Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Notices 5059

3. Chartering and Field of Membership

Issues.

4. Requests from Federal Credit Unions to

Convert to a Community Charter.

5. Request to Charter a Low-Income

Community Federal Credit Union.

6. Requests from Corporate Federal Credit

Unions for Field of Membership

Amendments.

7. Final Rule: Amendments to Part 704,

NCUA’s Rules and Regulations, Corporate

Credit Unions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Becky Baker, Secretary of the Board,

Telephone (703) 518–6304.

Becky Baker,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–2760 Filed 1–30–97; 2:54 pm]

BILLING CODE 7535–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of

information collection and solicitation

of public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC has recently

submitted to OMB for review the

following proposal for the collection of

information under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby

informs potential respondents that an

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and

that a person is not required to respond

to, a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number.

1. Type of submission, new, revision,

or extension: Revision.

2. The title of the information

collection: 10 CFR Part 55, ‘‘Operators’

Licenses.’’

3. The form number if applicable: Not

applicable.

4. How often the collection is

required: As necessary in order for NRC

to meet its responsibilities to determine

the eligibility of applicants for

operators’ licenses and perform a review

of applications and reports for

simulation facilities submitted to the

NRC.

5. Who will be required or asked to

report: Holders of and applicants for

facility (i.e., nuclear power, research,

and test reactor) operating licenses and

individual operators’ licenses.

6. An estimate of the number of

responses: 135.

7. The estimated number of annual

respondents: 135.

8. An estimate of the total number of

hours needed annually to complete the

requirement or request: 3,556

(approximately 964 hours of reporting

burden and approximately 2,592 hours

of recordkeeping burden).

9. An indication of whether Section

3507(d), Pub. L. 104–13 applies: Not

applicable.

10. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 55 of the

NRC’s regulations, ‘‘Operators’

Licenses,’’ specifies information and

data to be provided by applicants and

facility licensees so that the NRC may

make determinations concerning the

licensing of operators for nuclear power

plants necessary to promote the health

and safety of the public. The reporting

and recordkeeping requirements

contained in 10 CFR Part 55 are

mandatory for the licensees and

applicants affected.

A copy of the submittal may be

viewed free of charge at the NRC Public

Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW

(Lower Level), Washington, DC.

Members of the public who are in the

Washington, DC, area can access the

submittal via modem on the Public

Document Room Bulletin Board (NRC’s

Advanced Copy Document Library) NRC

subsystem at FedWorld, 703–321–3339.

Members of the public who are located

outside of the Washington, DC, area can

dial FedWorld, 1–800–303–9672, or use

the FedWorld Internet address:

fedworld.gov (Telnet). The document

will be available on the bulletin board

for 30 days after the signature date of

this notice. If assistance is needed in

accessing the document, please contact

the FedWorld help desk at 703–487–

4608. Additional assistance in locating

the document is available from the NRC

Public Document Room, nationally at 1–

800–397–4209, or within the

Washington, DC, area at 202–634–3273.

Comments and questions should be

directed to the OMB reviewer by March

5, 1997: Edward Michlovich, Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs

(3150–0018), NEOB–10202, Office of

Management and Budget, Washington,

DC 20503.

Comments can also be submitted by

telephone at (202) 395–3084.

The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda

Jo. Shelton, (301) 415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day

of January 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Gerald F. Cranford,

Designated Senior Official for Information

Resources Management.

[FR Doc. 97–2538 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[IA 97–004]

James C. Nelson, Order Prohibiting

Involvement In NRC-Licensed

Activities (Effective Immediately)

I

Mr. James C. Nelson owns and

operates Nelson Excavating, Inc. in

Thomas, West Virginia. Nelson

Excavating, Inc. (Licensee) holds Byproduct License No. 47–24923–02,

issued by the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or Commission)

pursuant to 10 CFR Part 30. The License

was initially issued on June 24, 1987,

and last renewed on September 17,

1992. The License authorizes the

Licensee to use a Troxler Electronic

Model 3400 series portable moisture

density gauge for soil compaction

measurements in accordance with the

conditions specified therein. The

License was extended for a period of

five years on March 1, 1996, and will

expire on September 30, 2002. On

August 15, 1996, the Licensee

discontinued licensed activities and

transferred its gauge containing

nominally 11 millicuries (mCi) of

Cesium-137 and 44 mCi of Americium241 to an authorized recipient. On

August 15, 1996, the Licensee formally

requested termination of its NRC

License. The License is being

terminated separately in accordance

with this request.

