18860 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 1995 / Notices

telephone (202) 219–8753. Oral

presentations will be limited to ten

minutes, but an extended statement may

be submitted for the record.

Organizations or individuals may also

submit statements for the record

without testifying. Twenty (20) copies of

such statements should be sent to the

Executive Secretary of the Advisory

Council at the above address. Papers

will be accepted and included in the

record of the meeting if received on or

before May 1, 1995.

Signed at Washington, DC this 7 day of

April, 1995.

Olena Berg,

Assistant Secretary, Pension and Welfare

Benefits Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–9138 Filed 4–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–29–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–325 and 50–324]

Carolina Power & Light 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 Nos. DPR–

71 and DPR–62 issued to the Carolina

Power & Light Company (the licensee)

for operation of the Brunswick Steam

Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 (BSEP)

located in Southport, North Carolina.

The proposed amendment would

provide an exception to Technical

Specification (TS) 3.0.4. TS 3.0.4 allows

entry of a unit into another operational

condition only if the conditions of the

Limiting Conditions for Operation

(LCOs) are met without reliance on TS

action statements. The exception

requested by the licensee would allow

a change in a unit’s operational

condition in a specific situation in

which the unit’s LCO concerning the

minimum number of operable offsite

power circuits is not fully satisfied.

Specifically, the exception would allow

an operational mode change of a unit if

the second unit is in Operational

Condition 4 or 5 (i.e., cold shutdown or

refueling) and one of the second unit’s

offsite power circuits is inoperable.

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 proposed amendments do not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated. The proposed change

would allow one unit to transition through

Operational Conditions 3, 2, and 1 to full

power with the opposite unit in Operation

Condition 4 or 5 and one off-site power

circuit out of service. The current

specification allows one unit to operate for

up to 45 days with the other unit shutdown

and one of the shutdown unit’s off-site power

circuits unavailable.

A significant level of redundancy of AC

sources remains, even with one of the

shutdown unit’s off-site circuits unavailable.

If the shutdown unit’s remaining offsite

circuit were to fail during the restart of the

other unit, some of the operating unit’s

components that receive AC power from the

shutdown unit’s emergency buses and their

functions would be unavailable until power

is restored to the emergency buses by the

emergency diesel generators. For example,

with Unit 1 shutdown and Unit 2

transitioning through startup to full power

operation, the Unit 2 components fed by

Emergency Buses E1 and E2 that would be

temporarily unavailable on a loss of both

Unit 1 off-site circuits include 2 of the 4

drywell coolers (4 of 8 drywell cooling fans),

one conventional service water pump,

Residual Heat Removal System (RHR) and

RHR service water pumps 2C and 2D, Low

Pressure Coolant Injection (LPCI) system

injection valves, torus spray valves, and two

diesel building exhaust fans. Were Unit 2

shutdown and Unit 1 transitioning through

startup to full power operation, a Group 6#

valve isolation and reactor building/

secondary containment isolations also occurs

on the operating unit (Unit 1), as well as a

Standby Gas Treatment System automatic

start. Temporary loss of these functions and

the associated isolations and actuations

would not cause an automatic unit reactor

trip; therefore, a loss of offsite power to

emergency buses on the shutdown unit

would not cause a transient initiating event

on the operating unit. Therefore, the

probability of an accident previously

evaluated is not significantly increased by

the proposed change.

A loss of auxiliary (off-site) power (LOOP)

event is an analyzed transient for the

Brunswick Plant. A loss of offsite power is

assumed to occur following a loss of all

external grid connections or faults in the

offsite power system itself. The Brunswick

Probabilistic Safety Assessment has modeled

the loss of offsite power event. The most

probably causes of a loss of offsite power

event involve natural events or transmission

network maintenance. Neither of these is

affected by the proposed change. Therefore,

the probability of a previously evaluated

transient is not significantly increased.

This change does not affect the remaining

off-site Technical Specification requirements

nor does it affect the on-site electrical

distribution Technical Specification

requirements. The existing Technical

Specifications require all four diesel

generators and the remaining offsite power

sources of both units be operable. Technical

Specifications 3.8.1.1.c and 3.8.1.1.d will still

be applicable to the unit transitioning

through the startup evolution. These

specifications dictate requirements for the

operating unit upon loss of a diesel generator

or an additional offsite power circuit. Thus,

operability of the emergency diesel

generators and the remaining offsite power

sources is unaffected by this change. Since

the emergency diesel generator capability is

unaffected by this change, the proposed

change would not affect the capability of

accident mitigating equipment; therefore, the

consequences of previously evaluated

accidents is not affected by the proposed

change.

2. The proposed amendments would not

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated. A LOOP is one of the

transients analyzed in the Brunswick Update

Final Safety Analysis Report. The proposed

action would not affect the conclusions of

that analysis. In addition, the Brunswick

design basis accident analyses accommodate

a loss of off-site power coincident with the

design basis accident and a single failure of

one emergency diesel generator. The

proposed change does not affect operability

requirements of the emergency diesel

generators. Therefore, no new malfunction or

accident is introduced by the proposed

action.

3. The proposed amendments do not

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety. The basis of Technical Specification

3.0.4 is to ensure that facility operation is not

initiated with either required equipment or

systems inoperable or other limits being

exceeded. Exceptions to this provision are

provided for specifications when startup

with inoperable equipment would not affect

plant safety. Sufficient redundancy of AC

power will continue to exist and no fewer

sources of AC power will be available than

would be allowed for power operation for up

to 45 days under Specification 3.8.1.1.a.

