Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices 23049

• Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated,

electronic, mechanical, or other

technological collection techniques or

other forms of information technology,

e.g., permitting electronic submissions

of responses.

III. Current Action

The BLS uses the Annual Refiling

Survey (ARS) forms to gather industrial

and geographical data on business

establishments. The revised ARS forms

are designed to verify and update

NAICS codes, geographical information,

and multiple worksite information.

Type of Review: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Agency: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Title: Annual Refiling Survey.

OMB Number: 1220–0032.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households; Business or other for-profit;

Not-for-profit institutions; Farms;

Federal government; State, local, or

tribal government.

Total Respondents: 2,272,998.

Frequency: Annually.

Total Responses: 2,272,998.

Form Total

respondents Frequency Totalresponses

Average time

per response

Estimated total

burden

(hours)

3023–NVS ........................................................................... 2,092,708 Once ................. 2,092,708 .083 173,695

3023–NVM .......................................................................... 37,334 Once ................. 37,334 .25 9,334

3023–NCA ........................................................................... 142,956 Once ................. 142,956 .167 23,874

Totals ........................................................................ 2,272,998 ...................... 2,272,998 206,903

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):

$0.

Total Burden Cost (operating/

maintenance): $0.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for Office of

Management and Budget approval of the

information collection request; they also

will become a matter of public record.

Signed at Washington, DC this 1st day of

May 2001.

W. Stuart Rust, Jr.,

Chief, Division of Management Systems,

Bureau of Labor Statistics.

[FR Doc. 01–11409 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–24–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

[Docket No. ICR–1218–0121(2001)]

Powered Platforms for Building

Maintenance (29 CFR 1910.66);

Extension of the Office of Management

and Budget’s (OMB) Approval of

Information-Collection (Paperwork)

Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of an opportunity for

public comment.

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public

comment concerning its request to

decrease and extend the informationcollection requirements specified in the

standard on Powered Platforms for

Building Maintenance (29 CFR 1910.66).

DATES: Submit written comments on or

before July 6, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

to the Docket Office, Docket No. ICR–

1218–0121(2001), OSHA, U.S.

Department of Labor, Room N–2625,

200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202)

693–2350. Commenters may transmit

written comments of 10 pages or less by

facsimile to: (202) 693–1648.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Theda Kenney, Directorate of Safety

Standards Programs, OSHA, U.S.

Department of Labor, Room N–3609,

200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202)

693–2222. A copy of the Agency’s

Information-Collection Request (ICR)

supporting the need for the information

collections specified by the standard on

Powered Platforms for Building

Maintenance is available for inspection

and copying in the Docket Office, or by

requesting a copy from Theda Kenney at

(202) 693–2222 or Todd Owen at (202)

693–2444. For electronic copies of the

ICR, contact OSHA on the Internet at

http://www.osha.gov/comp-links.html,

and select ‘‘Information Collection

Requests.’’

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Department of Labor, as part of its

continuing effort to reduce paperwork

and respondent (i.e., employer) burden,

conducts a preclearance consultation

program to provide the public with an

opportunity to comment on proposed

and continuing information-collection

requirements in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA–95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This

program ensures that information is in

the desired format, reporting burden

(time and costs) is minimal, collection

instruments are clearly understood, and

OSHA’s estimate of the informationcollection burden is correct.

Paragraph (e)(9) of the § 1910.66

(hereafter, the ‘‘Standard’’) requires that

employers develop and implement a

written emergency-action plan for each

type of powered-platform operation.

The plan must explain the emergency

procedures that employees are to follow

if they encounter a disruption of the

power supply, equipment failure, and

other emergency. Prior to operating a

powered platform, employers must

notify employees how they can inform

themselves about alarm systems and

emergency-escape routes, and

emergency procedures that pertain to

the building on which they will be

working. Employers are to review with

each employee those parts of the

emergency-action plan that the

employee must know to ensure their

protection during an emergency; these

reviews must occur when the employee

receives an initial assignment involving

a powered-platform operation and after

the employer revises the emergencyaction plan.

