45280 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 165 / Tuesday, August 26, 1997 / Notices

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

Jack R. Newman, Esq., Morgan, Lewis &

Bockius, 1800 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20036–5869, 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).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated August 14, 1997,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the

local public document room located at

the Wharton County Junior College, J.

M. Hodges Learning Center, 911 Boling

Highway, Wharton, TX.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day

of August 1997.

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James W. Clifford,

Acting Director, Project Directorate IV/1,

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–22634 Filed 8–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–397]

Washington Public Power Supply

System; 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–

21, issued to Washington Public Power

System (the licensee), for operation of

the Washington Nuclear Project No. 2

(WNP–2) located in Benton County,

Washington.

The proposed amendment would

modify the inservice testing (IST)

requirements specified in Technical

Specification (TS) 5.5.6 for the inboard

primary containment isolation valve

(PCIV) on the transversing in-core probe

(TIP) system nitrogen purge line. The

proposed amendment is submitted to

resolve enforcement discretion which

was issued to the licensee on August 13,

1997, related to the above identified TS

surveillance requirements.

The exigent circumstances for this

technical specification amendment

request exist due to the potential for

system degradation associated with

isolating the nitrogen purge line to the

TIP system for the duration of the

current operating cycle.

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.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for

amendments to be granted under

exigent circumstances, the NRC staff

must determine 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 any

accident previously evaluated.

The purpose of the proposed license

amendment is to extend the full stroke

testing requirement interval for TIP–V–

6 to the next shutdown of sufficient

duration to complete the testing. The

test requirement assures the freedom of

movement of the obturator of the check

valve. The probability of occurrence of

an evaluated accident is not increased

because extending the testing interval

does not create a new precursor or effect

an existing precursor to any design basis

accident. The consequences of an

evaluated accident are not significantly

increased because of the reliable

performance history of TIP–V–6 and an

operable TIP–V–15. The ability of TIP–

V–6 to provide containment isolation is

maintained. Therefore, the proposed

amendment request does not

significantly increase the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

2. The proposed change does not

create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

The Technical Specification

amendment would not create a new or

different kind of accident because it

does not involve modification of the

plant configuration, result in any

physical change to TIP–V–6, or its
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 165 / Tuesday, August 26, 1997 / Notices 45281

operation. As a result, no new failure

modes are introduced. Therefore, no

new or different kinds of accidents are

created.

3. The proposed change does not

involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety.

The safety function of TIP–V–6 is to

close to isolate the primary containment

under accident conditions. The

extension of this testing interval for

TIP–V–6 will not decrease the reliability

of the valve. The performance of TIP–V–

6, as demonstrated through testing and

inspection, has been good. However,

should the check valve fail to close to

isolate the purge line, the external

automatic isolation valve (TIP–V–15)

would provide the required

containment penetration isolation. Plant

and system response to an initiating

event will remain unchanged.

Therefore, the proposed change does not

involve a significant reduction in the

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 14 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 14-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

14-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. 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 Review and

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom

of Information and Publications

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 6D22, 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 September 25, 1997, 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 at the local public

document room located at the Richland

Public Library, 955 Northgate Street,

Richland, Washington 99352. 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

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 the amendment is issued before the

expiration of the 30-day hearing period,

the Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no

significant hazards consideration. If a

hearing is requested, 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 significant
45282 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 165 / Tuesday, August 26, 1997 / Notices

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,

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

Perry D. Robinson, Esq., Winston &

Strawn, 1400 L Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 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).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated August 14, 1997,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the

local public document room, located at

the Richland Public Library, 955

Northgate Street, Richland, Washington

99352.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day

of August 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Timothy G. Colburn,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

IV–2, Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–22633 Filed 8–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear

Regulatory Commission.

DATES: Weeks of August 25, September

1, 8, and 15, 1997.

PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland.

STATUS: Public and closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED

Week of August 25

There are no meetings scheduled for

the week of August 25.

Week of September 1—Tentative

Wednesday, September 3

11:30 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public

Meeting) (if needed)

Week of September 8—Tentative

There are no meetings scheduled for

the week of September 8.

Week of September 15—Tentative

Wednesday, September 17

9:00 a.m. Briefing by DOE on Strategy

for MOX Fuel Fabrication and

Irradiation Services (Public

Meeting)

(Contact: Ted Sherr, 301–415–7218)

10:30 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public

Meeting) (if needed)

Friday, September 19

10:00 a.m. Briefing on Improvements in

Senior Management Assessment

Process for Operating Reactors

(Public Meeting)

(Contact: Bill Borchardt. 301–415–

1257)

1:30 p.m. Briefing by DOE and NRC on

Regulatory Oversight of DOE

Nuclear Facilities (Public Meeting)

Please note: Affirmation of ‘‘Louisiana

Energy Services (Claiborne

Enrichment Center); Atomic Safety

and Licensing Board Partial Initial

Decision (Resolving Contentions B

and J.3), LBP–973’’ was postponed

from Friday, August 22. No new

date has been set.

The schedule for Commission

meetings is subject to change on short

notice. To verify the status of meetings

call (Recording)—(301) 415–1292.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Bill Hill (301) 415–1661.

The NRC Commission Meeting

Schedule can be found on the Internet

at:

http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/

schedule.htm

This notice is distributed by mail to

several hundred subscribers; if you no

longer wish to receive it, or would like

to be added to it, please contact the

Office of the Secretary. Attn: Operations

Branch, Washington, D.C. 20555 (301–

415–1661).

In addition, distribution of this

meeting notice over the internet system

is available. If you are interested in

receiving this Commission meeting

schedule electronically, please send an

electronic message to wmh@nrc.gov or

dkw@nrc.gov.

Dated: August 22, 1997.

William H. Hill, Jr.,

Secy Tracking Officer, Office of the Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–22837 Filed 8–22–97; 2:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

PEACE CORPS

Proposed Information Collection

Requests

AGENCY: Peace Corps.

ACTION: Notice of public use form

review request to the Office of

Management and Budget.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1981 (44 USC, Chapter

35) Peace Corps of the United States has

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget a request for approval of

information collection Peace Corps

Medical History and Examination Forms

(PC–7189 and PC–1790). The purpose of

this notice is to allow an additional 30

days for public comments. Comments

are encouraged and will be accepted

until March 7, 1997. This process is

conducted in accordance with 5 CFR

Part 1320.10; the initial notice was

published in the Federal Register on

September 6, 1996 (pp. 47215–47216),

during which time no comments were

received by the agency. Peace Corps

invites comments on whether the

proposed collection of information is

necessary for proper performance of the

functions of the Peace Corps, including

whether the information will have

practical use; the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

ways to enhance the quality, utility and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and, ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information

on those who are to respond, including

through the use of automated collection

techniques, when appropriate, and other

forms of information technology. A copy

of the information collection may be

obtained from Susan Gambino, Office of

Medical Services, United States PEACE

CORPS, 1990 K Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20526. Ms. Gambino

may be contacted by telephone at (202

606–3481. Comments on those forms

should be addressed to Victoria Becker

Wassmer, Desk Officer, Office of

Management and Budget, NEOB,

Washington, DC 20503.

Information Collection Abstract

Title: Health Status Review (PC–

1789). Report of Medical Exam (PC–

1790).