Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 150 /Wednesday, August 5, 1998 / Notices 41875

the Commission in accordance with 10

CFR 2.730(f) early in the proceeding. In

addition, boards are encouraged to

certify novel legal or policy questions

related to admitted issues to the

Commission as early as possible in the

proceeding. The Commission may also

exercise its authority to direct

certification of such particular questions

under 10 CFR 2.718(i). The

Commission, however, will evaluate any

matter put before it to ensure that

interlocutory review is warranted.

4. Discovery Management

Efficient management of the pre-trial

discovery process is critical to the

overall progress of a proceeding.

Because a great deal of information on

a particular application is routinely

placed in the agency’s public document

rooms, Commission regulations already

limit discovery against the staff. See,

e.g.,10 CFR 2.720(h), 2.744. Under the

existing practice, however, the staff

frequently agrees to discovery without

waiving its rights to object to discovery

under the rules, and refers any

discovery requests it finds objectionable

to the board for resolution. This practice

remains acceptable.

Application in a particular case of

procedures similar to provisions in the

1993 amendments to Rule 26 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or

informal discovery can improve the

efficiency of the discovery process

among other parties. The 1993

amendments to Rule 26 provide, in part,

that a party shall provide certain

information to other parties without

waiting for a discovery request. This

information includes the names and

addresses, if known, of individuals

likely to have discoverable information

relevant to disputed facts and copies or

descriptions, including location, of all

documents or tangible things in the

possession or control of the party that

are relevant to the disputed facts. The

Commission expects the licensing

boards to order similar disclosure (and

pertinent updates) if appropriate in the

circumstances of individual

proceedings. With regard to the staff,

such orders shall provide only that the

staff identify the witnesses whose

testimony the staff intends to present at

hearing. The licensing boards should

also consider requiring the parties to

specify the issues for which discovery is

necessary, if this may narrow the issues

requiring discovery.

Upon the board’s completion of

rulings on contentions, the staff will

establish a case file containing the

application and any amendments to it,

and, as relevant to the application, any

NRC report and any correspondence

between the applicant and the NRC.

Such a case file should be treated in the

same manner as a hearing file

established pursuant to 10 CFR 2.1231.

Accordingly, the staff should make the

case file available to all parties and

should periodically update it.

Except for establishment of the case

file, generally the licensing board

should suspend discovery against the

staff until the staff issues its review

documents regarding the application.

Unless the presiding officer has found

that starting discovery against the staff

before the staff’s review documents are

issued will expedite the hearing,

discovery against the staff on safety

issues may commence upon issuance of

the SER, and discovery on

environmental issues upon issuance of

the FES. Upon issuance of an SER or

FES regarding an application, and

consistent with such limitations as may

be appropriate to protect proprietary or

other properly withheld information,

the staff should update the case file to

include the SER and FES and any

supporting documents relied upon in

the SER or FES not already included in

the file.

The foregoing procedures should

allow the boards to set reasonable

bounds and schedules for any remaining

discovery, e.g., by limiting the number

of rounds of interrogatories or

depositions or the time for completion

of discovery, and thereby reduce the

time spent in the prehearing stage of the

hearing process. In particular, the board

should allow only a single round of

discovery regarding admitted

contentions related to the SER or the

FES, and the discovery respective to

each document should commence

shortly after its issuance.

III. Conclusion

The Commission reiterates its longstanding commitment to the expeditious

completion of adjudicatory proceedings

while still ensuring that hearings are fair

and produce an adequate record for

decision. The Commission intends to

monitor its proceedings to ensure that

they are being concluded in a fair and

timely fashion. The Commission will

take action in individual proceedings, as

appropriate, to provide guidance to the

boards and parties and to decide issues

in the interest of a prompt and effective

resolution of the matters set for

adjudication.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day

of July, 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Annette Vietti-Cook,

Assistant Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 98–20781 Filed 8–4–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Documents Containing Reporting or

Recordkeeping Requirements: Office

of Management and Budget Review

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of the Office of

Management and Budget review of

information collection and solicitation

of public comment.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) has recently

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review the

following proposals for the collection of

information under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35).

1. Type of submission, new, revision,

or extension: Revision.

2. Title of the information collection:

Proposed Rule, Conformance to

National Policies for Access to and

Protection of Classified Information, 10

CFR Parts 10, 11, 25, and 95.

3. The form number if applicable: Not

applicable.

4. How often the collection is

required: On occasion.

5. Who will be required or asked to

report: NRC regulated facilities and

other organizations requiring access to

NRC classified information or special

nuclear material.

6. An estimate of the number of

responses:

10 CFR Part 10—0

10 CFR Part 11—0

10 CFR Part 25—0

10 CFR Part 95—14

NRC Form 237—(12)

7. The estimated number of annual

respondents:

10 CFR Part 10—0

10 CFR Part 11—0

10 CFR Part 25—0

10 CFR Part 95—8

NRC Form 237—4

8. An estimate of the total number of

hours needed to complete the

requirement or request:

10 CFR Part 10—0

10 CFR Part 11—0

10 CFR Part 25—0

10 CFR Part 95—144

NRC Form 237—(2.4)
41876 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 150 /Wednesday, August 5, 1998 / Notices

9. An indication of whether Section

3507(d), Pub. L. 104–13 applies:

Applicable.

