Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2001 / Notices 33111

Title: Notice to Participants and

Beneficiaries and the Federal

Government of Electing One Percent

Increased Cost Exemption.

OMB Number: 1210–0105.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households; Business or other for-profit;

Not-for-profit institutions.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondents: 10.

Responses: 10,000.

Estimated burden hours (Operating

and Maintenance): 333.

Estimated burden costs: $5,000.

Title: Calculation and Disclosure of

Documentation of Eligibility for

Exemption.

OMB Number: 1210–0106.

Affected Public: Individuals or

households; Business or other for-profit;

Not-for-profit institutions.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondents: 10.

Responses: 200.

Estimated burden hours (Operating

and Maintenance): 10.

Estimated burden costs: $100.

II. Desired Focus of Comments

The Department of Labor is

particularly interested in comments

that:

• 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 Actions

The Department intends to request an

extension of the ICRs currently

approved under control numbers 1210–

0105 and 1210–0106 without change to

the existing information collection

provisions. Although MHPA

requirements will not apply to benefits

for services furnished on or after

September 30, 2001 in accordance with

the sunset provision of section 712(f) of

ERISA, in order to ensure that

participants and beneficiaries are aware

of their rights under group health plans,

the Department intends to maintain the

clearance of the notice and disclosure

provisions of MHPA through September

30, 2001 and until such time as the

sunset provision has taken effect

without additional Congressional action

that would have the effect of extending

the duration of MHPA’s applicability.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for OMB

approval of the ICRs; they will also

become a matter of public record.

Dated: June 14, 2001.

Gerald B. Lindrew,

Deputy Director, Pension and Welfare

Benefits Administration, Office of Policy and

Research.

[FR Doc. 01–15536 Filed 6–19–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–29–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–334 and 50–412]

Firstenergy Nuclear Operating

Company (FENOC), 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 Nos. DPR–

66 and NPF–73 issued to FENOC, et al.

(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 amendment would

revise the BVPS–1 and 2 Technical

Specifications (TSs) to implement

improvements endorsed in the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) Final

Policy Statement on Technical

Specification Improvements for Nuclear

Power Reactors (58 FR 39132) which

was published in the Federal Register

on July 22, 1993. The major change

proposed in this request involves the

application of the TS screening criteria

from the policy statement (codified in

10 CFR 50.36) to evaluate the content of

the BVPS TS.

Consistent with the policy statement

guidance, the TS that do not meet the

criteria of 10 CFR 50.36 are proposed for

relocation to documents controlled by

BVPS. The proposed locations for the

relocated TS requirements are the

Licensing Requirements Manual (LRM)

and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual

(ODCM). The LRM and ODCM are

referenced in the BVPS–1 and 2

Updated Final Safety Analysis Reports

(UFSARs). Changes to documents

referenced in the UFSAR are required to

be made in accordance with 10 CFR

50.59. As such, changes to the relocated

TS requirements will be in accordance

with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 and

prior NRC review and approval of

changes will be requested if required by

10 CFR 50.59.

In order to support the relocation of

certain TS, this license amendment

request also proposes changes to

retained TS and Bases. In addition, this

request proposes the addition of a TS

Bases control program consistent with

the improved standard TS. These

changes are administrative in nature

and are made to support the relocation

of TS and provide clarifications and

enhancements that serve to make the

existing TS more consistent with the

content of the Improved Standard

Technical Specifications (ISTS) for

Westinghouse Plants contained in

NUREG–1431.

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. Does the change involve a significant

increase in the probability or consequences

of an accident previously evaluated?

The proposed amendment does not involve

a significant increase in the probability of an

accident previously evaluated because no

changes are being made to any event

initiator. Nor is any analyzed accident

scenario being revised. The initiating

conditions and assumptions for accidents

described in the UFSAR [Updated Final

Safety Analysis Report] remain as previously

analyzed.

The proposed amendment also does not

involve a significant increase in the

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated. The amendment does not reduce

the current operability requirements

33112 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2001 / Notices

contained in the TS proposed for relocation.

The proposed relocation of TS requirements

only affects the level of regulatory control

involved in future changes to the

requirements. Additionally, the TS proposed

for relocation do not meet the 10 CFR 50.36

criteria for retention in the TS.

The additional changes proposed to

retained TS in the LAR [license amendment

request], including the addition of the TS

Bases Control Program, are either

enhancements, clarifications, or

administrative in nature, and are made to

support the relocation of TS and to be more

consistent with the ISTS and plant specific

safety analyses. The changes to retained TS

have no adverse effect on the safety analyses

for design basis accidents described in the

UFSAR. The initiating conditions and

assumptions for accidents described in the

UFSAR remain as previously analyzed.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does

not involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

2. Does the changes create the possibility

of a new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated?

