57404 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Notices

trends, opportunities and assessment

procedures in Integrative Animal Biology.

Closed Session: October 23, 2000, 8:30 a.m.

to 6:00 p.m., October 24, 2000, 8:30 a.m. to

6:00 p.m.; and October 25, 2000, 8:30 a.m. to

10:00 a.m. and from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

to review and evaluate Integrative Animal

Biology proposals as part of the selection

process for awards.

Reason for Closing: The proposals being

reviewed include information, of a

proprietary or confidential nature, including

technical information financial data, such as

salaries; and personal information

concerning individuals associated with the

proposals. These matters are exempt under 5

U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government

in the Sunshine Act.

Dated: September 19, 2000.

Karen J. York,

Committee Meeting Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–24411 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Advisory Committee for Small

Business Industrial Innovation; Notice

of Meeting

In accordance with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, as amended), the National Science

Foundation announces the following

meeting:

Name: Advisory Committee for Small

Business Industrial Innovation (61).

Date/Time: October 6 and 20, 2000; 8:30

a.m.–5 p.m.

Place: NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Rooms 130,

360 and 370, Arlington, VA.

Type of Meeting: Closed.

Contact Person: Joseph Hennessey, Acting

Director, Small Business Innovation Research

and Small Business Technology Transfer

Programs, Room 590, Division of Design,

Manufacturing, and Industrial Innovation,

National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson

Boulevard, VA 22230. Telephone (703) 292–

7069.

Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and

recommendations concerning proposals

submitted to NSF for financial support.

Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals

submitted to the Small Business Innovation

Research (SBIR) and Small Business

Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs as part

of the selection process for awards.

Reason for Closing: The proposals being

reviewed include information of a

proprietary or confidential nature, including

technical information; financial data, such as

salaries, and personal information

concerning individuals associated with the

proposals. These matters are exempt under 5

U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government

in the Sunshine Act.

Dated: September 19, 2000.

Karen J. York,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–24405 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–219]

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC;

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. DPR–

16 issued to AmerGen Energy Company,

LLC (the licensee) for operation of the

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

located in Ocean County, New Jersey.

The proposed amendment would

delete the reporting requirement for the

core spray sparger inspection.

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. Will operation of the facility in

accordance with the proposed amendment

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated?

This change does not add components or

make any other physical change to the plant.

The change involves inspection

methodology. In the SER supporting

Amendment 70 to the Oyster Creek Technical

Specifications, dated January 26, 1984, the

staff required that future inspections of all

accessible surfaces and welds of both core

spray spargers and repair assemblies be

performed at each refueling outage. In order

to ensure that meaningful comparisons with

previous inspections could be made, the staff

required such inspections be performed in

accordance with a method acceptable to

them. To comply with that requirement, prior

to each refueling outage, Oyster Creek

submitted a detailed inspection plan. On

December 2, 1999, the NRC staff issued an

SER which approved the methodology

contained in ‘‘BWR [Boiling-Water Reactor]

Vessel and Internals Project BWR Core Spray

Internals Inspection and Flaw Evaluation

Guidelines’’ (BWRVIP–18). Oyster Creek was

an active participant in the development of

the guidelines and has committed to use

them as a License condition. In addition, the

inspection results will be submitted to the

NRC as part of the ASME [American Society

of Mechanical Engineers] Section XI ISI

[Inservice Inspection] Summary as required

by the BWRVIP–18 Guidelines. The

probability of an accident is not increased by

this change of inspection methodology.

With no physical changes to the plant or

any operating parameter and the use of a

formally approved inspection methodology,

the consequences of any postulated accident

are not increased.

2. Will operation of the facility in

accordance with the proposed amendment

create the possibility of a new or different

[kind of] accident from any accident

previously evaluated?

The core spray spargers and the other

components of the Core Spray System will

not be modified by this change. The function

of the Core Spray System is to provide an

alternate supply of cooling water, that is

independent of the Feedwater System, in the

event of an accident. This change will

incorporate into the Oyster Creek License a

commitment to inspect the core spray

spargers and other reactor internals during

each refueling outage in accordance with a

methodology approved for all BWRs by the

NRC. The function and operation of the Core

Spray System are not affected by this change

in inspection methodology. Therefore, the

possibility of a new or different [kind of]

accident not previously analyzed is not

created.

3. Will operation of the facility in

accordance with the proposed amendment

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety?

In the SER supporting Amendment 47 to

the Oyster Creek Technical Specifications,

dated May 15, 1980, the staff found the

licensee’s design and installation of the

repair bracket assemblies were in accordance

with currently accepted engineering

practices. Further, the analyses of the

structural loads imposed by static, seismic

and thermal loadings demonstrated the

bracket assembly’s ability to limit the crack

opening to within an acceptable range should

an existing crack propagate around the pipe

circumference. The inspection requirement

was imposed to ensure that any new cracks

or propagation of existing cracks would be

discovered as soon as possible so corrective

action could be taken. This change does not

affect the interval between inspections but

imposes a standardized, comprehensive

methodology approved by the NRC.

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