14308 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 51 / Thursday, March 16, 1995 / Notices

Foundation (NSF) announces the

following meetings:

Name: Advisory Panel for Ecological

Studies (#1751).

Date and time: April 5, 1995, 3 pm–5 pm;

April 6, & April 7, 1995, 8:30 am–5 pm each

day.

Place: Room 380, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Contact person: Dr. Clifford Dahm,

Program Director, Ecological Studies Cluster,

Division of Environmental Biology, Room

635, National Science Foundation, 4201

Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.

Telephone: (703) 306–1479.

Minutes: May be obtained from the contact

person listed above.

Agenda: To review and evaluate Ecosystem

Studies proposals as part of the selection

process for awards.

Name: Advisory Panel for Ecological

Studies (#1751).

Date and time: April 5, 1995, 3 pm–5 pm;

April 6 and April 7, 1995, 8:30 am–5 pm

each day.

Place: Room 390, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Contact person: Dr. Scott L. Collins,

Program Director, Ecological Studies Cluster,

Division of Environmental Biology, Room

635, National Science Foundation, 4201

Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.

Telephone: (703) 306–1479.

Minutes: May be obtained from the contact

person listed above.

Agenda: To review and evaluate Ecology

proposals as part of the selection process for

awards.

Name: Advisory Panel for Systematic and

Population Biology (#1753).

Date and time: April 19–21, 1995, 8 am–

5 pm each day.

Place: Room 375(1) and 375(3), National

Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Contact person: Dr. James E. Rodman,

Program Director, Systematic and Population

Biology Cluster, Division of Environmental

Biology, Room 635, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 306–

1481.

Minutes: May be obtained from the contact

person above.

Agenda: To review and evaluate

Systematic Biology proposals as part of the

selection process for awards.

Name: Advisory Panel For Systematic and

Population Biology (#1753).

Date and time: April 12–14, 1995, 8 am–

5:30 pm each day.

Place: Rooms 330 & 340, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22203.

Contact person: Dr. Mark Courtney,

Program Director, Systematic and Population

Biology Cluster, Division of Environmental

Biology, Room 635, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22203. Telephone: (703) 306–

1481.

Minutes: May be obtained from the contact

person listed above.

Agenda: To review and evaluate

Population Biology proposals as part of the

selection process for awards.

Name: Advisory Panel for Systematic and

Population Biology (#1753).

Date and time: April 20, 1995, 8 am–5 pm.

Place: 375(1), National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22203.

Contact person: Dr. James Rodman,

Program Director, Systematic and Population

Biology Cluster, Division of Environmental

Biology, Room 635, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22203. Telephone: (703) 306–

1481.

Minutes: May be obtained from the contact

person listed above.

Agenda: To review and evaluate

Partnerships for Enhancing Expertise in

Taxonomy (PEET) proposals as part of the

selection process for awards.

Type of meeting: Closed.

Purpose of meeting: To provide advice and

recommendations concerning support for

research proposals submitted to the NSF for

financial support.

Reason for closing: The proposals being

reviewed include information of a

proprietary or confidential nature, including

technical information: financial data, such as

salaries; and personal information

concerning individuals associated with the

proposals. These matters are exempt under 5

U.S.C. 552b (c)(4) and (6) of the Government

in the Sunshine Act.

Dated: March 13, 1995.

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–6544 Filed 3–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–247]

Consolidated Edison Company of New

York (Indian Point Nuclear Generating

Unit No. 2); Exemption

I

Consolidated Edison Company of

New York, Inc. (Con Edison or the

licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License No. DPR–26, which

authorizes operation of Indian Point

Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 (the

facility or IP2), at a steady-state reactor

power level not in excess of 3071.4

megawatts thermal. The facility is a

pressurized water reactor located at the

licensee’s site in Westchester County,

New York. The license provides among

other things, that it is subject to all

rules, regulations, and Orders of the

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(the Commission or NRC) now or

hereafter in effect.

II

Section III.D.1.(a) of Appendix J to 10

CFR Part 50 requires the performance of

three Type A containment integrated

leakage rate tests (ILRTs), at

approximately equal intervals during

each 10-year service period of the

primary containment. The third test of

each set shall be conducted when the

plant is shutdown for the 10-year

inservice inspection of the primary

containment.

III

By letters dated September 19, 1994,

January 13, 1995, and February 3, 1995,

Con Edison requested temporary relief

from the requirement to perform a set of

three Type A tests at approximately

equal intervals during each 10-year

service period of the primary

containment. The requested exemption

would permit a one-time interval

extension of the third Type A test by

approximately 24 months (from the

1995 refueling outage, currently

scheduled to begin in February 1995, to

the 1997 refueling outage) and would

permit the third Type A test of the

second 10-year inservice inspection

period to not correspond with the end

of the current American Society of

Mechanical Engineers Boiler and

Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code)

inservice inspection interval.

The licensee’s request cites the

special circumstances of 10 CFR 50.12,

paragraph (a)(2)(ii), as the basis for the

exemption. They point out that the

existing Type B and C testing programs

are not being modified by this request

and will continue to effectively detect

containment leakage caused by the

degradation of active containment

isolation components as well as

containment penetrations. It has been

the consistent and uniform experience

at IP2 during the five Type A tests

conducted from 1976 to date, that any

significant containment leakage paths

are detected by the Type B and C

testing. The Type A test results have

only been confirmatory of the results of

the Type B and C test results.

Additionally, the Indian Point 2

Containment Penetration and Weld

Channel Pressurization System provides

a means for continuously pressurizing

the positive pressure zones incorporated

into the containment penetrations, the

channels over the welds in the steel

inner liner and certain containment

isolation valves. This system provides

continuous monitoring of these

potential containment leakage paths,

thus providing further assistance during

power operation that a leak path does

not exist and further obviates the need
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 51 / Thursday, March 16, 1995 / Notices 14309

for Type A testing at this time.

