDEN HOURS PER SURVEY FOR THREE YEAR PERIOD

Survey name Number of 

respondents1 Hours 

Graduate Student Survey ........................................................................................................................................ 2 5,000 3,000 

SESTAT Surveys ..................................................................................................................................................... 10,000 5,000 

Postdoc Project ........................................................................................................................................................ 800 1,600 

New and Redesigned R&D Surveys: 

Academic R&D ................................................................................................................................................. 600 1,200 

Government R&D ............................................................................................................................................. 50 100 

Nonprofit R&D .................................................................................................................................................. 200 100 

Industry R&D .................................................................................................................................................... 500 2,000 

Survey of Scientific & Engineering Facilities ........................................................................................................... 300 150 

Public Understanding of S&E Surveys .................................................................................................................... 200 50 

Survey of Earned Doctorates .................................................................................................................................. 300 550 

Additional surveys not specified .............................................................................................................................. 1,200 1,200 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 19,150 14,950 

1 Number of respondents listed for any individual survey may represent several methodological improvement projects. 

2This number refers to the science, engineering, and health-related departments within the academic institutions of the United States (not the 

academic institutions themselves). 

Comments: Comments are invited on 

(a) whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Agency, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information; (c) ways to 

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information on respondents, 

including through the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on those who are to 

respond, including through the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

including in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they also will become a matter of public 

record. 

Dated: August 25, 2006. 

Suzanne Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation. 

[FR Doc. 06–7238 Filed 8–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Notice of Permit Applications Received 

Under the Antarctic Conservation Act 

of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541) 

AGENCY: National Science Foundation. 

ACTION: Notice of Permit Applications 

Received under the Antarctic 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 30, 2006 / Notices 51643 

Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law 

95–541. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF) is required to publish 

notice of permit applications received to 

conduct activities regulated under the 

Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. 

NSF has published regulations under 

the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 

45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. This is the required notice 

of permit applications received. 

DATES: Interested parties are invited to 

submit written data, comments, or 

views with respect to this permit 

application by September 29, 2006. This 

application may be inspected by 

interested parties at the Permit Office, 

address below. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, 

Office of Polar Programs, National 

Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 

Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Polly A. Penhale at the above address or 

(703) 292–7405. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

National Science Foundation, as 

directed by the Antarctic Conservation 

Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–541), as 

amended by the Antarctic Science, 

Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, 

has developed regulations for the 

establishment of a permit system for 

various activities in Antarctica and 

designation of certain animals and 

certain geographic areas requiring 

special protection. The regulations 

establish such a permit system to 

designate Antarctic Specially Protected 

Areas. 

The applications received are as 

follows: 

1. Applicant: Permit Application No. 

2007–001, Olav T. Oftedal, Department 

of Conservation Biology, Smithsonian 

Institution, National Zoological Park, 

3001 Connecticut Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20008. 

Activity for Which Permit is Requested 

Take, and import into the U.S.A. The 

applicant plans to capture and collect 

samples from up to 120 Weddell seal 

mother-pup pairs and up to 180 

lactating mother-juvenile pairs. The 

samples will help determine the 

importance of food intake to lactating 

Weddell seals and their young during 

the lactation period. They will measure: 

(a) Energy expenditure of lactating 

females, (b) the amount and 

composition of milk consumed by 

nursing pups, (c) growth of pups, and 

(d) onset and prevalence of feeding in 

mothers and pups, and (e) amount of 

energy that lactating females derive 

from food intake. 

Location 

McMurdo Sound vicinity. 

Dates 

September 1, 2006 to February 1, 

2009. 

2. Applicant: Permit Application No. 

2007–004, Gretchen E. Hofmann, 

Department of Ecology, Evolution and 

Marine Biology, University of 

California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, 

CA 93106–9610. 

Activity for Which Permit Is Requested 

Introduce non-indigenous species into 

Antarctica. The applicant proposes to 

bring up to 10 black cod (Notothenia 

angustata) for use in experiments in 

Crary Lab at McMurdo Station. The fish 

from temperate waters will be exposed 

to the subzero conditions of Antarctic 

coastal waters. The responses of the 

New Zealand fish will be assessed using 

genomics techniques, and these results 

will be compared to the Antarctic 

species. The New Zealand fish are 

thought to have initially evolved in the 

Antarctic and then migrated to more 

temperate water. These experiments 

will more carefully test this supposition. 

The New Zealand fish will not be 

released into Antarctic waters. 

