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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices 21485

involve a significant increase in the

probability of occurrence or consequences of

an accident or malfunction of equipment

important to safety previously analyzed in

the safety analysis report. The changes have

no impact on plant operations or the release

of radioactive materials.

2. The proposed changes to the TMI–2

License and Technical Specifications will not

create the possibility for an accident or

malfunction of a different type than any

previously evaluated in the safety analysis

report because no plant configuration or

operational changes are involved.

3. The changes will not involve a

significant reduction in the margin of safety

as defined in the basis for any technical

specification for TMI–2 because no change to

operational limits will be made.

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 30 days after the date of

publication of this notice will be

consideration 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 an 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 May 22, 2000, 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 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 (the 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.

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 specific

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

21486 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices

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

Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esq., Shaw, Pittman,

Potts & Trowbridge, 2300 N Street,

N.W., Washington, DC 20037, 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 Board that the petition

and/or request should be granted based

upon a balancing of the factors specified

in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(i)-(v) and 10 CFR

2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated April 6, 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 14th day

of April 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John L. Minns,

Project Manager, Decommissioning Section,

Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning,

Division of Licensing Project Management,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–9964 Filed 4–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–336]

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et

al.; 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 (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. DPR–

65 issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy

Company, et al. (the licensee) for

operation of the Millstone Nuclear

Power Station, Unit No. 2 located in

Waterford, Connecticut.

The proposed amendment would

correct an administrative error in

reference 6.9.1.8b.1 of the list of

documents specified in Technical

Specification 6.9.8b. This list of

documents describes the analytical

methods used to determine the core

operating limits.

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 licensee has provided its

analysis of the issue of no significant

hazards consideration, which is

presented below:

1. Involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed change will revise the date

in reference 6.9.1.8b.1 from ‘‘February 1995’’

to ‘‘January 1997.’’ The report title and

document number are correct and remain the

same as identified in Amendment No. 242.

This change is administrative in nature since

it does not have any impact on the actual

analytical methods used to determine the

core operating limits, the calculations

performed for Cycle 14, and the calculations

for future reloads. Therefore, this change will

not significantly increase 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.

The proposed change will revise the date

in reference 6.9.1.8b.1 from ‘‘February 1995’’

to ‘‘January 1997.’’ This change is

administrative in nature. This change will

not alter the plant configuration (no new or

different type of equipment will be installed)

or require any new or unusual operator

actions. It does not alter the way any

structure, system, or component functions

and does not alter the manner in which the

plant is operated. Therefore, the proposed

change will not create the possibility of a

new or different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

3. Involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety.

The proposed change will revise the date

in reference 6.9.1.8b.1 from ‘‘February 1995’’

to ‘‘January 1997.’’ This change is

administrative in nature. Therefore, the

proposed change will not result in 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 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 May 22, 2000, 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