63896 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

in amplification of the statutory

requirement for obtaining information

on persons and entities having a direct

financial interest in or management

responsibility for a management

contract. Finally, 25 CFR part 539

permits appeals to the Commission from

a decision of the Chairman to

disapprove a management contract and

allows the Indian tribe and the

management company an opportunity to

provide information relevant to that

appeal. The NIGC will use the

information collected to either approve

or disapprove the contract or, in the

case of an appeal, to grant or deny the

appeal.

Estimated Burden: The reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to be 500 hours per

response.

Respondents: Indian tribes

conducting gaming and management

contractors for tribal gaming operations.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

100.

Estimated Annual Responses: 15.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 7,500.

Montie R. Deer,

Chairman, National Indian Gaming

Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–27408 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7565–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to

submit an information collection

request to OMB and solicitation of

public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a

submittal to OMB for review of

continued approval of information

collections under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35).

Information pertaining to the

requirement to be submitted:

1. The title of the information

collection: 10 CFR Part 25—Access

Authorization for Licensee Personnel.

2. Current OMB approval number:

3150–0046.

3. How often the collection is

required: On occasion.

4. Who is required or asked to report:

NRC-regulated facilities and other

organizations requiring access to NRCclassified information.

5. The number of annual respondents:

20.

6. The number of hours needed

annually to complete the requirement or

request: 257 hours (197 hours reporting

and 60 hours recordkeeping) or 3.8

hours per response.

7. Abstract: NRC-regulated facilities

and other organizations are required to

provide information and maintain

records to ensure that an adequate level

of protection is provided NRC-classified

information and material.

Submit, by December 26, 2000,

comments that address the following

questions:

1. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for the NRC to

properly perform its functions? Does the

information have practical utility?

2. Is the burden estimate accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected?

4. How can the burden of the

information collection be minimized,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology?

A copy of the draft supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room, One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville

Pike, Room O–1F23, Rockville, MD

20852. OMB clearance requests are

available at the NRC worldwide web

site: http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/

OMB/index.html. The document will be

available on the NRC home page site for

60 days after the signature date of this

notice.

Comments and questions about the

information collection requirements

may be directed to the NRC Clearance

Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, T–6 E6,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, by

telephone at 301–415–7233, or by

Internet electronic mail at

BJS1@NRC.GOV.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day

of October, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brenda Jo. Shelton,

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–27385 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–U

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–269, 50–270, and 60–287]

Duke Energy Corporation; 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. DPR–

38, DPR–47, and DPR–55 issued to the

Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee)

for operation of the Oconee Nuclear

Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 located in

Seneca, South Carolina.

By letter dated June 6, 2000, the

Commission approved Amendment Nos.

312, 312, and 312 to add Technical

Specification (TS) Surveillance

Requirement 3.8.1.17 to verify

operability of the Keowee Hydro Units

(KHUs) out-of-tolerance logic trip and

closure blockage relays associated with

the overhead and underground power

path breakers. The amendments

specified that the TS change would be

implemented by November 30, 2000.

Subsequently, by application dated

October 18, 2000, the licensee submitted

a proposed amendment to change the

implementation date. The proposed new

date would be based on an engineering

study that is being conducted to

evaluate the appropriate KHU OOT

surveillance criteria and resolve

overshoot concerns. These overshoot

concerns are described in Amendment

Nos. 316, 316 and 316 that were issued

on October 4, 2000, which also added a

note that requires an amendment, based

on the results of this evaluation, be

submitted by April 5, 2001.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices 63897

analysis of the issue of no significant

hazards consideration, which is

presented below:

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91, Duke Power

Company (Duke) has made the determination

that this amendment request involves a No

Significant Hazards Consideration by

applying the standards established by the

NRC regulations in 10 CFR 50.92. This

ensures 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.

No. The License Amendment Request

(LAR) involves revising the implementation

date of November 30, 2000 for the Keowee

Hydro Unit [KHU] out-of-tolerance [OOT]

voltage and frequency modification. Revising

this date will allow Duke to integrate

resolution of the overshoot issues.

This LAR involves an administrative issue,

rather than the inability of the KHU to

perform its intended safety function. The outof-tolerance voltage and frequency

modification is considered an enhancement

to the existing design. Changing the

implementation date for the modification has

no impact on existing plant equipment.

Revising the requirements for

implementation does not involve: (1) A

physical alteration to the Oconee Units; (2)

operating any installed equipment in a new

or different manner; or (3) a change to any

set points for parameters which initiate

protective or mitigative action.

