9412 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 1995 / Notices

licensees to develop an implementation

plan with supporting analyses and

justifications and to notify NRC of

implementation of that plan prior to

establishing a performance-based leak

test program.

Copies of the submittal may be

inspected or obtained for a fee from the

NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L

Street NW., Lower Level, Washington,

DC 20037.

Comments and questions can be

directed by mail to the OMB reviewer:

Troy Hillier, Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs (3150–0011), NEOB–

10202, Office of Management and

Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

Comments may also be communicated

by telephone at (202) 395–3085.

The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda

Jo Shelton, (301) 415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day

of February, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Gerald F. Cranford,

Designated Senior Official for Information

Resources Management.

[FR Doc. 95–4008 Filed 2–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 50–461]

Illinois Power Company; 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. NPF–

62, issued to the Illinois Power

Company (the licensee) for operation of

the Clinton Power Station, Unit 1,

located in DeWitt County, Illinois.

The proposed amendment would

modify Technical Specifications (TSs)

3.8.2, ‘‘AC Sources-Shutdown;’’ 3.8.5,

‘‘DC Sources-Shutdown;’’ and 3.8.8,

‘‘Inverters-Shutdown.’’ The proposed

changes revise the operability

requirements for the Division 3 diesel

generator and the Division 3 and 4

batteries, battery chargers, and inverters

to apply only when the high pressure

core spray system is required to be

OPERABLE.

The onsite Class 1E safety-related

power systems at the Clinton Power

Station include AC, DC and

uninterruptible AC bus power systems.

The Class 1E AC power system supplies

power to the unit Class 1E loads and

consists of 4160–V switchgear, 480–V

unit substations, and 480–V motor

control centers (some of which include

480–120/208–V transformers and

distribution panels). The system

includes diesel generators that serve as

standby power sources, independent of

any other onsite or offsite source. The

onsite system is divided into three

divisions, each with its own

independent distribution network,

diesel generator (DG), and redundant

load group. Each division is capable of

being supplied by one onsite (DG) and

two offsite sources of electrical power

for serving the unit Class 1E AC loads.

The Class 1E DC power system

supplies 125 VDC power to unit Class

1E loads. The primary sources are

battery chargers. The system includes

batteries, battery chargers, motor control

centers, and DC distribution panels. The

system is divided into four divisions,

each with its own independent

distribution network, battery, battery

charger and redundant load group.

The Class 1E uninterruptible AC bus

power system supplies 120 VAC power

to the nuclear system protection system

(NSPS) and miscellaneous Class 1E

loads. The system is also divided into

four divisions and includes

uninterruptible power supplies and

buses. The uninterruptible AC bus

power supply system is designed to

provide adequate uninterruptible power

to all the NSPS loads during all modes

of operation including abnormal and

accident conditions. Loads include

NSPS logic power, neutron monitoring,

process radiation monitoring, portions

of the leak detection system, reactor

water cleanup and residual heat

removal system sample line valves, and

scram discharge volume controls and

indication. The Division 4 Class 1E

power system components, which

require AC power to operate are

supplied by the Division 2 Class 1E AC

power system.

Since safety-related loads supplied

power by electrical power distribution

subsystems that are ‘‘fail-safe’’ or

otherwise do not need an electrical

power source to perform their intended

safety functions, Illinois Power believes

that the technical specification

requirements are overly restrictive as

related to Division 3 and 4, and place

unnecessary constraints on when

certain work can be performed or when

certain systems can be removed from

service relative to an optimal refueling

outage work schedule. The applicable

loads are primarily supplied by the

Division 3 and 4 electrical power

systems. Thus, Illinois Power is

requesting a relaxation from the

technical specification requirements

associated with Division 3 and 4

electrical power system requirements

that are applicable during plant

shutdown conditions.

The need for the technical

specification change was recently

identified during outage planning in

preparation for the fifth refueling

outage, scheduled to begin March 12,

1995, at the Clinton Power Station. The

change significantly affects ‘‘critical

path’’ work activities during the outage

and will prevent unnecessary delays in

plant startup. Any unnecessary delays

would result in a significant financial

impact on the utility.

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 issues of no significant

hazards consideration, which is

presented below:

(1) The proposed changes do not involve

a change to plant design and are limited to

requirements for operability of electrical

power sources when the plant is not

operating in MODES 1, 2, or 3. The proposed

changes will still ensure that sufficient

electrical power is required to be operable to

mitigate the consequences of postulated

accidents. As described previously, and

except for the source range monitors (SRMs),

the reduced redundancy of electrical power

sources to non-high pressure core spray

(HPCS) system loads is not safety significant

due to the fail-safe nature of those loads.

With respect to the SRMs, the SRMs are not

assumed to function to mitigate any design

basis accidents or transients. The SRMs

provide monitoring during plant startup and

refueling operations. In addition, there are no

accidents postulated to occur as a result of

a malfunction of electrical power sources

with the plant shut down. As a result, the

proposed changes will not result in an

increase in the probability or consequence of

any accident previously evaluated.

(2) The proposed changes do not involve

a change to plant design and are limited to

requirements for operability of electrical

power sources when the plant is not

operating in MODES 1, 2, or 3. In addition,

there are no accidents postulated to occur as

a result of a malfunction of electrical power
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 1995 / Notices 9413

sources with the plant shut down. As

discussed above, the components which

receive power from the Division 3 and 4

electrical power distribution subsystems do

not require electrical power to perform their

safety functions when the HPCS System is

not required to be operable for compliance

with Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO)

3.5.2, ‘‘ECCS-Shutdown.’’ As a result, the

proposed changes cannot create the

possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated.

