Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2001 / Notices 32963

detailed data for communications,

utilities, ADP, and office equipment.

The data in each file cover four fiscal

years: the year just completed, the

current year, the next year, and the

budget request year. A Portable

Document Format version of each file

may be printed from www.ows/

doleta.gov/ by clicking on the ‘‘News’’

link or the scrolling RJM article under

the News section; this will link to a site

where the user can select the files.

Please contact Tim Felegie at (202) 693–

2934 for a paper copy of the files or for

help in using the site.

State agencies would submit a

narrative justification to explain

incremental changes from the previous

year to the budget request year that are

not related to a PCI request. Examples

include personal services or personnel

benefit increases and changes to

minutes per unit (MPU) value.

State agencies would have an

opportunity to submit PCI requests for

certain types of investments: program

performance improvements, capital

projects for facilities and technology,

and law changes. State agencies would

incorporate the PCI request into the RJM

data file and the funding increase could

be expressed as an increase in MPU

value, an increase in non-workloadrelated staff years, or an increase in

NPS. The funding increase could be

requested for a single year or spread

over multiple years. ETA would

evaluate these requests on how they

address performance and capital

improvements, impact on customer

service, and cost benefit/cost avoidance.

ETA would load the Excel file data

into a database for array and analysis.

Type of Review: New.

Agency: Employment and Training

Administration.

Title: Resource Justification Model.

Affected Public: State Government.

Cite/reference Total respondents Frequency Total responses

Average time

per response

(hours)

Burden

(hours)

RJM 1 ser .................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 41 2,173

RJM 2 ser .................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 30 1,590

RJM 3 ser .................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 6 318

RJM 4 ser .................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 12 636

RJM 5 ser .................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 12 636

RJM 6 ser .................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 7 371

Narrative ..................................................................... 53 Anually ............................. 53 11 583

PCI ............................................................................. 53 Anually ............................. 53 114 6,042

Totals ............................................................... ...................... .......................................... 424 ...................... 12,349

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):

$500,000 (based on variable cost per

State—negligible for some States and up

to $60,000 for others).

Total Burden Cost (operating/

maintaining): $375,028.

Comments submitted in response to

this comment request will be

summarized and/or included in the

request for Office of Management and

Budget approval of the information

collection request; they will also

become a matter of public record.

Dated: June 11, 2001.

Grace A. Kilbane,

Administrator, Office of Workforce Security.

[FR Doc. 01–15360 Filed 6–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–334 and 50–412]

Firstenergy Nuclear Operating

Company, et al.; Notice of

Consideration of Issuance of

Amendments to Facility Operating

Licenses and Opportunity for a

Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of amendments to

Facility Operating License (OL) Nos.

DPR–66 and NPF–73, issued to

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating

Company, et al. (FENOC, the licensee),

for operation of the Beaver Valley Power

Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (BVPS–1 and

2), located in Shippingport,

Pennsylvania.

The proposed amendments would

change the OLs and technical

specifications for BVPS–1 and 2 to

reflect an increase in the licensed core

power level for each unit to 2689

megawatts (thermal), approximately 1.4

percent greater than the current level.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendments, the Commission

will have made findings required by the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

(the Act) and the Commission’s

regulations.

By July 19, 2001, the licensee may file

a request for a hearing with respect to

issuance of the amendments to the

subject facility operating licenses 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 petitions 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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and is

accessible electronically through the

Agencywide Documents Access and

Management System (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 (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 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

must 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 a 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 that may be entered

32964 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2001 / Notices

in the proceeding on the petitioner’s

interest. The petition must 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

that must include a list of the

contentions that the petitioner seeks to

have litigated in the hearing. 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 that

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.

The 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 amendments

under consideration. The contention

must be one that, if proven, would

entitle the petitioner to relief. A

petitioner who fails to file such a

supplement that 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.

Requests for a hearing and petitions

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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 Mary O’Reilly,

Attorney, FirstEnergy Legal Department,

FirstEnergy Corporation, 76 S. Main

Street, Akron, OH 44308, attorney for

the licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for a 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).

If a request for a hearing is received,

the Commission’s staff may issue the

amendments after it completes its

technical review and prior to the

completion of any required hearing if it

publishes a further notice for public

comment of its proposed finding of no

significant hazards consideration in

accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and

50.92.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendments dated January 18, 2001

(ADAMS Accession No. ML010230096),

as supplemented by letters dated

February 20 (ADAMS Accession No.

ML010540305) and April 12, 2001

(ADAMS Accession No. ML011130105),

which are available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, located at One White

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first

floor), Rockville, Maryland, and

accessible electronically through the

ADAMS Public Electronic Reading

Room link at the NRC Web site

(http://www.nrc.gov). If there are

problems accessing the document

located in ADAMS, contact the PDB

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209 or

301–415–4737, or send an e-mail to

pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of May 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Lawrence J. Burkhart,

Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–15371 Filed 6–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–361 and 50–362]

Southern California Edison; San

Onofre Nuclear Generating Station,

Unit Nos. 2 and 3; Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is considering

issuance of an amendment to Facility

Operating Licenses Nos. NPF–10 and

NPF–15, issued to Southern California

Edison Company (SCE or the licensee),

for operation of the San Onofre Nuclear

Generating Station (SONGS), Units Nos.

2 and 3, located in San Diego County,

California.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

The proposed action would amend

the facility license and the technical

specifications for SONGS Units 2 and 3,

to allow SCE to increase the maximum

reactor core power level for each unit

from 3390 megawatts thermal (MWt) to

3448 MWt, which is an increase of 1.42

percent of rated core thermal power for

SONGS Units 2 and 3.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

amendment dated April 3, 2001, and

supplemented April 23, May 11, May

25, and May 31, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action would permit an

increase in the licensed core thermal

power from 3390 MWt to 3448 MWt and

is needed to allow an increase in the net

electrical output of SONGS Units 2 and

3 and, thus, provide additional

electrical power to service domestic and

commercial areas of the licensee’s grid.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

In support of its request for the

proposed power uprate, SCE evaluated

the radiological effects of the proposed

action, and specifically evaluated its

radioactive waste management systems

including system/component activity

inventories and activity releases

associated with the liquid, gaseous, and

solid waste management systems, as

well as the process and effluent

radiological monitoring and sampling

systems. In addition, SCE evaluated the

non-radiological effects of the proposed

action. Based on its review of the

licensee’s evaluation of the

environmental impacts, the NRC staff

concludes that the proposed increase in

power would not result in a significant