Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices 16179

ANSI/UL 1769—Cylinder Valves

ANSI/UL 1773—Termination Boxes

UL 1776—High-Pressure Cleaning

Machines

UL 1778—Uninterruptible Power

Supply Equipment

ANSI/UL 1786—Nightlights

UL 1795—Hydromassage Bathtubs

UL 1812—Ducted Heat Recovery

Ventilators

UL 1815—Nonducted Heat Recovery

Ventilators

UL 1863—Communication Circuit

Accessories

ANSI/UL 1876—Isolating Signal and

Feedback Transformers for Use in

Electronic Equipment

UL 1917—Solid-State Fan Speed

Controls

UL 1950—Information Technology

Equipment Including Electrical

Business Equipment

UL 1995—Heating and Cooling

Equipment

UL 2006—Halon 1211 Recovery/

Recharge Equipment

UL 2097—Reference Standard for

Double Insulation Systems for Use

in Electronic Equipment

Preliminary Finding

Underwriters Laboratories

Incorporated addressed all of the criteria

which had to be met for recognition as

an NRTL in its initial application and in

its further correspondence. For example,

the applicant submitted a list of its test

equipment and instrumentation; a roster

of its personnel including resumes of

those in key positions and copies of

position descriptions; a summary of its

listing, labeling, and follow-up services,

including examples; a statement of its

independence as a testing laboratory;

and a discussion of its control programs,

including the Q-Plus Program and a

copy of its Laboratory Operations

Manual; and descriptions of its

calibration system, appeals procedure,

recordkeeping and operational

procedures.

Nine major areas were examined in

depth in carrying out the laboratory

surveys: facility; test equipment;

calibration program; test and evaluation

procedures; test reports; records; quality

assurance program; follow-up listing

program; and personnel.

The discrepancies noted by the survey

teams in the on-site evaluations [Ex.

2B(1)] were adequately resonded to by

the applicant prior to the preparation of

the survey report and are included as a

integral part of the report.

With the preparation of the final

survey reports of Underwriters

Laboratories Incorporated, the survey

team was satisfied that the testing

facilities appeared to meet the necessary

criteria required by the standard, and so

noted in the On-Site Review Report

(Survey); see Ex. 2B.

Following a review of the application

file, and the on-site survey reports of the

Northbrook, Illinois; Melville, New

York; Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina; Santa Clara, California; Camas,

Washington; and the subsidiary Taipei,

Taiwan, and Hong Kong facilities, the

NRTL Recognition Program staff

concluded that the applicant appeared

to have met the requirements for

renewal of its recognition as a

Nationally Recognized Testing

Laboratory for the above noted facilities

and, therefore, recommended to the

Assistant Secretary that the application

be preliminarily approved.

Based upon a review of the completed

application file and the

recommendations of the staff, the

Assistant Secretary has made a

preliminary finding that the

Underwriters Laboratories Incorporated

facilities for which accreditation was

requested can meet the requirements for

recognition (Camas, WA), or renewal of

recognition (all others noted above), as

required by 29 CFR 1910.7.

All interested members of the public

are invited to supply detailed reasons

and evidence supporting or challenging

the sufficiency of the applicant’s having

met the requirements for renewal of its

recognition as a Nationally Recognized

Testing Laboratory, as well as Appendix

A, of 29 CFR 1910.7. Submission of

pertinent written documents and

exhibits shall be made no later than May

30, 1995, and must be addressed to the

NRTL Recognition Program, Office of

Variance Determination, Room N 3653,

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, U.S. Department of

Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210. Copies of the

UL application, the laboratory survey

reports, and all submitted comments, as

received, (Docket No. NRTL–4–93 , are

available for inspection and duplication

at the Docket Office, Room N 2634,

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, U.S. Department of

Labor, at the above address.

The Assistant Secretary’s final

decision on whether the applicant

(Underwriters Laboratories

Incorporated) satisfies the requirements

for renewal of its recognition as an

NRTL will be made on the basis of the

entire record including the public

submissions an any further proceedings

that the Assistant Secretary may

consider appropriate in accordance with

Appendix A of Section 1910.7.

Signed at Washington, DC this 22nd day of

March 1995.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7676 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–M

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

Meetings of Humanities Panel

AGENCY: National Endowment for the

Humanities.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(Public Law 92–463, as amended),

notice is hereby given that the following

meetings of the Humanities Panel will

be held at the Old Post Office, 1100

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20506.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David C. Fisher, Advisory Committee

Management Officer, National

Endowment for the Humanities,

Washington, DC 20506; telephone (202)

606–8322. Hearing-impaired individuals

are advised that information on this

matter may be obtained by contacting

the Endowment’s TDD terminal on (202)

606–8282.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

proposed meetings are for the purpose

of panel review, discussion, evaluation

and recommendation on applications

for financial assistance under the

National Foundation on the Arts and the

Humanities Act of 1965, as amended,

including discussion of information

given in confidence to the agency by the

grant applicants. Because the proposed

meetings will consider information that

is likely to disclose: (1) trade secrets and

commercial or financial information

obtained from a person and privileged

or confidential; or (2) information of a

personal nature the disclosure of which

would constitute a clearly unwarranted

invasion of personal privacy, pursuant

to authority granted me by the

Chairman’s Delegation of Authority to

Close Advisory Committee meetings,

dated July 19, 1993, I have determined

that these meetings will be closed to the

public pursuant to subsections (c)(4),

and (6) of section 552b of Title 5, United

States Code.

