41600 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Notices

1Originally, the FCC identified whether a station

qualified as a specialty station, but after it deleted

its distant signal carriage rules, it discontinued this

practice. See Malrite T.V. of New York v. FCC, 652

F2d 1140 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1143

(1982).

What is a Specialty Station?

The FCC regulations in effect on June

24, 1981, defined a specialty station as

‘‘a commercial television broadcast

station that generally carries foreignlanguage, religious, and/or automated

programming in one-third of the hours

of an average broadcast week and onethird of the weekly prime-time hours.’’

47 CFR 76.5(kk) (1981).

How is a Station Deemed To Be a

Specialty Station? 1

Under a procedure adopted by the

Copyright Office in 1989, see 54 FR

38461 (September 18, 1989), an owner

or licensee of a broadcast station files a

sworn affidavit attesting that the

station’s programming comports with

the 1981 FCC definition, and hence,

qualifies as a specialty station. A list of

the stations filing affidavits is then

published in the Federal Register in

order to allow any interested party to

file an objection to an owner’s claim of

specialty station status for the listed

station. Once the period to file

objections closes, we publish a final list

which includes references to the

specific objections filed against a

particular station owner’s claim. In

addition, affidavits that are submitted

after the close of the filing period are

accepted and kept on file at the

Copyright Office.

The staff of the Copyright Office,

however, does not verify the specialty

station status of any station listed in an

affidavit.

How Does the Staff of the Copyright

Office Use the List?

Copyright Office licensing examiners

refer to the final annotated list in

examining a statement of account where

a cable system operator claims that

particular stations are specialty stations.

If a cable system operator claims

specialty station status for a station not

on the final list, the examiner

determines whether the owner of the

station has filed an affidavit since

publication of the list.

How Often Has the Copyright Office

Published Specialty Station Lists?

The Copyright Office compiled and

published its first specialty station list

in 1990, together with an announcement

of its intention to update the list

approximately every three years in order

to maintain as current a list as possible.

55 FR 40021 (October 1, 1990). Its

second list was published in 1995. 60

FR 34303 (June 30, 1995). With this

notice, the Copyright Office is initiating

the procedure for the compilation and

publication of the third specialty station

list.

Does This Notice Require Action on the

Part of an Owner of a Television

Broadcast Station?

Yes, we are requesting that the owner,

or a valid agent of the owner, of any

eligible television broadcast station

submit an affidavit to the Copyright

Office stating that he or she believes that

the station qualifies as a specialty

station under 47 CFR 76.5(kk) (1981),

the FCC’s former rule defining

‘‘specialty station.’’ The affidavit must

be certified by the owner or an official

representing the owner.

Affidavits are due within 60 days of

the publication of this notice in the

Federal Register. There is no specific

format for the affidavit; however, the

affidavit must confirm that the station

owner believes that the station qualifies

as a specialty station under the 1981

FCC rule.

Notwithstanding the above, any

affidavit submitted to the Copyright

Office within the 45-day period prior to

publication of this notice need not be

resubmitted to the Office. Any affidavit

filed during this 45-day period shall be

considered timely filed for purposes of

this notice.

What Happens After the Affidavits Are

Filed With the Copyright Office?

Once the period for filing the

affidavits closes, we will compile and

publish in the Federal Register a list of

the stations identified in the affidavits.

At the same time, we will solicit

comment from any interested party as to

whether or not particular stations on the

list qualify as specialty stations.

Thereafter, a final list of the specialty

stations that includes references to any

objections filed to a station’s claim will

be published in the Federal Register.

In addition, affidavits that, for good

cause shown, are submitted after the

close of the filing period will be

accepted and kept on file at the

Copyright Office. Affidavits received in

this manner will be accepted with the

understanding that the owners of those

stations will resubmit affidavits when

the Office next formally updates the

specialty station list. An interested party

may file an objection to any late-filed

affidavit. Such objections shall be kept

on file in the Copyright Office together

with the corresponding affidavit.

Dated: July 28, 1998.

Marybeth Peters,

Register of Copyrights.

[FR Doc. 98–20737 Filed 8–3–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–440]

Notice of Consideration of Approval of

Transfer of License and Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License, Proposed No Significant

Hazards Consideration Determination,

and Opportunity for a Hearing; The

Cleveland Electric Illuminating

Company, Centerior Service Company,

Duquesne Light Company, Ohio

Edison Company, OES Nuclear, Inc.,

Pennsylvania Power Company, Toledo

Edison Company

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering the issuance of an order

under 10 CFR 50.80 approving the

transfer of Facility Operating License

No. NPF–58 issued to The Cleveland

Electric Illuminating Company,

Centerior Service Company, Toledo

Edison Company, Ohio Edison

Company, Pennsylvania Power

Company, OES Nuclear, Inc., and

Duquesne Light Company (the

licensees) with respect to operating

authority thereunder for the Perry

Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No.1, located

in Lake County, Ohio, and considering

issuance of a conforming amendment

under 10 CFR 50.90.