There is no adverse impact on containment

integrity, radiological release pathways, fuel

design, filtration systems, main steam relief

valve set points, or radwaste systems. No

new radiological release pathways are

created.

Therefore, the probability or consequence

of an accident previously evaluated is not

significantly increased.

2. Create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

No. The LAR involves revising the

implementation date for the KHU voltage and

frequency OOT modification.

Delaying implementation does not involve

a physical effect on the unit, nor is there any

increased risk of a unit trip or reactivity

excursion. No new failure modes or credible

accident scenarios are postulated from this

activity.

Therefore, the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any kind of

accident previously evaluated is not created.

3. Involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety.

No. The LAR involves delaying

implementation of the KHU voltage and

frequency OOT modification. Delaying

implementation will allow Duke to fully

integrate the resolution of the overshoot

issues.

Delaying implementation does not involve:

(1) A physical alteration of the Oconee Units;

(2) the installation of new or different

equipment; (3) operating any installed

equipment in a new or different manner; (4)

a change to any set points for parameters

which initiate protective or mitigative action;

or (5) any impact on the fission product

barriers or safety limits.

Therefore, this request does 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

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 30-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

30-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 and provide for opportunity

for a hearing after 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 and

Directives Branch, Division of

Administrative 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 6D59, Two

White Flint North, 11545 Rockville

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30

a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.

Documents may be examined, and/or

copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public

Document Room, located at One White

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first

floor), Rockville, Maryland.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By November 24, 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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 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

63898 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

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 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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 Anne W.

Cottington, Winston and Strawn, 1200

17th Street, NW., Washington, DC

20555, 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 October 18, 2000,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, located at One White Flint North,

11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),

Rockville, Maryland, 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 19th day

of October 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David E. LaBarge,

Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–27381 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–313]

Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas

Nuclear One, Unit 1; Notice of

Availability of the Draft Supplement 3

to the Generic Environmental Impact

Statement and Public Meeting for the

License Renewal of Arkansas Nuclear

One, Unit 1

Notice is hereby given that the U. S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the

Commission) has published a draft

plant-specific supplement to the

Generic Environmental Impact

Statement (GEIS), NUREG–1437,

regarding the renewal of operating

license DPR–51 for an additional 20

years of operation at the Arkansas

Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO–1). ANO–1

is located in Pope County, Arkansas.

Possible alternatives to the proposed

action (license renewal) include no

action and reasonable alternative energy

sources.

The draft supplement to the GEIS is

available electronically for public

inspection in the NRC Public Document

Room located at One White Flint North,

11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),

Rockville, Maryland, or from the

Publicly Available Records (PARS)

component of NRC’s document system

(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from

the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/

NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public

Electronic Reading Room). In addition,

the Pendergraft Library, located at

Arkansas Tech University, 305 West Q

Street, Russellville, AR 72801, has

agreed to make the draft supplement to

the GEIS available for public inspection.

Any interested party may submit

comments on the draft supplement to

the GEIS for consideration by the NRC

staff. To be certain of consideration,

comments on the draft supplement to

the GEIS and the proposed action must

be received by January 4, 2001.

Comments received after the due date

will be considered if it is practical to do

so, but the NRC staff is able to assure

consideration only for comments

received on or before this date. Written

comments on the draft supplement to

the GEIS should be sent to:

Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division

of Administrative Services, Mailstop T–6D

59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001.

Comments may be hand-delivered to

the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 a.m.

and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.

Submittal of electronic comments may

be sent by the Internet to the NRC at

anoeis@nrc.gov. All comments received

by the Commission, including those

made by Federal, State, and local

agencies, Indian tribes, or other

interested persons, will be made

available electronically at the

Commission’s Public Document Room

in Rockville, Maryland or from the

Publicly Available Records (PARS)

component of NRC’s document system

(ADAMS).

The NRC staff will hold a public

meeting to present an overview of the

draft plant-specific supplement to the

GEIS and to accept public comments on

the document. The public meeting will

be held at the Holiday Inn, Russellville,

Arkansas, on November 14, 2000. There

will be two sessions to accommodate

interested parties. The first session will

commence at 1:30 p.m. and will

continue until 4:30 p.m. The second

session will commence at 7:00 p.m. and

will continue until 10:00 p.m. Both

meetings will be transcribed and will

include (1) a presentation of the

contents of the draft plant-specific

supplement to the GEIS, and (2) the

opportunity for interested government

agencies, organizations, and individuals

to provide comments on the draft report.

Persons may pre-register to attend or