According to paragraph (f)(5)(i)(C),

employers must affix a load-rating plate

to a conspicuous location and on each

suspended unit that states the unit’s

23050 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices

weight and its rated load capacity.

Paragraph (f)(5)(ii)(N) requires

employers to mount each emergency

electric-operating device in a secured

compartment and label the device with

instructions for its use. After installing

a suspension wire rope, paragraphs

(f)(7)(vi) and (f)(7)(vii) mandate that

employers attach a corrosion-resistant

tag with specified information to one of

the wire-rope fastenings if the rope is to

remain at one location. In addition,

paragraph (f)(7)(viii) requires employers

who resocket a wire rope to either stamp

specified information on the original tag

or put that information on a

supplemental tag and attach it to the

fastening.

Paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii)

require that building owners, at least

annually, have a competent person:

Inspect the supporting structures of

their buildings; inspect and, if

necessary, test the components of the

powered platforms, including control

systems; inspect/test components

subject to wear (e.g., wire ropes,

bearings, gears, and governors); and

certify these inspections and tests.

Under paragraph (g)(2)(iii), building

owners must maintain and, on request,

disclose to OSHA a written certification

record of these inspections/tests; this

record must include the date of the

inspection/test, the signature of the

competent person who performed it,

and the number/identifier of the

building support structure and

equipment inspected/tested.

Paragraph (g)(3)(i) mandates that

building owners use a competent person

to inspect and, if necessary, test each

powered-platform facility according to

the manufacture’s recommendations

every 30 days, or prior to use if the work

cycle is less than 30 days. Under

paragraph (g)(2)(iii), building owners

must maintain and, on request, disclose

to the Agency a written certification

record of these inspections/tests; this

record is to include the date of the

inspection/test, the signature of the

competent person who performed it,

and the number/identifier of the

powered-platform facility inspected/

tested.

According to paragraph (g)(5)(iii),

building owners must have suspension

wire ropes thoroughly inspected for a

number of specified conditions by a

competent person once a month, or

before placing the wire ropes into

service if the ropes are inactive for 30

days or longer. Paragraph (g)(5)(v)

requires building owners to maintain

and, on request, disclose to OSHA a

written certification record of these

monthly inspections; this record must

consist of the date of the inspection, the

signature of the competent person who

performed it, and the number/identifier

of the wire rope inspected.

Paragaraph (i)(1)(iv) requires

employers to develop written work

procedures for the operation, safe use,

and inspection of powered platforms,

and to provide these procedures to their

employees for training purposes. In

meeting these requirements, an

employer may use pictorial methods

and operating manuals supplied by the

manufacturers of the system

components. In addition, paragraph

(i)(1)(ii) mandates that employers train

employees in: Recognizing safety

hazards associated with their work tasks

and developing measures to prevent

these hazards; general recognition and

prevention of safety hazards associated

with the operation of powered

platforms, including the powered

platforms they operate; the emergencyaction plan and work procedures

developed under paragraphs (e)(9) and

(i)(1)(iv), respectively; and the

inspection, maintenance, use, and

performance of their personal fall-arrest

system. On completion of this training,

paragraph (i)(1)(v) specifies that

employers must prepare a written

certification that includes the identity of

the employee trained, the signature of

the employer or the trainer, and the date

the employee completed the training. In

addition, the employer must maintain

an employee’s training certificate for the

duration of their employment and, on

request, make it available to OSHA.