1. Date: April 20–21, 1995.

Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Room: 415.

Program: This meeting will review

applications submitted for Humanities

Projects in Media program for the March

10, 1995 deadline, submitted to the
16180 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices

Division of Public Programs, for projects

after September 1, 1995.

2. Date: April 27–28, 1995.

Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Room: 415.

Program: This meeting will review

applications submitted for Humanities

Projects in Media program for the March

10, 1995 deadline, submitted to the

Division of Public Programs, for projects

beginning after September 1, 1995.

David C. Fisher,

Advisory Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–7641 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7536–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. STN 50–528]

Arizona Public Service Company, et

al., Palo Verde Nuclear Generating

Station, Unit No. 1; Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption

from certain requirements of 10 CFR

Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraph

III.D.1.(a), Type A Tests, to the Arizona

Public Service Company, et al. (APS or

the licensee), for operation of the Palo

Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit

No. 1, located in Maricopa County,

Arizona.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

the licensee from the requirements of 10

CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraph

III.D.1.(a), to the extent that a one-time

schedular extension would permit

rescheduling the third containment

integrated leak rate test (ILRT) in the

first 10-year service period from the fifth

refueling outage (1R5) currently

scheduled for May 1995 to the sixth

refueling outage (1R6) planned for

September 1996. The requested

exemption would also allow the

decoupling of this third test from the

endpoint of the first 10-year inservice

inspection (ISI) period.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated December 28, 1994.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The current containment integrated

leakage rate test (ILRT) requirements for

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station,

Unit 1, as set forth in Appendix J, are

that, after the preoperational leak rate

test, a set of three Type A tests must be

performed at approximately equal

intervals during each 10-year period.

Also, the third test of each set must be

conducted when the plant is shut down

for the 10-year plant inservice

inspection. To date, for Palo Verde

Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, the

preoperational and the first two periodic

ILRTs have been conducted. The most

recent ILRT was conducted in February

1990, approximately 59 months ago.

Thus, in accordance with Appendix J,

an ILRT would have to be conducted

during the upcoming refueling outage

(1R5, scheduled for May 1995).

The licensee has requested a

schedular exemption from Appendix J.

Specifically, the exemption would allow

APS to delay the Unit 1 third Type A

test until the September 1996 refueling

outage (1R6) and allow APS to only

perform the three tests required by 10

CFR Part 50, Appendix J. As such, the

third Type A test would be performed

within 10 calendar years from the

common start date of the initial ISI

interval and 10 years and 8 months from

the date of Unit 1 commercial operation.

With this exemption, the interval

between the second and third Type A

test would be approximately 81 months.

The licensee also requested an

exemption that would allow the

decoupling of this third test from the

endpoint of the first 10-year inservice

inspection period. Specifically,

subsequent Type A testing would be

performed in accordance with the

requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,

Appendix J (three Type A tests every 10

years at approximately equal intervals),

commencing from the completion of the

Unit 1 sixth refueling outage (1R6). A

CILRT would not need to be performed

during the 10-year ISI outage planned

for the Spring of 1998 (1R7). Therefore,

the need for the licensee’s proposed

action is to allow a longer interval

between the Palo Verde Unit 1 second

and third periodic Type A ILRTs. This

action, along with decoupling the

requirement to perform an ILRT at the

end of the 10-year inservice inspection

period, will eliminate the need for an

additional test. The licensee concluded

that the extension of the Type A test

interval has a negligible impact on

overall risk and results in a cost savings.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that the proposed one-time

exemption would not increase the

probability or consequences of accidents

previously analyzed and the proposed

one-time exemption would not affect

facility radiation levels or facility

radiological effluents. The licensee has

analyzed the results of previous Type A

tests performed at the Palo Verde

Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1. The

licensee has provided an acceptable

basis for concluding that the proposed

one-time extension of the Type A test

interval would maintain the

containment leakage rates within

acceptable limits. Accordingly, the

Commission has concluded that the

one-time extension does not result in a

significant increase in the amounts of

any effluents that may be released nor

does it result in a significant increase in

individual or cumulative occupational

radiation exposure. Therefore, there are

no significant radiological

environmental impacts associated with

the proposed exemption.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

exemption only involves Type A testing

on the containment. It does not affect

nonradiological plant effluents and has

no other environmental impact.

Accordingly, the Commission concludes

that here are no significant

nonradiological environmental impacts

associated with the proposed

exemption.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

there is no measurable environmental

impact associated with the proposed

action, any alternatives with equal or

greater environmental impact need not

be evaluated. As an alternative to the

proposed action, the staff considered

denial of the proposed action. Denial of

the application would result in no

change in current environmental

impacts. The environmental impacts of

the proposed action and the alternative

action are similar.

The change will not increase the

probability or consequences of

accidents, no changes are being made in

the types of any effluents that may be

released offsite, and there is not

significant increase in the allowable

individual or cumulative occupation

radiation exposure. Accordingly, the

Commission concludes that there are no

significant radiological environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

exemption.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of resources not previously considered

in the ‘‘Final Environmental Statement

Related to the Operation of Palo Verde

Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2,

and 3,’’ dated February 1982.