10. Abstract:—The Nuclear

Regulatory Commission is amending 10

CFR Parts 10, 11, 25 and 95 to conform

the requirements for the protection of

and access to classified information to

new national security policy

documents, to conform the addressee for

some reporting requirements to reflect

the results of a reorganization within the

NRC Office of Administration, and to

reflect the reassignment of some

responsibilities from the Executive

Director for Operations to the Deputy

Executive Director for Management

Services. The proposed mandatory

requirements are necessary to ensure

that classified information in the

possession of NRC licensees and others

under the NRC’s regulatory

requirements is protected in accordance

with current national policies. The

change in addressee is necessary to

ensure proper receipt of reports from

regulated entities, and the change in

responsibilities is necessary to

accurately reflect which NRC official is

responsible for certain decisions.

Submit, by September 4, 1998,

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 submittal may be

viewed free of charge at the NRC Public

Document Room, 2120 L Street NW,

(lower level), Washington, DC. You may

also review the submittal and provide

comments via the NRC’s interactive

rulemaking web site through the NRC

home page (http://www.nrc.gov). From

the home page, select ‘‘Rulemaking’’

from the tool bar. The interactive

rulemaking website can then be

accessed by selecting ‘‘Rulemaking

Forum.’’ This site provides the ability to

upload comments as files (any format),

if your web browser supports that

function. For information about the

interactive rulemaking web site, contact

Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301) 415–5905; email CAG@nrc.gov.

Comments and questions should be

directed to the OMB reviewer by

September 4, 1998:

Erik Godwin, Office of Information

and Regulatory Affairs (3150–0047, and

3150–0050) NEOB–10202 Office of

Management and Budget, Washington,

D.C. 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 31st day

of 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Keith R. Shaw,

Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the

Chief Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–20882 Filed 8–4–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Houston Lighting & Power Company

and City Public and Service Board of

San Antonio, et al.; Notice of

Consideration of Approval of

Application Regarding Proposed

Merger

Notice is hereby given that the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the

Commission) is considering approval,

by issuance of an order under 10 CFR

50.80, of an application concerning a

proposed merger between Central and

South West Corporation (CSW) and

American Electric Power Company, Inc.

(AEP). CSW is the parent holding

company of Central Power and Light

Company (CPL). Houston Lighting &

Power Company, City Public Service

Board of San Antonio, Central Power

and Light Company, City of Austin,

Texas, and STP Nuclear Operating

Company are holders of Facility

Operating Licenses Nos. NPF–76 and

NPF–80, issued on March 22, 1988, and

March 28, 1989, respectively. Facility

Operating Licenses Nos. NPF–76 and

NPF–80 authorize the holders to possess

the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2

(STP), and authorize STP Nuclear

Operating Company to use and operate

STP in accordance with the procedures

and limitations set forth in the operating

licenses. By application dated June 16,

1998, submitted under cover of a letter

dated June 19, 1998, as supplemented

by letter dated June 23, 1998, and

enclosures thereto, the Commission was

informed that CSW and AEP have

entered into a merger agreement under

which CSW would become a whollyowned subsidiary of AEP with CPL

remaining a wholly-owned subsidiary of

CSW. The application seeks approval of

the indirect transfer of control of the

interest held by CPL in the STP

operating licenses to AEP to the extent

effected by the proposed merger.

According to the application, the

merger will have no adverse effect on

either the technical management or

operation of STP since STP Nuclear

Operating Company, responsible for the

operation and maintenance of STP, is

not involved in the merger. Houston

Lighting & Power Company, City Public

Service Board of San Antonio, Central

Power and Light Company, City of

Austin, Texas, and STP Nuclear

Operating Company will remain

licensees responsible for their

possessory interests and related

obligations. No direct transfer of the

license will result from the merger.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, the

Commission may consent to the transfer

of control of a license after notice to

interested persons. Such consent is

contingent upon the Commission’s

determination that the holder of the

license following the transfer is

qualified to hold the license and that the

transfer is otherwise consistent with

applicable provisions of law,

regulations, and orders of the

Commission.

For further details with respect to this

proposed action, see the application

from CPL dated June 16, 1998,

submitted under cover of a letter dated

June 19, 1998, from Shaw, Pittman,

Potts, and Trowbridge, counsel for CPL,

and supplemental letter dated June 23,

1998, and enclosures thereto. These

documents are available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC

20555, and at the local public document

room located at the Wharton County

Junior College, J.M. Hodges Learning

Center, 911 Boling Highway, Wharton,

TX 77488.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day

of July 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Thomas W. Alexion,

Project Manager, Project Directorate IV–1,

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–20881 Filed 8–4–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–387 and 50–388]

Pennsylvania Power and Light

Company; Notice of Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

Licenses

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (Commission) has issued