Emergency-action plans allow

employers and employees to anticipate,

and effectively respond to, emergencies

that may arise during powered-platform

operations. Affixing load-rating plates to

suspended units, instructions to

emergency electric-operating devices,

and tags to wire-rope fasteners prevent

workplace accidents by providing

information to employers and

employees regarding the conditions

under which they can safely operate

these system components. Requiring

building owners to establish and

maintain written certification of

inspections and testing conducted on

the supporting structures of buildings,

powered-platform systems, and

suspension wire ropes provides

employers and employees with

assurance that they can operate safely

from the buildings using equipment that

is in safe operating condition. The

training requirements increase

employee safety by allowing them to

develop the skills and knowledge

necessary to effectively operate, use,

and inspect powered platforms,

recognize and prevent safety hazards

associated with platform operation,

respond appropriately under emergency

conditions, and maintain and use their

fall-protection arrest system. Training

certification permits employers to

review the training provided to their

employees, thereby ensuring that the

employees received the necessary

training. In addition, the paperwork

requirements specified by the Standard

provide the most efficient means for an

OSHA compliance officer to determine

whether or not employers and building

owners are providing the required

notification, certification, and training.

II. Special Issues for Comment

OSHA has a particular interest in

comments on the following issues:

• Whether the proposed informationcollection requirements are necessary

for the proper performance of the

Agency’s functions, including whether

the information is useful;

• The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of

the burden (time and costs) of the

information-collection requirements,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions; used;

• The quality, utility, and clarity of

the information collected; and

• Ways to minimize the burden on

employers who must comply; for

example, by using automated or other

technological information-collection

and -transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

OSHA is proposing to decrease the

existing burden-hour estimate, and to

extend OMB approval, of the collectionof-information requirements specified in

the Standard. In this regard, the Agency

is proposing to decrease the current

burden-hour estimate from 246,498

hours to 119,497 hours, a total reduction

of 127,001 hours. OSHA will summarize

the comments submitted in response to

this notice, and will include this

summary in its request to OMB to

extend the approval of these

information-collection requirements.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently-approved informationcollection requirement.

Title: Powered Platforms for Building

Maintenance (29 CFR 1910.66).

OMB Number: 1218–0121.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions; Federal

government; State, local or tribal

governments.

Number of Respondents: 900.

Frequency of Response: Annually;

monthly; occasionally.

Average Time per Response: Varies

from 1 minute (0.02 hour) (to maintain

a training record) to 10 hours (to

inspect/test building-support structures

and the components of a powered

platform).

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices 23051

Estimated Total Burden Hours:

119,497 hours.

Estimated Cost (Operation and

Maintenance): $0.

IV. Authority and Signature

R. Davis Layne, Acting Assistant

Secretary of Labor for Occupational

Safety and Health, directed the

preparation of this notice. The authority

for this notice is the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506)

and Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 3–

2000 (65 FR 50017).

Signed at Washington, DC on May 1st,

2001.

R. Davis Layne,

Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 01–11389 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[50–305]

Nuclear Management Company, LLC;

Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant;

Exemption

1.0 Background

Nuclear Management Company, LLC

(the licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License No. DPR–43, which

authorizes operation of the Kewaunee

Nuclear Power Plant (KNPP). The

license provides, among other things,

that the facility is subject to all rules,

regulations, and orders of the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the

Commission) now or hereafter in effect.

The facility consists of a pressurized

water reactor located on the licensee’s

KNPP site in Kewaunee County,

Wisconsin.

2.0 Request

By letter dated June 7, 1999, as

supplemented February 4, September

26, December 18, 2000, and March 12,

2001, Wisconsin Public Service

Corporation (WPSC) proposed three

exemptions and a license amendment

which affect the licensing basis of the

KNPP reactor pressure vessel (RPV).

Subsequently, WPSC was succeeded by

Nuclear Management Company, LLC

(NMC), as the licensed operator of the

KNPP. By letter dated October 5, 2000,

NMC (the licensee) requested the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

staff continue to process and disposition

licensing actions previously docketed

and requested by WPSC. By letter dated

December 18, 2000, the licensee

withdrew the license amendment.