Therefore, application of the regulation

in this particular circumstance would

not serve, nor is it necessary to achieve,

the underlying purpose of the rule.

IV

Section III.D.1.(a) of Appendix J to 10

CFR Part 50 states that a set of three

Type A leakage rate tests shall be

performed at approximately equal

intervals during each 10-year service

period.

The licensee proposes an exemption

to this section which would provide a

one-time interval extension for the Type

A test by approximately 24 months. The

Commission has determined, for the

reasons discussed below, that pursuant

to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(1) this exemption is

authorized by law, will not present an

undue risk to the public health and

safety, and is consistent with the

common defense and security. The

Commission further determines that

special circumstances, as provided in 10

CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), are present justifying

the exemption; namely, that application

of the regulation of the particular

circumstances is not necessary to

achieve the underlying purpose of the

rule.

The underlying purpose of the

requirement to perform Type A

containment leak rate tests at intervals

during the 10-year service period, is to

ensure that any potential leakage

pathways through the containment

boundary are identified within a time

span that prevents significant

degradation from continuing or

becoming unknown. The NRC staff has

reviewed the basis and supporting

information provided by the licensee in

the exemption request. The NRC staff

has noted that the licensee has a good

record of ensuring a leaktight

containment. All Type A tests have

passed with significant margin and the

licensee has noted that the results of the

Type A testing have been confirmatory

of the Type B and C tests which will

continue to be performed. The licensee

has stated to the NRC Project Manager

that they will perform the general

containment inspection although it is

only required by Appendix J (Section

V.A.) to be performed in conjunction

with Type A tests. The NRC staff

considers that these inspections, though

limited in scope, provide an important

added level of confidence in the

continued integrity of the containment

boundary. The NRC staff also notes that

the unique IP2 Containment Penetration

and Weld Channel Pressurization

System provides a means for

continuously monitored potential

containment leakage paths.

The NRC staff has also made use of

the information in a draft staff report,

NUREG–1493, which provides the

technical justification for the present

Appendix J rulemaking effort which

also includes a 10-year test interval for

Type A tests. The integrated leakage rate

test, or Type A test, measures overall

containment leakage. However,

operating experience with all types of

containments used in this country

demonstrates that essentially all

containment leakage can be detected by

local leakage rate tests (Type B and C).

According to results given in NUREG–

1493, out of 180 ILRT reports covering

110 individual reactors and

approximately 770 years of operating

history, only 5 ILRT failures were found

which local leakage rate testing could

not detect. this is 3% of all failures. This

study agrees well with previous NRC

staff studies which show that Type B

and C testing can detect a very large

percentage of containment leaks. The

IP2 experience has also been consistent

with these results.

The Nuclear Management and

Resources Council (NUMARC), now the

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), collected

and provided the NRC staff with

summaries of data to assist in the

Appendix J rulemaking effort. NUMARC

collected results of 144 ILRTs from 33

units; 23 ILRTs exceeded 1.0La. Of

these, only nine were not due to Type

B or C leakage penalties. The NEI data

also added another perspective. The NEI

data show that in about one-third of the

cases exceeding allowable leakage, the

as-found leakage was less than 2La; in

one case the leakage was found to be

approximately 2La; in one case the asfound leakage was less than 3La; one

case approached 10La; and in one case

the leakage was found to be

approximately 21La. For about half of

the failed ILRTs the as-found leakage

was not quantified. These data show

that, for those ILRTs for which the

leakage was quantified, the leakage

values are small in comparison to the

leakage value at which the risk to the

public starts to increase over the value

of risk corresponding to La

(approximately 200La, as discussed in

NUREG–1493). Therefore, based on

these considerations, it is unlikely that

an extension of one cycle for the

performance of the Appendix J, Type A

test at IP2 would result in significant

degradation of the overall containment

integrity. As a result, the application of

the regulation in these particular

circumstances is not necessary to

achieve the underlying purpose of the

rule.

Based on generic and plant specific

data, the NRC staff finds the basis for

the licensee’s proposed exemption to

allow a one-time exemption to permit a

schedular extension of one cycle for the

performance of the Appendix J, Type A

test, provided that the general

containment inspection is performed, to

be acceptable.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the

Commission has determined that

granting this Exemption will not have a

significant impact on the environment

(60 FR 12787).

This Exemption is effective upon

issuance and shall expire at the

completion of the 1997 refueling outage.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of March 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Steven A. Varga,

Director, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–6483 Filed 3–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Agency Forms Submitted for OMB

Review

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad

Retirement Board has submitted the

following proposal(s) for the collection

of information to the Office of

Management and Budget for review and

approval.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL(S):

(1) Collection title: Withholding

Certificate for Railroad Retirement

Monthly Annuity Payments

(2) Form(s) submitted: RRB W–4P

(3) OMB Number: 3220–0149

(4) Expiration date of current OMB

clearance: April 30, 1995

(5) Type of request: Revision of a

currently approved collection

(6) Respondents: Individuals or

households

(7) Estimated annual number of

respondents: 31,000

(8) Total annual responses: 31,000

(9) Total annual reporting hours: 1

(10) Collection description: Under

Public Law 98–76 railroad retirement

beneficiaries’ Tier 2, dual vested and

supplemental benefits are subject to

income tax under private pension

rules. Under Public Law 99–514, the

non-social security equivalent benefit

portion of Tier 1 is also taxable under

private pension rules. The collection

obtains the information needed by the

Railroad Retirement Board to

implement the income tax

withholding provisions.