(3) As described in the Bases for LCO 3.8.2,

‘‘AC Sources-Shutdown,’’ the technical

specification requirements ensure that the

unit has the capability to mitigate the

consequences of postulated accidents.

However, as also described in those Bases, a

single failure and a concurrent loss of all

offsite power or loss of all onsite power is not

required to be assumed. The proposed

changes only affect the requirements for

electrical power sources when the plant is

operating outside MODES 1, 2, and 3 and

only affect the requirements for the electrical

power sources for Divisions 3 and 4. Except

when the HPCS System is operable for

compliance with LCO 3.5.2, the requirements

for the Division 1 and 2 electrical power

sources are adequate to mitigate postulated

accidents, assuming a single failure or loss of

offsite or onsite power. The proposed

changes will ensure that both Division 3 and

4 inverters, batteries, battery chargers, and a

second qualified offsite circuit or the

Division 3 diesel generator is operable when

the HPCS System is required operable for

compliance with LCO 3.5.2. As a result, the

proposed changes do not result in a

significant reduction in the 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 Rules Review and

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom

of Information and Publications

Services, Office of Administration, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, and should cite

the publication date and page number of

this Federal Register notice. Written

comments may also be delivered to

Room 6D22, 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 March 20, 1995, 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 at the local public

document room located at the Vespasian

Warner Public Library, 120 West

Johnson Street, Clinton, Illinois 61727.

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
9414 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 1995 / Notices

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, Attention:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to Leif

Norrholm, Director, Project Directorate

III–3: petitioner’s name and telephone

number, date petition was mailed, plant

name, and publication date and page

number of this Federal Register notice.

A copy of the petition should also be

sent to the Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555,

and to Leah Manning Stetzner, Vice

President, General Counsel, and

Corporate Secretary, 500 South 27th

Street, Decatur, Illinois 62525, 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 February 14, 1995,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the

local public document room located at

the Vespasian Warner Public Library,

120 West Johnson Street, Clinton,

Illinois 61727.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Douglas V. Pickett,

Project Manager, Project Directorate III–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–4169 Filed 2–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND

BUDGET

Discount Rates for Cost-Effectiveness

Analysis of Federal Programs

AGENCY: Office of Management and

Budget.

ACTION: Revisions to Appendix C of

OMB Circular A–94.

SUMMARY: The Office of Management

and Budget revised Circular A–94 in

1992. The revised Circular specified

certain discount rates to be updated

annually when the interest rate and

inflation assumptions used to prepare

the budget of the United States

Government are changed. These

discount rates are found in Appendix C

of the revised Circular. The updated

discount rates are shown below. The

discount rates in Appendix C are to be

used for cost-effectiveness analysis,

including lease-purchase analysis, as

specified in the revised Circular. They

do not apply to regulatory analysis.

DATES: The revised discount rates are

effective immediately and will be in

effect through February 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert B. Anderson, Office of Economic

Policy, Office of Management and

Budget, (202) 395–3381.

Joun B. Arthur,

Associate Director for Administration.

Memorandum for the Heads of Departments

and Agencies

From: Alice M. Rivlin

Subject: 1995 Discount Rates for OMB

Circular No. A–94

On October 29, 1992, OMB issued a

revision to OMB Circular No. A–94,

‘‘Guidelines and Discount Rates for BenefitCost Analysis of Federal Programs.’’ The

revision established new discount rate

guidelines for use in benefit-cost and other

types of economic analysis.

The revised Circular specifies certain

discount rates that will be updated annually

when the interest rate and inflation

assumptions in the budget are changed.

These discount rates are found in Appendix

C of the revised Circular. The attachment to

this memorandum is an update of Appendix

C. It provides discount rates that will be in

effect for the period March 1995 through

February 1996.

The rates presented in Appendix C do not

apply to regulatory analysis. They are to be

used for lease-purchase and costeffectiveness analysis, as specified in the

Circular.

Attachement

Appendix C

(Revised January 1995)

Discount Rates for Cost-Effectiveness, Lease

Purchase, and Related Analyses

Effective Dates. This appendix is updated

annually around the time of the President’s

budget submission to Congress. This version

of the appendix is valid through the end of

February, 1996. Copies of the updated

appendix and the Circular can be obtained

from the OMB Publications Office (202–395–

7332). Updates of this appendix are also

available upon request from the Office of

Economic Policy (202–395–3381), as is a

table of past years’ rates.

Nominal Discount Rates. Nominal interest

rates based on the economic assumptions

from the budget are presented in the table

below. These nominal rates are to be used for

discounting nominal flows, as in leasepurchase analysis.

NOMINAL INTEREST RATES ON TREASURY NOTES AND BONDS OF SPECIFIED MATURITIES (IN PERCENT)

3-year 5-year 7-year 10-

year

30-

year

7.3 ..... 7.6 7.7 7.9 8.1

Analyses of programs with terms different

from those presented above may use a linear

interpolation. For example, a four-year

project can be evaluated with a rate equal to

the average of the three-year and five-year

rates. Programs with durations longer than 30

years may use the 30-year interest rate.

Real Discount Rates. Real interest rates

based on the economic assumptions from the

budget are presented below. These real rates

are to be used for discounting real (constantdollar) flows, as in cost-effectiveness

analysis.

REAL INTEREST RATES ON TREASURY

NOTES AND BONDS OF SPECIFIED

MATURITIES (IN PERCENT)

3-year 5-year 7-year 10-

year

30-

year

4.2 ..... 4.5 4.6 4.8 4.9

Analyses of programs with terms different

from those presented above may use a linear

interpolation. For example, a four-year

project can be evaluated with a rate equal to

the average of the three-year and five-year

rates. Programs with durations longer than 30

years may use the 30-year interest rate.

[FR Doc. 95–4078 Filed 2–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3110–01–M