The three exemptions requested by

the licensee address portions of the

following regulations: (1) Appendix G to

10 CFR Part 50, which sets forth fracture

toughness requirements for ferritic

materials of pressure-retaining

components of the reactor coolant

pressure boundary of light water nuclear

power reactors to provide adequate

margins of safety during any condition

of normal operation, including

anticipated operational occurrences and

system hydrostatic tests, to which the

pressure boundary may be subjected

over its service lifetime; (2) 10 CFR

50.61, which sets forth fracture

toughness requirements for protection

against pressurized thermal shock (PTS)

events; and (3) Appendix H to 10 CFR

Part 50, which requires the

establishment of a RPV material

surveillance program.

The licensee requested an exemption

from Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 to

replace the required use of the existing

Charpy V-notch and drop weight-based

methodology and allow the use an

alternate methodology to incorporate

the use of fracture toughness test data

for evaluating the integrity of the KNPP

RPV circumferential beltline weld based

on the use of the 1997 Edition of

American Society for Testing and

Materials (ASTM) Standard Test

Method E 1921 (E 1921–97) and

American Society for Mechanical

Engineering (ASME) Code Case N–629.

The exemption is required since

Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50, through

reference to Appendix G to Section XI

of the ASME Code pursuant to 10 CFR

50.55(a), requires the use of a

methodology based on Charpy V-notch

and drop weight data.

The licensee requested an exemption

from 10 CFR 50.61 to use an alternate

methodology to allow the use of fracture

toughness test data for evaluating the

integrity of the KNPP RPV

circumferential beltline weld based on

the use of the 1997 Edition of ASTM E

1921–97 and ASME Code Case N–629.

The exemption is required since the

methodology for evaluating RPV

material fracture toughness in 10 CFR

50.61 requires the use of the Charpy Vnotch and drop weight data for

establishing the PTS reference

temperature (RTPTS).

The licensee requested an exemption

from Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50 to

modify the basis for the KNPP RPV

surveillance program to allow the

acquisition and use of fracture

toughness data instead of the Charpy Vnotch impact testing required by

Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50. The

exemption is required since Appendix

H to 10 CFR Part 50 does not address

the testing of surveillance specimens for

direct measurement of fracture

toughness.

3.0 Discussion

10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) enables the

Commission to grant exemptions from

the requirements of Part 50 when

special circumstances are present such

that application of the regulation in the

particular circumstances would not

serve the underlying purpose of the

rule, or is not necessary to achieve the

underlying purpose of the rule.

The underlying purpose of Appendix

G to 10 CFR Part 50 is to set forth

fracture toughness requirements for

ferritic materials of pressure-retaining

components of the reactor coolant

pressure boundary of light water nuclear

power reactors to provide adequate

margins of safety during any condition

of normal operation, including

anticipated operational occurrences and

system hydrostatic tests, to which the

pressure boundary may be subjected

over its service lifetime.

The methodology underlying the

requirements of Appendix G to 10 CFR

Part 50 is based on the use of Charpy Vnotch and drop weight data. The

licensee proposes to replace the use of

the existing Charpy V-notch and drop

weight-based methodology by a fracture

toughness-based methodology to

demonstrate compliance with Appendix

G to 10 CFR Part 50. The NRC staff has

concluded that the exemption is

justified based on the licensee utilizing

the fracture toughness methodology

specified in Appendix A of the NRC

staff safety evaluation (SE), dated May 1,

2001. The use of the methodology

specified in Appendix A of the NRC

staff SE will ensure that P–T limits

developed for the KNPP RPV will

continue to be based on an adequately

conservative estimate of RPV material

properties and ensure that the pressureretaining components of the reactor

coolant pressure boundary retain

adequate margins of safety during any

condition of normal operation,

including anticipated operational

occurrences. Also, when additional

fracture toughness data relevant to the

evaluation of the KNPP RPV

circumferential weld is acquired as part

of the KNPP surveillance program, this

data must be incorporated into the

evaluation of the KNPP RPV using the

methodology of Appendix A of the NRC

staff SE. With these conditions, which

were agreed to by licensee letter, dated

March 12, 2001, the licensee’s requested

exemption from the use of the Charpy

V-notch and drop weight-based

methodology required by Appendix G to

10 CFR Part 50 may be granted in

accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(ii) in that