The proposed amendment does not involve

any physical changes to the plant or the

modes of plant operation defined in the TS.

The proposed amendment does not involve

the addition or modification of plant

equipment nor does it alter the design or

operation of any plant systems. No new

accident scenarios, transient precursors,

failure mechanisms, or limiting single

failures are introduced as a result of these

changes.

There are no changes in this amendment

that would cause the malfunction of safetyrelated equipment assumed to be operable in

accident analyses. No new mode of failure

has been created and no new equipment

performance requirements are imposed. The

proposed amendment has no effect on any

previously evaluated accident.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does

not create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

3. Does the change involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety?

The margin of safety depends on the

maintenance of specific operating parameters

and systems within design requirements and

safety analysis assumptions.

The proposed amendment does not involve

revisions to any safety limits or safety system

setting that would adversely impact plant

safety. The proposed amendment does not

alter the functional capabilities assumed in a

safety analysis for any system, structure, or

component important to the mitigation and

control of design bases accident conditions

within the facility. Nor does this amendment

revise any parameters or operating

restrictions that are assumptions of a design

basis accident. In addition, the proposed

amendment does not affect the ability of

safety systems to ensure that the facility can

be placed and maintained in a shutdown

condition for extended periods of time.

The relocation of TS does not reduce the

effectiveness of the requirements being

relocated. Rather, the relocation of the TS

results in a change in the regulatory control

required for future changes made to the

requirements. Additionally, the technical

specifications proposed for relocation do not

meet the 10 CFR 50.36 criteria for retention

in the technical specifications.

The requirements contained within the

affected TS will continue to be implemented

by the appropriate plant procedures (e.g.,

operating and maintenance procedures) in

the same manner as before. However, future

changes to the relocated requirements will be

controlled in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59

instead of a license amendment pursuant to

10 CFR 50.90. The provisions of 10 CFR

50.59 establish adequate controls over

requirements removed from the TS and

assure future changes to these requirements

will be consistent with safe plant operation.

The additional changes proposed to

retained TS in this LAR, including the

addition of the TS Bases Control Program, are

either enhancements, clarifications, or

administrative in nature, and are made to

support the relocation of TS and to be more

consistent with the ISTS and plant specific

safety analyses. These changes do not alter

any operating parameters or design

requirements assumed in a safety analysis for

systems or components important to the

mitigation and control of design bases

accident conditions within the facility. Nor

do these changes alter safety limits or safety

system settings required for safe operation of

the plant or the assumptions of any safety

analysis.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does

not involve 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.

Documents may be examined, and/or

copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public

Document Room, located at One White

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first

floor), Rockville, Maryland.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By July 20, 2001, 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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or

electronically on the Internet at the NRC

Web site http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/CFR/

index.html. If there are problems in

accessing the document, contact the

Public Document Room Reference staff

at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or

by e-mail to pdr@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

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2001 / Notices 33113

1 17 CFR 240.6a–1.

2 17 CFR 240.6a–2.

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, 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 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 March 28, 2001

(Agencywide Documents Access and

Management Systems (ADAMS)

Accession No. ML010950383), as

supplemented on May 1, 2001 (ADAMS

Accession No. ML011290073), which is

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

located at One White Flint North, 11555

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,

Maryland. Publicly available records

will be accessible from the ADAMS

Public Electronic Reading Room on the

Internet at the NRC Web site, http://

www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html.

If you do not have access to ADAMS or

if there are problems in accessing the

documents located in ADAMS, contact

the NRC Public Document Room

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–

415–4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day

of June, 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. 01–15474 Filed 6–19–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available

From: Securities and Exchange

Commission, Office of Filings and

Information Services, Washington, DC

20549.

Extension: Form 1,

Rules 6a–1 and 6a–2; SEC File No. 270–18;

OMB Control No. 3235–0017.

Rules 6a–3; SEC File No. 270–15; OMB

Control No. 3235–0021.

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget

requests for extension of the previously

approved collections of information

discussed below.

The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’) sets forth a regulatory scheme

for national securities exchanges. Rule

6a–1 under the Act 1 generally requires

an applicant for initial registration as a

national securities exchange to file an

application with the Commission on

Form 1. An exchange that seeks an

exemption from registration based on

limited trading volume also must apply

for such exemption on Form 1. Rule 6a–

2 under the Act 2 requires registered and

exempt exchanges: (1) To amend the

Form 1 if there are any material changes

to the information provided in the

initial Form 1; and (2) to submit

periodic updates of certain information

provided in the initial Form 1, whether

such information has changed or not.

The information required pursuant to

Rules 6a–1 and 6a–2 is necessary to

enable the Commission to maintain

accurate files regarding the exchange

and to exercise its statutory oversight

functions. Without the information

submitted pursuant to Rule 6a–1 on