II

On October 24, 1995, the NRC’s Office

of the Controller issued an Order

Suspending License (Effective

Immediately) to Nelson Excavating, Inc.

suspending its License for the nonpayment of fees in the amount of

$2,873.48, including late penalties of

$753.48. The Order required, among

other things, that the Licensee

immediately restrict its activities

involving licensed material to safe,

secure storage or appropriate disposal

until notified by the NRC in writing that

the License had been terminated. The

Order became final on November 24,

1995, following the Licensee’s failure to

respond to the NRC or pay the fees

within the 30 days specified in the

Order.

During the period March 19 through

April 1, 1996, NRC Region II conducted

a special safety inspection of licensed

activities to determine the status of the

gauge and compliance with the October

24, 1995 Order. The inspection

determined the following: (1) The

Licensee used the gauge containing byproduct material on November 6, 1995,

and January 4, 1996, contrary to the

requirements of the October 24, 1995,
5060 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Notices

Order; (2) The Licensee was using a

different Radiation Protection Officer

than that identified in Condition 11 of

the License. The Licensee also

represented to the NRC in a letter, dated

September 17, 1992, that the individual

named in the License was still acting as

Radiation Protection Officer, when in

fact the individual was not, contrary to

the requirements of 10 CFR 30.9; and (3)

The Licensee failed to test the licensed

material for leakage at the required

frequency contrary to Condition 14 of

the License.

On May 15, 1996, NRC Region II

management contacted the Licensee to

discuss compliance with the October 24,

1995 Order. Mr. Nelson indicated that

his licensed material had been used for

the work conducted on November 6,

1995, and January 4, 1996, under

another license and not that issued to

Nelson Excavating, Inc. Additionally, he

affirmed that he understood the

provisions of the Order that the gauge

was to be placed in storage and not

used.

On June 11, 1996, a Demand for

Information (DFI) was issued to the

Licensee in order to obtain a written

response regarding the two apparent

uses of licensed material and the

potential submittal of inaccurate

information to the NRC on September

17, 1992. The Licensee’s response was

due on July 11, 1996.

Since the licensee was unresponsive

to NRC’s request in the DFI and

numerous telephone inquiries, NRC

Region II conducted another inspection

at the Licensee’s facility in Thomas,

West Virginia, on August 14 and 15,

1996. During that inspection, eleven

additional uses of the Licensee’s gauge

after issuance of the Order were

identified through a review of gauge

utilization records. Ten of the uses

occurred following the May 15, 1996,

discussions between NRC Region II and

the Licensee confirming the Licensee’s

understanding of the Order. As a result

of this inspection, the Licensee

transferred the gauge to an authorized

recipient and documented the transfer

appropriately on August 15, 1996.

As a result of the NRC inspection and

prompting by the NRC, the Licensee

also submitted a written response to the

DFI on August 15, 1996. The response

admitted that the gauge was used on 13

occasions during the prohibition period.

As an explanation, Mr. Nelson stated

that he had reading and comprehension

difficulties, and following his March 19,

1996, payment of backfees and receipt

of a March 1, 1996, notice from NRC

extending his license until September

30, 2002, he felt that he could use his

license material. In addition, he stated

that he paid for it [the gauge], he owned

it, and would use it accordingly. The

DFI response further provided

statements by two employees of the

Licensee that they had not been

instructed by Mr. Nelson not to use the

gauge.

By letter, dated September 25, 1996,

the Licensee and Mr. Nelson were

requested to attend a predecisional

enforcement conference to discuss the

apparent violations, their root causes,

and the corrective actions to preclude

recurrence. As of the date of this Order,

NRC has not received any response from

Mr. Nelson, despite numerous attempts

to contact him. Contact with the Office

Manager for Nelson Excavating, Inc,

however, indicated that due to personal

problems, Mr. Nelson did not intend to

respond.

Despite the lack of a response to

NRC’s September 25, 1996, letter, based

on the information gathered during the

inspections and in the response to the

DFI, the following was concluded

regarding Mr. Nelson’s activities: (1) He

deliberately provided information that

he knew was inaccurate to the NRC

regarding the identity of the Radiation

Protection Officer in a September 17,

1992, letter; and (2) he deliberately

permitted the use of the gauge

containing licensed material on 13

occasions during the period that use of

the gauge was prohibited by the October

24, 1995 Order. In addition, Mr. Nelson

has failed to respond to numerous

requests from the NRC regarding

oversight of his NRC license. This

failure caused the NRC to perform two

onsite inspections to assure licensed

activities were conducted in accordance

with NRC regulations.