Therefore, the proposed change would not

impact safety and the margin of safety

imposed by either Technical Specification

3.0.4 or Specification 3/4.8.1 would not be

significantly reduced.

The NRC staff has reviewed the

licensee’s analysis and, based on this

review, it appears that the three
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 1995 / Notices 18861

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 May 15, 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

University of North Carolina at

Wilmington, William Madison Randall

Library, 601 S. College Road,

Wilmington, North Carolina 28403–

3297. 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

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.

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 Data gram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to David

B. Mathews, 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,
18862 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 1995 / Notices

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4 (1994).

3European-style options can only be exercised

during a specified period before the options expire.

4The components of the Index are: Argentina

Fund Inc.; Telefonica de Argentina S.A.; YPF

Sociedad Anonima S.A.; Aracruz Celulose S.A.;

Brazil Fund, Inc.; Brazilian Equity Fund, Inc.;

Banco Osorno Y La Union; Compania de Telefonos

de Chile; Empresa Nacional Electricidad S.A.;

Empresas La Moderna S.A. de C.V.; Grupo Tribasa

S.A. de C.V.; Coca Cola Femsa S.A.; Telofonos de

Mexico S.A.; Grupo Televisa S.A.; and Vitro

Sociedad Anonima.

DC 20555, and to General Counsel,

Carolina Power & Light Company, P.O.

Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina

27602, 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 31, 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 University of North Carolina at

Wilmington, William Madison Randall

Library, 601 S. College Road,

Wilmington, North Carolina 28403–

3297.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day

of April.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David C. Trimble,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II–I,

Division of Reactor Projects-I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–9141 Filed 4–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Request under review by Office of

Management and Budget

Acting Agency Clearance Officer: David

T. Copenhafer, (202) 942–8800

Upon written request copy available

from: Securities and Exchange

Commission, Office of Filings and

Information Services, 450 5th Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549

Reinstatement: The Focus Group

Research Survey

File No. 270–386

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

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

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) has resubmitted for the

Office of Management and Budget

approval for a request to execute a focus

group research survey. The survey will

attempt to assess the public’s

understanding of mutual funds and

other financial matters. The results will

enable the Commission to better

understand the level of investor

comprehension of mutual fund

prospectuses and financial issues.

The survey is estimated to require

approximately 126.00 burden hours.

Approximately 40 people will

participate in the focus group sessions.

Each session will contain 10 individuals

and will last about 3.15 hours.

Direct general comments to the

Clearance Officer for the Securities and

Exchange Commission at the address

below. Direct any comments concerning

the accuracy of the estimated burden

hours for compliance with the

Securities and Exchange Commission to

David T. Copenhafer, Acting Director,

Office of Information Technology, 450

Fifth Street, N.W. Washington D.C.

20549 and the Clearance Officer for the

Securities and Exchange Commission,

Office of Management and Budget,

Room 3208, New Executive Office

Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.

Dated: March 28, 1995.

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–9075 Filed 4–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–35573; International Series

Release No. 800 File No. SR–CBOE–95–20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by

the Chicago Board Options Exchange,

Inc. Relating to the Listing and Trading

of Options on the CBOE Latin 15 Index

April 6, 1995.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on March 20,

1995, the Chicago Board Options

Exchange (‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed

with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the

proposed rule change as described in

Items I, II, and III below, which Items

have been prepared by the CBOE. The

Commission is publishing this notice to

solicit comments on the proposed rule

change from interested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Terms of Substance of

the Proposed Rule Change

The CBOE proposes to list for trading

options on the CBOE Latin 15 Index

(‘‘Latin 15 Index’’ or ‘‘Index’’). The text

of the proposed rule change is available

at the Office of the Secretary, CBOE, and

at the Commission.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission, the

Exchange included statements

concerning the purpose of and basis for

the proposed rule change and discussed

any comments it received on the

proposed rule change. The text of these

statements may be examined at the

places specified in Item IV below. The

CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth

in Sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of

the most significant aspects of such

statements.

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

The purpose of the proposed rule

change is to permit the Exchange to list

and trade cash-settled, European-style 3

stock index options on the Latin 15

Index, a narrow-based index created by

the Exchange.

The Latin 15 Index consists of fifteen

components, including American

Depositary Receipts (‘‘ADRs’’),

American Depositary Shares (‘‘ADSs’’),

and closed-end country funds from four

Latin American countries: Argentina,

Brazil, Chile, and Mexico.4 The

exchange represents that no proxy for

the performance of these emerging

economies is currently available in the

U.S. derivative markets, and options on

the Index will provide investors with a

low-cost means to participate in the

performance of these markets or to

hedge the risk of emerging markets

investments.

Index Design

As noted above, the Latin 15 Index

consists of fifteen components,

consisting of ADRs, ADSs, and closedend country funds. All of the

components of the Index currently trade

on the New York Stock Exchange

(‘‘NYSE’’).

The components comprising the

Index ranged in capitalization from

$77.2 million to $10.6 billion as of

March 14, 1995. The total capitalization

as of that date was $38.8 billion; the

mean capitalization was $2.6 billion;