Location 

The Crary Science and Engineering 

Center, McMurdo Station, Antarctica. 

Dates 

October 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006. 

3. Applicant: Permit Application No. 

2007–006, Paul J. Ponganis, Center for 

Marine Biotechnology/Biomedicine, 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 

University of California, San Diego, La 

Jolla, CA 92093–0204. 

Activity for Which Permit Is Requested 

Take and Enter Antarctic Specially 

Protected Area. The applicant proposes 

to capture up to 80 adult Emperors, up 

to 20 Emperor chicks, and 10 adult 

Adelie penguins. Blood and muscle 

tissue samples will be collected and 

depth recorders will be attached. The 

samples collected will help to 

understand how Emperors dive so long 

and avoid complications such as 

shallow water black out and 

accumulation of metabolic byproducts 

such as lactate. In addition, the 

applicant will conduct censuses of the 

Emperor colonies at Cape Crozier 

(ASPA #124), Beaufort Island (ASPA 

#105), Cape Washington, Franklin 

Island and Coulman Island. The 

applicant also proposes to salvage up to 

10 Emperor carcasses each year for 

anatomical studies. 

Location 

McMurdo Sound sea ice, Cape 

Washington, Franklin Island, Coulman 

Island, Cape Crozier (ASPA #124), and 

Beaufort Island (ASPA #105). 

Dates 

September 1, 2006 to January 31, 

2009. 

4. Applicant: Permit Application No. 

2007–007, Markus Horning, Hatfield 

Marine Science Center, 2030 SE Marine 

Science Drive, Newport, OR 97365. 

Activity for Which Permit Is Requested 

Take and Import into the United 

States. The applicant proposes to 

capture up to 48 Weddell seals to be 

weighed, blood and muscle tissue 

samples taken and VHF transmitters 

attached. The samples collected will be 

returned to the U.S. for analysis to 

determine the small-scale, immediate 

and obvious effects of aging on the 

diving capacity and exercise capability 

of adult Weddell seals. 

Location 

McMurdo Sound sea ice. 

Dates 

October 1, 2006 to January 31, 2008. 

5. Applicant: Permit Application No. 

2007–008, Walker O. Smith, Virginia 

Institute of Marine Science, P.O. Box 

1346, 1208 Greate Road, Gloucester 

Point, VA 23062. 

Activity for Which Permit Is Requested 

Introduce non-indigenous species into 

Antarctica. The application proposed to 

bring 2 flasks each of phytoplankton 

(Phaeocystis Antarctica, Pseudonitzschia sp. and Fragilariopsis 

cylindus) for use in experiments during 

a cruise on the R/V Nathaniel B. Palmer. 

These cultures are originally from 

Antarctica and have not been 

genetically modified. The applicant will 

study the physiological response of 

these native species to controlled 

environmental factors with onboard 

incubation. It is necessary to use these 

samples because the occurrence of these 

species in unpredictable in the Ross Sea 

and there is limited time on the cruise 

to perform the experiments. 

Location 

Ross Sea. 

Dates 

October 20, 2006 to December 25, 

2006. 

6. Applicant: Permit Application No. 

207–011, Mark Buckley, Senior Manager 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
51644 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 30, 2006 / Notices 

Multimedia, Raytheon Polar Service 

Company, 7400 S. Tucson Way, 

Centennial, CO 80112. 

Activity for Which Permit Is Requested 

Enter Antarctic Specially Protected 

Areas. The RPSC Multimedia team is 

often tasked with taking video and still 

footage of scientific activities and 

general scenery. Request for such 

coverage is expected to increase during 

the International Polar Year. The 

applicant requests to enter the Antarctic 

Specially Protected Areas in the 

McMurdo Sound/Ross Sea region when 

tasked to film scientific activities 

occurring at any of the sites. Access to 

the sites will be limited to due to 

operational and scientific constraints. 

Location 

Sabrina Island (ASPA 104), Beaufort 

Island (ASPA 105), Cape Hallett (ASPA 

106). Cape Bird (ASPA 116), Mt. 

Melbourne (ASPA 118), Cape Royds 

(ASPA 121), Arrival Heights (ASPA 

122), Barwick Valley (ASPA 123), Cape 

Crozier (ASPA 124), Tramway Ridge 

(ASPA 130), Canada Glacier (ASPA 

131), Northwest White Island (ASPA 

137), Linneaus Terrace (ASPA 138), 

Botany Bay (ASPA 154), Cape Evans 

(ASPA 155), Lewis Bay (ASPA 156), 

Backdoor Bay (ASPA 157), Hut Point 

(ASPA 158), Cape Adare (ASPA 150), 

Terra Nova Bay (ASPA 161). 