III

Based on the above, it appears that

James C. Nelson, the owner and operator

of the Nelson Excavating, Inc., has

engaged in deliberate misconduct in

violation of 10 CFR 30.10(a)(1), in that

he deliberately caused the Licensee to

be in violation of 10 CFR 30.34 (a),

Terms and Conditions of License, by

permitting the use of the gauge

containing licensed material on 13

occasions following the October 24,

1995 Order prohibiting use of the gauge,

and in violation of 10 CFR 30.10(a)(2) in

that he deliberately submitted

information to the NRC regarding the

identity of the RPO in a September 17,

1992 letter that he knew was inaccurate.

Mr. Nelson’s disregard for and failure to

adhere to NRC regulations and an Order

strongly suggests a lack of integrity

which cannot be tolerated. As owner

and operator of Nelson Excavating, Inc.,

Mr. Nelson was responsible for ensuring

that Nelson Excavating, Inc. conducted

activities safely and in accordance with

NRC requirements and the October 24,

1995, Order. The NRC must be able to

rely on the Licensee, its officials, and

employees to comply with NRC

requirements and the terms of NRC

Orders prohibiting the use of licensed

materials, and to communicate to the

NRC with candor and honesty.

Consequently, I lack the requisite

reasonable assurance that licensed

activities can be conducted in

compliance with the Commission’s

requirements and that the health and

safety of the public will be protected if

Mr. Nelson were permitted at this time

to be involved in NRC-licensed

activities. Therefore, the public health,

safety and interest require that Mr.

Nelson be prohibited from any oversight

of or involvement in NRC-licensed

activities for a period of five years from

the date of this Order. Furthermore,

pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that the

significance of Mr. Nelson’s conduct

described above is such that the public

health, safety and interest require that

this Order be immediately effective.

IV

Accordingly, pursuant to sections 81,

161b, 161i, 161o, 182 and 186 of the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,

and the Commission’s regulations in 10

CFR 2.202, 10 CFR 30.10, and 10 CFR

150.20, it is hereby ordered, effective

immediately, that:

A. For a period of five years from the date

of this Order, James C. Nelson is prohibited

from any involvement in or exercising

control over NRC-licensed activities. NRClicensed activities are those activities which

are conducted pursuant to a specific or

general license issued by the NRC, including,

but not limited to, those activities of

Agreement State licensees conducted

pursuant to the authority granted by 10 CFR

150.20. This prohibition includes, but is not

limited to: (1) using licensed materials or

conducting licensed activities in any capacity

within the jurisdiction of the NRC; and (2)

supervising or directing any licensed

activities conducted within the jurisdiction

of the NRC.

B. Following the five-year period of

prohibition outlined in Section IV.A above,

at least five days prior to the first time that

James C. Nelson engages in, or exercises

control over, NRC-licensed activities, he shall

notify the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20555, of the name,

address, and telephone number of the NRC

or Agreement State licensee and the location

where the licensed activities will be

performed. The notice shall be accompanied

by a statement that James C. Nelson is

committed to compliance with NRC

requirements and the basis why the

Commission should have confidence that he
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Notices 5061

will now comply with applicable NRC

requirements.

The Director, Office of Enforcement,

may, in writing, relax or rescind any of

the above conditions upon

demonstration by Mr. Nelson of good

cause.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202,

James C. Nelson must, and any other

person adversely affected by this Order

may, submit an answer to this Order,

and may request a hearing on this

Order, within 20 days of the date of this

Order. Where good cause is shown,

consideration will be given to extending

the time to request a hearing. A request

for extension of time must be made in

writing to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission Washington, D.C. 20555,

and include a statement of good cause

for the extension. The answer may

consent to this Order. Unless the answer

consents to this Order, the answer shall,

in writing and under oath or

affirmation, specifically admit or deny

each allegation or charge made in this

Order and shall set forth the matters of

fact and law on which James C. Nelson

or any other person adversely affected

relies and the reasons as to why the

Order should not have been issued. Any

answer or request for a hearing shall be

submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Attn: Chief,

Docketing and Service Section,

Washington, DC 20555. Copies also

shall be sent to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to

the Assistant General Counsel for

Hearings and Enforcement at the same

address, to the Regional Administrator,

NRC Region II, 101 Marietta Street N.W.,

Suite 2900, Atlanta, GA 30323, and to

James C. Nelson if the answer or hearing

request is by a person other than James

C. Nelson. If a person other than James

C. Nelson requests a hearing, that

person shall set forth with particularity

the manner in which his or her interest

is adversely affected by this Order and

shall address the criteria set forth in 10

CFR 2.714(d).

