10294 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 44 / Thursday, March 6, 1997 / Notices

Budget (OMB) for review and approval

in accordance with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 [P.L. 104–13, 44

U.S.C. Chapter 35]. Copies of this ICR,

with applicable supporting

documentation, may be obtained by

calling the National Endowment for the

Arts’ Director of Guidelines & Panel

Operations, A.B. Spellman [(202) 682–

5421]. Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TTY/TDD) may call (202) 682–5496

between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.

Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

Comments should be sent to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the

National Endowment for the Arts, Office

of Management and Budget, Room

10235, Washington, DC 20503 [(202)

395–7316], within 30 days from the date

of this publication in the Federal

Register.

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) is particularly interested in

comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

• Evaluate 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;

• Enhance the quality, utility and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

• 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,

e.g., permitting electronic submissions

of responses.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Endowment request the review of all of

its funding application guidelines. This

entry is issued by the Endowment and

contains the following information: (1)

The title of the form; (2) how often the

required information must be reported;

(3) who will be required or asked to

report; (4) what the form will be used

for; (5) an estimate of the number of

responses; (6) the average burden hours

per response; (7) an estimate of the total

number of hours needed to prepare the

form. This entry is not subject to 44

U.S.C. § 3504(h).

Agency: National Endowment for the

Arts.

Title: Blanket Justification for NEA

Funding Application Guidelines FY

1998–FY 2001.

OMB Number: 3135–0112.

Frequency: Annually.

Affected Public: Nonprofit

organizations, state and local arts

agencies, and individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

5,000.

Estimated Time Per Respondent:

19.29 hours.

Total Burden Hours: 96,450.

Total Annualized Capital/Startup

Costs: 0.

Total Annual Costs (Operating/

Maintaining Systems or Purchasing

Services): 0.

Description: Guideline instructions

and applications elicit relevant

information from individuals, nonprofit

organizations, and state and local arts

agencies that apply for funding from the

NEA. Current Endowment categories

include, but are not limited to: Grants to

Organizations, Partnership Agreements,

Literature Fellowships, American Jazz

Masters, National Heritage Fellowships

in the Folk & Traditional Arts, and

Leadership Initiatives (including

Millennium). This information is

necessary for the accurate, fair and

thorough consideration of competing

proposals in the review process.

ADDRESSES: A.B. Spellman, National

Endowment for the Arts, 1100

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Room 516,

Washington, DC 20506–0001, telephone

(202) 682–5421 (this is not a toll-free

number), fax (202) 682–5049.

Murray Welsh,

Director, Administrative Services, National

Endowment for the Arts.

[FR Doc. 97–5538 Filed 3–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7537–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364]

Southern Nuclear Operating Company,

Inc.; Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendments to Facility

Operating Licenses, Proposed No

Significant Hazards Consideration

Determination, and Opportunity for a

Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of amendments to

Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–2

and NPF–8, issued to Southern Nuclear

Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee),

for operation of the Joseph M. Farley

Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in

Houston County, Alabama.

The proposed amendments would

revise and clarify surveillance

requirements for the Control Room

Emergency Filtration System, the

Penetration Room Filtration System,

and the Containment Purge Exhaust

Filter System.

This requested Technical

Specification (TS) change is a followup

to a Notice of Enforcement Discretion

(NOED) granted to the licensee that is in

effect for the period from 1:27 p.m.

Eastern Standard Time on February 26,

1997, until approval of this exigent TS

request and full implementation of the

amendments within 30 days of its

issuance. NRC Inspection Manual, Part

9900, ‘‘Operations—Notices of

Enforcement Discretion,’’ requires that a

followup TS amendment be issued

within 4 weeks from the issuance of the

NOED.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendments, 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 requested

amendments involve 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 changes do not involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

The proposed changes to convert from

ANSI N510–1980 to ASME N510–1989 for

specific FNP [Farley Nuclear Plant] filtration

surveillance testing requirements do not

affect the probability of any accident

occurring. The consequences of any accident

will not be affected since the proposed

change will continue to ensure that

appropriate and required surveillance testing

for FNP filtration systems will be performed.

Relocating specific testing requirements to

the FNP FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report]

has no effect on the probability or

consequences of any accident previously

evaluated since required testing will

continue to be performed.

Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 44 / Thursday, March 6, 1997 / Notices 10295

2. The proposed changes do not create the

possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated.

Testing differences between ANSI N510–

1980 and ASME N510–1989 have been

evaluated by SNC [Southern Nuclear

Operating Company, Inc.] and none of the

proposed changes have the potential to create

an accident at FNP. ANSI N510–1989 has

been endorsed and approved by the NRC for

licensee use in NUREG 1431. No new system

design or testing configuration is being

proposed that could create the possibility of

any new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated.

Relocating specific testing requirements to

the FSAR has no effect on the possibility of

creating a new or different kind of accident

from any accident previously evaluated since

it is an administrative change in nature.

Therefore, the proposed changes do not

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

3. The proposed changes do not involve a

significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Conversion from the testing requirements

of ANSI N510–1980 sections 5, 8, and 14 to

ASME N510–1989 sections 5, 8, and 14 has

been previously approved by the NRC at

other nuclear facilities. ASME N510–1989

has been approved and endorsed by the NRC

in NUREG 1431. Relocating specific testing

requirements to the FSAR has no effect on

the margin of plant safety since required

testing will continue to be performed.

Therefore, SNC concludes based on the

above, that the proposed changes do not

result in a significant reduction of margin

with respect to plant safety as defined in the

Final Safety Analysis Report or the bases of

the FNP technical specifications.

Therefore, 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 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 April 7, 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 HoustonLove Memorial Library, 212 W.

Burdeshaw Street, Post Office Box 1369,

Dothan, Alabama. 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
10296 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 44 / Thursday, March 6, 1997 / Notices

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 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:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to Herbert

N. Berkow: petitioner’s name and

telephone number, date petition was

mailed, plant name, and publication

date and page number of this Federal

Register notice. 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 M. Stanford

Blanton, Esq., Balch and Bingham, Post

Office Box 306, 1710 Sixth Avenue

North, Birmingham, Alabama 35201,

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

amendments dated February 24, 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 Houston-Love Memorial Library,

212 W. Burdeshaw Street, Post Office

Box 1369, Dothan, Alabama.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day

of February 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Jacob I. Zimmerman,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II–2,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–5507 Filed 2–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Industry Presentation on the

Fabrication of Mixed Oxide Fuel

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Meeting notice.

SUMMARY: Representatives from the

nuclear industry will be making

presentations relating to the fabrication

of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel for use in

commercial light nuclear reactors. This

meeting is a follow-up to the February

21, 1997, meeting where NEI presented

material concerning the use of MOX fuel

in nuclear reactors. The meeting is open

to the public, and all interested parties

may attend.

DATES: Wednesday, March 26, 1997,

from 8:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Two White Flint North,

Auditorium, 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland. (Note: The NRC is

accessible to the White Flint Metro

Station; visitor parking around the NRC

building is limited.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Vanice A. Perin, Mail Stop T–8–A–33,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20555. Phone: 301–

415–8143; FAX: 301–415–5390;

INTERNET: VAP@NRC.GOV. For

material related to the meeting please

contact U.S. NRC Public Affairs Office

at (301) 415–8200 after March 26, 1997.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 14, 1997, the Department of

Energy issued the Record of Decision

(ROD) on the Storage and Disposition of

Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials. One

of DOE’s approaches to dispose of the

surplus plutonium is to burn it as MOX

fuel in existing domestic commercial

reactors.

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

has requested the opportunity to present

information on the use and fabrication

of MOX fuel for nuclear reactors to NRC

staff. This meeting is a follow-up to the

February 21, 1997, meeting where NEI

presented material concerning the use of

MOX fuel in nuclear reactors. A

preliminary agenda for the meeting is as

follows: (1) Technology Confirmation

Around the World, presented by the

National Laboratories; (2) MOX

Fabrication and Licensing Experience,

presented by British Nuclear Fuels, Inc.;

(3) MOX Fabrication and Licensing

Experience, presented by

Belgonucleaire; (4) MOX Fabrication

and Licensing Experience, presented by

Cogema; and (5) MOX Fabrication and

Licensing Experience, presented by

Siemens.

Attendees are requested to notify Ms.

Vanice A. Perin at 301–415–8143 of

their planned attendance if special

requirements (e.g., for the hearingimpaired) are necessary.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day

of February, 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Elizabeth Q. Ten Eyck,

Division Director, Division of Fuel Cycle

Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 97–5508 Filed 3–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Agency Forms Submitted for OMB

Review

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad

Retirement Board has submitted the

following proposal(s) for the collection

of information to the Office of

Management and Budget for review and

approval.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL(S):

(1) Collection title: Voluntary

Customer Surveys in Accordance with

E.O. 12862.

(2) Form(s) submitted: G–201, WebSite Survey.

(3) OMB Number: N/A.

(4) Expiration date of current OMB

clearance: N/A.

(5) Type of request: New collection.

(6) Respondents: Individuals or

households, business or other for profit.

(7) Estimated annual number of

respondents: 11,550.

(8) Total annual responses: 11,550.

(9) Total annual reporting hours:

1,043.

(10) Collection description: The

Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) will

utilize voluntary customer surveys to

ascertain customer satisfaction with the

RRB in terms of timeliness,

appropriateness, access, and other