Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 1995 / Notices 15309

comments should refer to United States

v. California Almond Growers Exchange

d/b/a Blue Diamond Growers, D.J. Ref.

90–5–2–1–1679.

The proposed Consent Decree may be

examined at the office of the United

States Attorney, 650 Capital Mall,

Sacramento, California; the Region IX

office of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, California 94105,

and at the Consent Decree Library, 1120

G Street, N.W., 4th Floor, Washington,

D.C. 20005, (202) 624–0892. A copy of

the proposed Consent Decree may be

obtained in person or by mail from the

Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street,

N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C.

20005. In requesting a copy, please

enclose a check in the amount of $6.50

for a copy of the consent decree (25

cents per page reproduction costs)

payable to ‘‘Consent Decree Library.’’

Joel M. Gross,

Acting Chief, Environmental Enforcement

Section, Environment and Natural Resources

Division.

[FR Doc. 95–7170 Filed 3–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

National Institute of Corrections

Request for Proposals

The National Institute of Corrections,

U.S. Department of Justice, is seeking

applications from organizations and

individuals able to develop and

distribute a quarterly newsletter on jail

mental health services. A grant of up to

$20,000 will be awarded for a 12-month

period beginning June 1, 1995.

Applications must be received by April

28, 1995. For more information and

application procedures, contact Linda

Wood, National Institute of Corrections,

Jails Division, 1960 Industrial Circle,

Suite A, Longmont CO 80501; 1–800–

995–6429, ext. 134; or fax 1–303–682–

0469.

Morris L. Thigpen,

Director.

[FR Doc. 95–7103 Filed 3–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–36–M

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

Meeting of Humanities Panel

AGENCY: National Endowment for the

Humanities.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(Public Law 92–463, as amended),

notice is hereby given that the following

meeting of the Humanities Panel will be

held at the Old Post Office, 1100

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20506.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David C. Fisher, Advisory Committee

Management Officer, National

Endowment for the Humanities,

Washington, D.C. 20506; telephone

(202) 660–8322. 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 meeting is 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

meeting 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 this meeting will be closed to the

public pursuant to subsections (c) (4),

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

States Code.

Date: April 20–21, 1995.

Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

Room: 430.

Program: This meeting will review

applications for Special Projects program for

the March 1995 deadline, submitted to the

Division of Public Programs, for projects

beginning after July 1, 1995.

David C. Fisher,

Advisory Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–7131 Filed 3–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7536–01–M

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Opportunity for Public Comment on

the Fourth Biennial Revision of the

U.S. Arctic Research Plan

In accordance with the Arctic

Research and Policy Act of 1984, Pub.

L. 98–373, the National Science

Foundation announces an Opportunity

for Public Comment on the Fourth

Biennial Revision of the U.S. Arctic

Research Plan.

PURPOSE: Section 109(a) of the Arctic

Research and Policy Act requires a

biennial revision of the U.S. Arctic

Research Plan (due in July 1995).

Section 109(a) of the Act further

requires the Interagency Arctic Research

Policy Committee to consult with a

number of groups during development

of the Plan. The Interagency Committee

and its staff and working groups have

prepared a draft revision to the Plan,

which will be available for review in the

following locations:

Arlington, Virginia: Office of Polar

Programs, Room 755, National

Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson

Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia;

Anchorage, Alaska: The Alaska

Resource Library, Federal Building,

222 W. 7th St., 1st Floor;

Juneau, Alaska: The Alaska State

Library, State Office Building, 333

Willoughby Avenue, Circulation

Desk, 8th Floor;

Fairbanks, Alaska: The Rasmuson

Library, University of Alaska,

Fairbanks, Reserve Desk.

Representatives of the groups named

in section 109(a) of the Act (residents of

the Arctic, the private sector and public

interest groups) as well as members of

the general public, are invited to obtain

a copy of the draft revision for review.

The biennial revision to the Arctic

Research Plan is organized to address

research needs in the following area:

1. Arctic Oceans and Marginal Seas;

2. Atmosphere and Climate;

3. Land and Offshore Resources;

4. Land-Atmosphere Interactions;

5. Engineering and Technology;

6. Social Science; and

7. Health.

Coordinated interagency efforts and

supporting programs are also discussed.