If a hearing is requested by James C.

Nelson or any other person whose

interest is adversely affected, the

Commission will issue an Order

designating the time and place of any

hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to

be considered at such hearing shall be

whether this Order should be sustained.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i),

James C. Nelson, or any other person

adversely affected by this Order, may, in

addition to demanding a hearing, at the

time the answer is filed or sooner, move

the presiding officer to set aside the

immediate effectiveness of the Order on

the ground that the Order, including the

need for immediate effectiveness, is not

based on adequate evidence but on mere

suspicion, unfounded allegations, or

error.

In the absence of any request for

hearing, or written approval of an

extension of time in which to request a

hearing, the provisions specified in

Section IV above shall be effective and

final 20 days from the date of this Order

without further order or proceedings. If

an extension of time for requesting a

hearing has been approved, the

provisions specified in Section IV shall

be final when the extension expires if a

hearing request has not been received.

An answer or a request for hearing shall

not stay the immediate effectiveness of

this order.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 27th day

of January 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Edward L. Jordan,

Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory

Effectiveness, Program Oversight,

Investigations and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 97–2536 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301]

Wisconsin Electric Power Company

(Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.

1 and 2); Exemption

I

Wisconsin Electric Power Company

(the licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License Nos. DRP–24 and

DRP–27, which authorize operation of

the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1

and 2, respectively. The licenses

provide, among other things, that the

licensee is subject to all rules,

regulations, and orders of the

Commission now or hereafter in effect.

The facility consists of two

pressurized-water reactors located at the

licensee’s site in Manitowoc County,

Wisconsin.

II.

In its letter dated July 1, 1996, as

supplemented November 18, 1996, the

licensee requested an exemption from

the Commission’s regulations. Title 10

of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part

50, Section 60 (10 CFR 50.60),

‘‘Acceptance Criteria for Fracture

Prevention Measures for Lightwater

Nuclear Power Reactors for Normal

Operation,’’ states that all lightwater

nuclear power reactors must meet the

fracture toughness and material

surveillance program requirements for

the reactor coolant pressure boundary as

set forth in Appendices G and H to 10

CFR Part 50. Appendix G to 10 CFR Part

50 defines pressure/temperature (P/T)

limits during any condition of normal

operation, including anticipated

operational occurrences and system

hydrostatic tests to which the pressure

boundary may be subjected over its

service lifetime. It is specified in 10 CFR

50.60(b) that alternatives to the

described requirements in Appendices

G and H to 10 CFR Part 50 may be used

when an exemption is granted by the

Commission under 10 CFR 50.12.

To prevent low-temperature

overpressure transients that would

produce pressure excursions exceeding

the P/T limits of Appendix G to 10 CFR

Part 50 while the reactor is operating at

low temperatures, the licensee installed

a low-temperature overpressure

protection (LTOP) system. The system

includes pressure-relieving devices

called power-operated relief valves

(PORVs). The PORVs are set at a

pressure low enough so that if an LTOP

transient occurred, the mitigation

system would prevent the pressure in

the reactor vessel from exceeding the P/

T limits of Appendix G to 10 CFR Part

50. To prevent the PORVs from lifting

as a result of normal operating pressure

surges (e.g., reactor coolant pumps

starting or stopping) with the reactor

coolant system in a water solid

condition, the operating pressure must

be maintained below the PORV setpoint.

The maximum LTOP setpoint of 425

psig was approved May 20, 1980, with

the issuance of Amendments 45 (DPR–

24) and 60 (DPR–27) to the Point Beach

operating licenses. This LTOP system

received pressure input from the

sensing taps located in the reactor

coolant system hot leg and at the

pressurizer. Subsequent evaluation

determined that the methodology used

to determine the LTOP system setpoint

did not account for the differential

pressure across the core during reactor

coolant pump operation. A recent

Westinghouse calculation (NSAL 93–

005) indicated that with both reactor

coolant pumps operating, the pressure

at core midplane may be as much as 63

psig higher than at the pressure sensing

points. To account for this differential

pressure, which could cause the reactor

vessel midplane pressure to exceed the

ASME Section XI, Appendix G limits,

the licensee implemented an

administrative requirement in 1993

allowing only one reactor coolant pump

in operation when reactor coolant

temperature is below 160 oF. Plant

operation with this restriction places an