Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices 21483

Washington, DC, 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

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, 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

William D. Johnson, Vice President and

Corporate Secretary, Carolina Power &

Light Company, Post Office Box 1551,

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602.

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 April 14, 2000, which

is available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, 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 17th day

of April, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Allen G. Hansen,

Project Manager, Section 2, Project

Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–9965 Filed 4–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–22]

In the Matter of CBS Corporation (Test

Reactor at Waltz Mill, PA); Order

Approving Transfer of License and

Conforming Amendment

I

The CBS Corporation (CBS) is the

owner of the Test Reactor located near

Waltz Mill in Westmoreland County,

Pennsylvania, and is authorized to

possess the facility as reflected in

License No. TR–2. The facility is

presently being decommissioned in

accordance with a decommissioning

plan approved by the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC or the

Commission). The NRC issued

Operating License No. TR–2 on June 19,

1959, to the Westinghouse Electric

Corporation pursuant to Part 50 of Title

10 of the Code of Federal Regulations

(10 CFR Part 50). The license was

amended on March 25, 1963, to

authorize the licensee to possess but not

operate the reactor. The license was

amended on July 31, 1998, and March

25, 1999, to reflect the change in the

legal name of the licensee for the Test

Reactor from the Westinghouse Electric

Corporation to the CBS Corporation.

The license was further amended on

September 30, 1998, to approve the

decommissioning of the reactor.

II

Under cover of a letter dated February

14, 2000, CBS submitted an application

to transfer the TR–2 license from CBS

Corporation to Viacom Inc. (Viacom).

This application was supplemented on

March 8 and 25, 2000 (collectively

referred to herein as ‘‘the application’’).

According to the application, CBS has

entered into an Agreement and Plan of

21484 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices

Merger with Viacom under which CBS

will merge with and into Viacom (the

‘‘Merger’’). The existing TR–2 license

held by CBS will be transferred to and

retained by Viacom, and Viacom will

have responsibility to decommission the

facility and terminate the license. The

application asserts that the proposed

transfer will not involve any change in

the operating organization, location,

facilities, equipment, or procedures

related to or personnel responsible for

the licensed activities. In addition, there

will be no effective change in the

personnel who are responsible for

completion of the decommissioning

effort as described in the TR–2

Decommissioning Plan.

The application also sought the

approval of a conforming amendment.

The conforming amendment would

remove references to CBS from the

facility license and replace them with

references to Viacom, and make other

miscellaneous administrative changes,

as appropriate, to reflect the transfer of

the license.

Approval of the transfer and

conforming license amendment was

requested pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80 and

10 CFR 50.90. Notice of the application

for approval and an opportunity for a

hearing was published in the Federal

Register on February 29, 2000 (65 FR

10841). A supplemental notice was

published on March 7, 2000 (65 FR

12040). No hearing requests or written

comments were filed.

Under 10 CFR 50.80, no license for a

production or utilization facility, or any

right thereunder, shall be transferred,

directly or indirectly, through transfer of

control of the license, unless the

Commission shall give its consent in

writing. Upon review of the information

in the application and other information

before the Commission, the NRC staff

has determined that Viacom is qualified

to hold the license, and that the transfer

of the license to Viacom is otherwise

consistent with applicable provisions of

law, regulations, and orders issued by

the Commission. The NRC staff has

further found that the application for

the proposed license amendment

complies with the standards and

requirements of the Atomic Energy Act

of 1954, as amended, and the

Commission’s rules and regulations set

forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; the facility

will be possessed in conformity with the

application, the provisions of the Act,

and the rules and regulations of the

Commission; there is reasonable

assurance that the activities authorized

by the proposed license amendment can

be conducted without endangering the

health and safety of the public and that

such activities will be conducted in

compliance with the Commission’s

regulations; the issuance of the

proposed license amendment will not

be inimical to the common defense and

security or to the health and safety of

the public; and the issuance of the

proposed amendment will be in

accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the

Commission’s regulations and all

applicable requirements have been

satisfied. The foregoing findings are

supported by a Safety Evaluation dated

April 13, 2000.

III

Accordingly, It Is Hereby Ordered that

the transfer of the license as described

herein to Viacom is approved, subject to

the following condition:

After receipt of all required regulatory

approvals of the merger between CBS and

Viacom, CBS shall inform the Director, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, in writing of

such receipt, and of the date of the closing

of the merger no later than five business days

prior to the date of closing. Should the

transfer of the license not be completed by

March 30, 2001, this Order shall become null

and void, provided, however, on written

application and for good cause shown, such

date may in writing be extended.

It Is Further Ordered that, consistent

with 10 CFR 2.1315(b), a license

amendment that makes changes, as

indicated in Enclosure 2 to the cover

letter forwarding this Order, to conform

the license to reflect the transfer is

approved. The amendment shall be

issued and made effective at the time

the proposed license transfer is

completed.

This Order is effective upon issuance.

For further details with respect to this

Order, see the initial application dated

February 14, 2000, and supplements

thereto dated March 8 and 25, 2000, and

the safety evaluation dated April 13,

2000, which are available for public

inspection at the NRC’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC.

Publicly available records will be

accessible electronically from the

ADAMS Public Library component on

the NRC Web Site, http://www.nrc.gov

(the Electronic Reading Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day

of April 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David B. Matthews,

Director, Division of Regulatory Improvement

Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–9966 Filed 4–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–320]

GPU Nuclear, Inc., Three Mile Island

Nuclear Station, Unit 2; 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 (NRC or the Commission)

is considering issuance of an

amendment to Facility Operating

License No. DPR–73 issued to GPU

Nuclear, Inc. (the licensee) for operation

of the permanently shutdown Three

Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2

(TMI–2), located in Middletown,

Pennsylvannia.

The proposed amendment would

reflect an administrative name change

from GPU Nuclear Corporation to GPU

Nuclear, Inc. Further, the proposed

license amendment makes an editorial

change to better describe TMI–2’s use of

site physical security, guard training

and qualification, and safeguard

contingency plans that are maintained

by the Three Mile Island Nuclear

Station, Unit 1, licensee, AmerGen

Energy Company, LLC. In addition, the

licensee requests that minor changes

(mainly in titles) be made in Section 6.0

of the Technical Specifications to reflect

the TMI–2 organizational and

administrative controls that will exist

following the sale of the Oyster Creek

Nuclear Generating Station.

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, (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 to the TMI–2

License and Technical Specifications do not