These include research in the Arctic

ocean, cultural and natural

characteristics of the Bering region,

environmental monitoring, arctic

contamination studies, data and

information, logistics, and international

activities.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Comments from

representatives of groups named in the

Arctic Research and Policy Act are

encouraged. Written comments should

be submitted to the address below by

April 25, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If

you would like to review a copy of the

draft biennial revision, but are unable to

visit one of the above locations, please

write to the following address: Arctic

Research Staff, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, Virginia 22230, or call (703)

306–1031, or FAX to (703) 306–0139.

Information will be available after

March 24, 1995.
15310 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 1995 / Notices

COSTS: None.

Charles E. Myers,

Head, Arctic Staff, National Science

Foundation.

[FR Doc. 95–7096 Filed 3–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–410]

Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.; 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–

69 issued to Niagara Mohawk Power

Corporation (the licensee) for operation

of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station,

located in Oswego County, New York.

The proposed amendment would

revise the Nine Mile Point Nuclear

Station, Unit 2, Technical Specifications

(TSs). Specifically, TS 4.6.1.2. a would

be modified to allow the second Primary

Containment Integrated Leakage Rate

Test (Type A) to be performed at the

fifth refueling outage (RF–05) or 72

months after the first Type A test

instead of the fourth refueling outage

(RF–04) as currently scheduled.

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. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit

2, in accordance with the proposed

amendment, will not involve a significant

increase in the probability or consequences

of an accident previously evaluated.

The proposed change for performance of

the second Type A test until RF–05 does not

increase the probability of a previously

analyzed accident occurring. Primary

containment leakage is not the precursor to

any analyzed event. Type A testing is done

to confirm the ability of the primary

containment to limit leakage consistent with

the safety analysis assumptions. Therefore, a

change in the test interval will not result in

an increase in the probability of an accident

previously analyzed. This has also been

confirmed by the risk assessment described

above [in amendment proposal].

Extension of the second Type A test will

not affect the containment’s ability to

maintain leakage below that assumed in the

safety analysis. The previous Type A test was

completed successfully, and there have been

no plant modifications (other than those that

required Type B or C testing) since the last

test which could directly affect the test

results. Type B and C testing of individual

penetrations has been satisfactory and will

continue to be performed in accordance with

the Technical Specifications. There have

been no pressure or temperature excursions

in the containment which could have

adversely affected containment integrity.

Hence, the ability of the containment to

maintain leakage within the Type A test

limits will be maintained. This testing

provides assurance that the consequences of

radioactive leakage area within 10CFR100

and GDC–19 limits. Therefore, the proposed

change will not involve a significant increase

in the consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

2. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit

2, in accordance with the proposed

amendment, will not create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

The proposed change for performance of

the second Type A test until RF–05 will not

affect the test methodology or acceptance

criteria nor does it alter the physical

containment structure or boundary in any

way. There will be no addition or removal of

plant hardware. No new plant operating

modes are being introduced. The primary

containment will continue to perform its

accident mitigation function of minimizing

leakage of radioactivity to the secondary

containment. Results of the previous Type A

tests are well below allowable limits, and

there have been no plant modifications since

the last test nor are any planned that could

directly impact the previous Type A test

results. The primary containment performs a

mitigation function and is not an initiator of

any analyzed event. A risk assessment was

performed which indicates that deferral of

the Type A ILRT will not result in any new

accident scenarios.

Therefore, the proposed change will not

create the possibility of a new or different

accident from any previously evaluated.

3. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit

2, in accordance with the proposed

amendment, will not involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety.

Safety margins are established through the

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 safety analyses as

reflected in the Technical Specification

Limiting Conditions for Operation.

Containment leak rates assumed in the safety

analyses are not increased by the proposed

change to the surveillance interval. The

acceptance criteria which must be met to

verify that leak rates remain within assumed

values will also not be changed.

Although the interval between the first and

second Type A tests is 72 months, no plant

modifications have been made nor are

planned which would invalidate past leak

test results which confirm acceptable

containment integrity. Furthermore, Type B

and C testing of individual penetrations has

been satisfactory and will continue to be

performed in accordance with the Technical

Specifications to assure that containment

integrity is maintained.

Therefore, the proposed change will 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 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,