Dates 

October 1, 2006 to February 14, 2009. 

Nadene G. Kennedy, 

Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs. 

[FR Doc. 06–7256 Filed 8–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–413, 50–414, 50–369 and 

50–370] 

Duke Power Company Llc, et al., 

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 Nos. NPF–

35, NPF–52, NPF–9 and NPF–11, issued 

to Duke Power Company, LLC, et al., for 

operation of the Catawba Nuclear 

Station, Units 1 and 2, located in York 

County, South Carolina, and McGuire 

Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located 

in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. 

The proposed amendments would 

revise technical specification (TS) 

3.4.15, ‘‘RCS [Reactor Coolant System] 

Leakage Detection Instrumentation’’. 

The proposed changes address the 

incore instrument room sump level 

instrumentation and containment 

atmosphere radioactivity monitors and 

their compliance with Regulatory Guide 

1.45. 

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 Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 

CFR), Part 50, Section 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. This analysis is from 

the May 4, 2006, submittal and 

supercedes the analysis from the 

licensee’s July 27, 2005, submittal: 

1. Would implementation of the changes 

proposed in this LAR involve a significant 

increase in the probability or consequences 

of an accident previously evaluated? 

No. The changes contained in this LAR 

(license amendment request) have been 

evaluated and determined to not increase the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. The proposed changes 

do not make any hardware changes and do 

not alter the configuration of any plant 

structure, system, or component. The 

proposed LAR: (1) Removes the containment 

atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor as 

an option for meeting the operability 

requirements of TS 3.4.15 and replaces it 

with the containment atmosphere particulate 

radioactivity monitor, (2) clarifies the 

applicability of the TS to the containment 

atmosphere particulate radioactivity monitor, 

(3) adds the incore instrument sump and its 

level instrumentation to the McGuire and 

Catawba licensing basis contained in the TS, 

the Bases, and the Updated Final Safety 

Analysis Reports, and (4) makes other low 

risk changes to TS 3.4.15. None of the 

containment Reactor Coolant System (RCS) 

leakage detection instrumentation systems 

are initiators of any accident; therefore, the 

probability of occurrence of an accident is 

not increased. The McGuire and Catawba 

licensing bases will continue to require 

diverse means of detecting reactor coolant 

system (RCS) leakage, thus ensuring that 

leakage due to cracks would continue to be 

identified prior to breakage and the plant 

would be shutdown accordingly. Therefore 

the consequences of an accident are not 

increased. 

2. Would implementation of the changes 

proposed in this LAR create the possibility of 

a new or different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated? 

No. The changes proposed in this LAR do 

not involve the use or installation of any 

equipment that is less conservative than that 

already installed and in use. No new or 

different system interactions are created and 

no new processes are introduced. The 

proposed changes will not introduce any new 

failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or 

accident initiators not already considered in 

the design and licensing basis. The proposed 

changes do not affect any structure, system, 

or component associated with an accident 

initiator. Based on these considerations, the 

proposed changes do not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated. 

3. Would implementation of the changes 

proposed in this LAR involve a significant 

reduction in a margin of safety? 

No. The changes proposed in this LAR do 

not make any alteration to any RCS leakage 

detection components. The proposed changes 

only remove the containment atmosphere 

gaseous radioactivity monitors as an option 

for meeting the operability requirements for 

TS 3.4.15 and replace it with the more 

responsive containment atmosphere 

particulate radioactivity monitor. Since the 

level of radioactivity in the McGuire and 

Catawba reactor coolant has become much 

lower than what was assumed in the original 

licensing bases, the gaseous channel can no 

longer detect a small RCS leak consistent 

with the plants’ leak-before-break (LBB) 

analyses. A conservative addition is being 

made to TS 3.4.15 in order to include 

controls for the incore instrument sump level 

instrumentation. The changes contained in 

the LAR are not risk significant since the RCS 

leakage detection instrumentation is not 

credited in the McGuire and Catawba 

probabilistic risk assessments. The proposed 

amendment continues to require diverse 

means of leakage detection equipment with 

the capability to promptly detect RCS leakage 

well within the margin of the LBB analyses. 

Based on this evaluation, the proposed 

changes do not involve a significant 

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 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES