13902 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 1997 / Notices

with respect to an enforcement action

related to the Vogtle Electric Generating

Plant that, the Southern Nuclear

employee who formerly served as the

Vogtle General Manager through August

1990, will not hold a line management

position involving NRC licensed

activities at GPC and Southern Nuclear

plants until the NRC is provided prior

written notice and the individual has

satisfactorily completed certain

management training. That commitment

is accordingly confirmed in this Order

for Hatch.

IV

Accordingly, pursuant to Sections

103, 104b, 105, 161b, 161i, and 184, of

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as

amended; 42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134, 2135,

2201(b), 2201(o), and 2234, and 10 CFR

50.80, It is hereby ordered that the

request that Southern Nuclear be

permitted to become the operator of the

Hatch facility and to have exclusive

responsibility and control over the

physical construction, operation, and

maintenance of the facility, discussed

above, is approved subject to the

following conditions:

(1) The Southern Nuclear employee

who formerly served as the General

Manager—Vogtle through August 1990,

will not hold a line management

position at Hatch until:

(a) Satisfactory completion of training

in management communications and

responsibilities; and,

(b) Written notice is provided to the

NRC sixty (60) days prior to his

assignment to such a position; and,

(2) If Southern Nuclear does not

assume responsibility and control over

physical construction, operation and

maintenance of the facility within 60

days of the date of this Order, this Order

shall become null and void. However,

upon written application and for good

cause shown, this date may be

extended.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.35, an

Environmental Assessment was

prepared and published in the Federal

Register on November 3, 1992 (57 FR

49724). As required by 10 CFR 51.32,

this assessment documents the

Commission’s determination that this

action will have no significant impact

on the quality of the human

environment and nothing has occurred

since its publication to alter this

finding.

This order is effective upon issuance.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 17th day

of March 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Frank J. Miraglia, Jr.,

Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–7336 Filed 3–21–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–461]

Illinois Power Company, Soyland

Power Cooperative (Clinton Power

Station, Unit No. 1); Order Approving

Transfer of License for Clinton Power

Station, Unit No. 1

I

Illinois Power Company (IP) owns

86.79 percent of Clinton Power Station,

Unit No. 1 (CPS), a single-unit nuclear

power plant. Soyland Power

Cooperative (Soyland) owns the

remaining 13.21-percent interest in the

facility. IP and Soyland are governed by

Facility Operating License No. NPF–62

issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) pursuant

to Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of

Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50) on

April 17, 1987. Under this license, only

IP has the authority to operate CPS. The

CPS facility is located in DeWitt County,

Illinois.

II

In an application originally submitted

by letter dated October 17, 1996, and

then supplemented and modified by

letter dated December 13, 1996, IP

requested NRC’s consent to a proposed

transfer of the 13.21-percent share of

CPS currently owned by Soyland to IP.

Upon completion of the sale, IP will

remain the plant operator and will

become sole owner of CPS. IP is a

wholly owned subsidiary of Illinova

Corporation and will remain so after

completion of the sale. The proposed

action constitutes a transfer of the

license for CPS to the extent it is held

by Soyland, and is subject to the license

transfer provisions of 10 CFR 50.80.

III

On the basis of the information

provided in IP’s application, the staff

finds that IP is financially qualified to

contribute appropriately to the

operation and decommissioning of CPS.

In its letter of December 13, 1996, IP

indicated that it would assume

responsibility for the external trust fund

established by Soyland for its share of

the ultimate decommissioning expenses

of CPS. IP also would remain an

‘‘electric utility’’ as defined in 10 CFR

50.2, engaged in the generation,

transmission, and distribution of

electric energy for wholesale and retail

sale, subject to the rate regulation of the

Illinois Commerce Commission and the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Thus, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.33(f), IP is

exempt from further financial

qualifications review as an electric

utility. However, since IP will become

the sole entity responsible for operating

and decommissioning expenses for the

facility, the staff has concluded that

approval of the application should be

conditioned upon IP providing prior

notice to the NRC of any asset transfer

having a depreciated book value

exceeding 10 percent of IP’s

consolidated net utility plant to its

parent company or any affiliated

company. Such a condition will help to

ensure that IP will remain financially

qualified to be the sole holder of the

license.

IV

The proposed transfer does not

involve any transfer of operating

authority, which IP already possesses.

There will be no change in the

management or technical qualifications

of IP’s nuclear organization as a result

of the license transfer. On the basis of

the continuity of IP’s nuclear

organization and management

previously described, the staff finds that

the proposed license transfer will not

adversely affect IP’s technical

qualifications or the management of CPS

and does not otherwise raise any

technical qualifications issues.

V

CPS underwent an antitrust review

before issuance of the construction

permit and antitrust license conditions

were attached to the CPS operating

license that still apply to IP. Thus, the

application in this case does not involve

a new owner or a licensee that has not

undergone an antitrust review by the

NRC. Under the Atomic Energy Act, no

further review by the NRC is authorized.

VI.

IP makes the following statements in

its letter of December 13, 1996: ‘‘The

shares of common stock of Illinova are

publicly traded and widely held. IP and

IPMI [Illinova Power Marketing, Inc.]

are wholly owned subsidiaries of

Illinova. The directors and officers of

both these companies are U.S. citizens.

Neither Illinova, IP, nor IPMI is owned,

controlled, or dominated by any alien,

foreign corporation, or foreign

government.’’ (IP letter, Attachment 2,

p. 7.) The staff has no reason to believe

otherwise.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 1997 / Notices 13903

VII

After reviewing the information

submitted in the letters of October 17

and December 13, 1996, and other

information before the Commission, and

in consideration of the foregoing

findings, the NRC staff has determined

that IP is qualified to hold the license

and that the transfer, subject to the

conditions set forth herein, is otherwise

consistent with applicable provisions of

law, regulations, and orders issued by

the Commission. Accordingly, pursuant

to Sections 161b, 161i, 161o, and 184 of

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as

amended; 42 U.S.C. sections 2201(b),

2201(i), 2201(o), and 2234; and 10 CFR

50.80, the Commission consents to the

proposed transfer of the license

described herein from Soyland to IP,

subject to the following: (1) The

issuance of approved amendments fully

reflecting the transfer approved by this

Order at the time such transfer is

effected; (2) should the transfer not be

completed by December 31, 1997, this

Order shall become null and void,

provided, however, on application and

for good cause shown, such date may be

extended; and (3) IP shall provide the

Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation a copy of any application, at

the time it is filed, to transfer (excluding

grants of security interests or liens) from

IP to Illinova Corporation (its parent

company) or to any other affiliated

company, facilities for the production,

transmission, or distribution of electric

energy having a depreciated book value

exceeding ten percent (10%) of IP’s

consolidated net utility plant.

This Order is effective upon issuance.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, 51.32, and

51.35, an environmental assessment and

a finding of no significant impact have

been prepared and published in the

Federal Register on February 5, 1997

(62 FR 5495). On the basis of the

environmental assessment, the

Commission has determined that the

issuance of this Order will not have a

significant effect on the quality of the

human environment.

Notice of consideration of issuance of

an order approving the transfer of the

license and an opportunity for a hearing

was published in the Federal Register

on January 29, 1997 (62 FR 4337).

For further details with respect to this

action, see IP’s letters requesting

approval of the transfer of the license

dated October 17 and December 13,

1996, which are 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 Vespasian Warner Public

Library, 310 N. Quincy Street, Clinton,

IL 61727.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day

of March 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Samuel J. Collins,

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–7332 Filed 3–21–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–245]

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company

Notice of Withdrawal of Applications

for Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request of Northeast Nuclear

Energy Company, et. al (the licensee) to

withdraw its July 28, 1994, and

November 8, 1995, applications for

proposed amendments to Facility

Operating License No. DPR–21 for the

Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit

1, located in New London County,

Connecticut.

The amendment proposed in the July

28, 1994, letter would have modified the

facility technical specifications

pertaining to seismic capability of the

feedwater coolant injection system. The

amendment proposed in the November

8, 1995, letter would have modified the

facility technical specifications for the

jet pumps in order to make the technical

specifications consistent with the

limiting conditions for operation and

surveillance requirements in the NRC’s

Standard Technical Specifications for

General Electric Plants (NUREG–1433).

The Commission had previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment published in

the Federal Register on March 15, 1995

(60 FR 14023) for the July 28, 1994,

request, and March 27, 1996 (61 FR

13528) for the November 8, 1995,

request. However, by letter dated

February 27, 1997, the licensee

withdrew the proposed changes.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the applications for

amendments dated July 28, 1994, and

November 8, 1995, and the licensee’s

letter dated February 27, 1997, which

withdrew the applications for license

amendments. The above documents are

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 rooms located at the

Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers

Community-Technical College, 574 New

London Turnpike, Norwich,

Connecticut 06360 and at the Waterford

Library, ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope

Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut

06385.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day

of March 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Stephen Dembek,

Project Manager, Special Projects Office,

Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–7319 Filed 3–21–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–72]

University of Utah (University of Utah

AGN–201 Research Reactor), Order

Terminating Amended Facility

Operating License No. R–25

By application dated July 17, 1990, as

supplemented on July 18, 1990, and

June 12, 1991, the University of Utah

(the licensee) requested from the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC

or the Commission) authorization to

dismantle and dispose of the component

parts of the AGN–201 Research Reactor

(AGN–201 or the reactor) located on the

licensee’s campus in Salt Lake City,

Utah. The letter of July 17, 1990,

contained a request that upon successful

completion of decommissioning,

authorization be given for termination of

Amended Facility Operating License

No. R–25. A ‘‘Notice of Proposed

Issuance of Orders Authorizing

Disposition of Component Parts and

Terminating Facility License,’’ was

published in the Federal Register on

May 9, 1991 (56 FR 21508). No requests

for a hearing were received. By Order

dated August 1, 1991 (56 FR 37733), the

Commission authorized dismantling of

the reactor and disposition of

component parts as proposed in the

decommissioning plan of the licensee.

By letter dated April 13, 1994, as

supplemented on March 17 and 22,

1995, and February 6, 1996, the licensee

submitted ‘‘A Summary of the

Decommissioning Process of the

University of Utah AGN–201M Reactor

No. 107.’’

The reactor fuel has been removed

from the core and shipped to a

Department of Energy facility. The

reactor has been completely dismantled,

and all requirements pertaining to

residual radioactivity, personnel and

external radiation exposure, and fuel