The proposed transfer of operating

authority under the license would

authorize a new operating company,

called the FirstEnergy Nuclear

Operating Company, to use and operate

the Perry Nuclear Power Plant and to

possess and use related licensed nuclear

materials in accordance with the same

conditions and authorizations included

in the current operating license. The

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company

would be formed by FirstEnergy

Corporation, the corporate parent of the

licensees except for Duquesne Light

Company, to become the licensed

operator for the Perry Nuclear Power

Plant and would have exclusive control

over the operation and maintenance of

the facility. The license would be

amended to reflect the transfer of

authority under the license. After

issuance of the transfer order and

conforming license amendment, the

owners of the facility will be authorized

only to possess the facility and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Notices 41601

Centerior Service Company will be

removed entirely from the license.

Under the proposed arrangement,

ownership of the Perry Nuclear Power

Plant will remain unchanged with each

owner retaining its current ownership

interest. The FirstEnergy Nuclear

Operating Company will not own any

portion of the Perry Nuclear Power

Plant. Likewise, the owners’ entitlement

to capacity and energy from the Perry

Nuclear Power Plant will not be affected

by the proposed change in operating

responsibility for the Perry Nuclear

Power Plant. The owners will continue

to provide all funds for the operation,

maintenance, and decommissioning of

the Perry Nuclear Power Plant. The

responsibility of the owners will

include funding for any emergency

situations that might arise at the Perry

Nuclear Power Plant.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, the

Commission may approve the transfer of

a license, or any right thereunder, after

notice to interested persons. Such

approval is contingent upon the

Commission’s determination that the

transferee is qualified to hold the

license and that the transfer is otherwise

consistent with applicable provisions of

law, regulations, and orders of the

Commission.

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 licensees have provided

their analysis of the issue of no

significant hazards consideration, which

is presented below:

The Perry Nuclear Power Plant has

reviewed the proposed changes and

determined that a significant hazards

consideration does not exist because

operation of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant,

Unit No. 1, in accordance with these changes

would:

1a. Not involve a significant increase in the

probability of an accident previously

evaluated because no accident initiators or

assumptions are affected. The proposed

changes are administrative and have no

direct effect on any plant systems. All

Limiting Conditions for Operation, Limiting

Safety System Settings, and Safety Limits

specified in the Technical Specifications will

remain unchanged.

1b. Not involve a significant increase in the

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated because no accident conditions or

assumptions are affected. The proposed

changes do not alter the source term,

containment isolation, or allowable

radiological consequences. The proposed

changes are administrative and have no

adverse effect on any plant system.

2. Not create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated because no new

accident initiators or assumptions are

introduced by the proposed changes. The

proposed changes are administrative and

have no direct effect on any plant systems.

The changes do not affect the reactor coolant

pressure boundary and do not affect any

system functional requirements, plant

maintenance, or operability requirements.

3. Not involve a significant reduction in

the margin of safety because the proposed

changes do not involve new or significant

changes to the initial conditions contributing

to accident severity or consequences. The

proposed changes are administrative and

have no direct effect on any plant systems.

The NRC staff has reviewed the

licensees’ 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.

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 September 3, 1998, the licensees

may file a request for a hearing with

respect to the proposed transfer of

operating authority under the license

and issuance of a conforming

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 Perry Public Library, 3753

Main Street, Perry, OH 44081. 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
41602 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Notices

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

present evidence and cross-examine

witnesses.

If a hearing is requested with respect

to the proposed amendment, 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 on the amendment 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, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, 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 Jay

E. Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts

and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20037, attorney for the

licensees.

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 June 30, 1998, 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

Perry Public Library, 3753 Main Street,

Perry, OH 44081.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day

of July 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Ronald R. Bellamy,

Acting Director, Project Directorate III–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–20783 Filed 8–3–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–346]

Notice of Consideration of Approval of

Transfer of License and Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License, Proposed No Significant

Hazards Consideration Determination,

and Opportunity for a Hearing; Toledo

Edison Company, Centerior Service

Company, and the Cleveland Electric

Illuminating Company

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an order under

10 CFR 50.80 approving the transfer of

Facility Operating License No. NPF–3

issued to the Toledo Edison Company,

Centerior Service Company, and The

Cleveland Electric Illuminating

Company (the licensees) with respect to

operating authority thereunder for the

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit

No. 1, located in Ottawa County, Ohio,

and considering issuance of a

conforming amendment under 10 CFR

50.90.

The proposed transfer of operating

authority under the license would

authorize a new company, FirstEnergy

Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC),

to use and operate Davis-Besse and to

possess and use related licensed nuclear

materials in accordance with the same

conditions and authorizations included

in the current operating license. FENOC

would be formed by FirstEnergy

Corporation, the corporate parent of the

licensees, to become the licensed

operator for Davis-Besse and would

have exclusive control over the

operation and maintenance of the

facility. The license would be amended

to reflect the transfer of authority under

the license.

Under the proposed arrangement,

ownership of Davis-Besse will remain

unchanged with each owner (The

Cleveland Electric Illuminating

Company and Toledo Edison Company)

retaining its current ownership interest.

FENOC will not own any portion of

Davis-Besse. Likewise, the owners’

entitlement to capacity and energy from

Davis-Besse will not be affected by the

proposed change in operating

responsibility for Davis-Besse. The

owners will continue to provide all

funds for the operation, maintenance,

and decommissioning by FENOC of

Davis-Besse. The responsibility of the

owners will include funding for any

emergency situations that might arise at

Davis-Besse.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, the

Commission may approve the transfer of

a license, or any right thereunder, after