28602 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 5, 1996 / Notices

updates of previously approved

schedules. Such schedules also may

include records that are designated for

permanent retention.

Destruction of records requires the

approval of the Archivist of the United

States. This approval is granted after a

thorough study of the records that takes

into account their administrative use by

the agency of origin, the rights of the

Government and of private persons

directly affected by the Government’s

activities, and historical or other value.

This public notice identifies the

Federal agencies and their subdivisions

requesting disposition authority,

includes the control number assigned to

each schedule, and briefly describes the

records proposed for disposal. The

records schedule contains additional

information about the records and their

disposition. Further information about

the disposition process will be

furnished to each requester.

Schedules Pending

1. Department of Agriculture,

Agricultural Marketing Service (N1–

136–96–1). Change in retention period

for regulatory enforcement case files.

2. United States Department of the

Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (N1–

115–94–8). General administrative

records pertaining to project and power

management.

3. Department of State (N1–59–96–

12). Routine, facilitative, duplicative,

and fragmentary files identified during

review of the 1964–66 office files.

4. Department of Transportation,

Federal Transit Administration, Office

of Grants Management (N1–408–94–1).

Triennial review files for the Capital

and Operating Assistance Program.

5. Department of Transportation,

Surface Transportation Board (N1–134–

96–2). Change in retention standards for

recordation files.

6. Environmental Protection Agency

(N1–412–95–7). Reduction in retention

periods for permit and compliance files

and administrative files relating to

computer center operations.

7. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–95–12). Printouts and reports

produced by the Human Resource

Information System (the electronic

records produced by this system are

designated for permanent retention).

Dated: May 23, 1996.

James W. Moore,

Assistant Archivist for Records

Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–14010 Filed 6–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7515–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–286]

Port Authority of the State of New York

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. DPR–

64 issued to New York Power Authority

for operation of the Indian Point

Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3 (IP3)

located in Westchester County, New

York.

The proposed amendment would

allow the reactor coolant system (RCS)

leak test, which is performed after each

refueling outage, to be conducted at

normal operating pressure as opposed to

being conducted at 2335 psig.

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. Does the proposed license amendment

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated?

Response: The proposed license

amendment does not involve a significant

increase in the probability or consequences

of an accident previously evaluated. The

change proposes a system leakage test for the

RCS that is comparable to the hydrostatic test

that it replaces, as acknowledged by the NRC

approval of ASME [American Society of

Mechanical Engineers] Code Case N–498,

‘‘Alternative Rules for 10-Year Hydrostatic

Pressure Testing for Class 1 and 2 Systems

Section XI, Division 1,’’ and the ASME Boiler

and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI. As

discussed in Section 2 [see application dated

April 26, 1996], ‘‘Evaluation of Change,’’ the

proposed change to substitute a system leak

test at normal operating pressure in lieu of

the hydrostatic test at 2335 psig will

minimize challenge to plant safety and

demonstrate leak tightness of the RCS.

Therefore, the proposed change would not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

2. Does the proposed license amendment

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated?

Response: The proposed license

amendment does not create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated. The proposed

changes do not involve the addition of any

new or different type of equipment, nor do

they involve the operation of equipment

required for safe operation of the facility in

a manner different from those addressed in

the Final Safety Analysis Report. As stated in

Section 2 [see application dated April 26,

1996] based on industry experience, it is

expected that any leaks would be discovered

by the leak test at normal operating pressure.

3. Does the proposed amendment involve

a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Response: The proposed license

amendment does not involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety. The proposed

changes do not adversely affect performance

of any safety related system or component,

instrument operation, or safety system

setpoints and do not result in increased

severity of any of the accidents considered in

the safety analysis. Although the current

basis states that if the system does not leak

at 2335 psig (operating pressure +100 psig) it

will be leak tight during normal operation,

industry experience demonstrates that leaks

are not discovered as a result of hydrostatic

test pressure propagating a pre-existing flaw

through wall. In most cases, leaks are

discovered when the system is at normal

operating pressure. Also, testing will

continue to be performed as required by

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code

Section XI.

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
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 5, 1996 / Notices 28603

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 July 5, 1996, 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 White

Plains Public Library, 100 Martine

Avenue, White Plains, New York 10601.

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.

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 Jocelyn

A. Mitchell: 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 Mr. Charles M. Pratt,

10 Columbus Circle, New York, New

York 10019, 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 April 26, 1996, which
28604 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 5, 1996 / Notices

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

White Plains Public Library, 100

Martine Avenue, White Plains, New

York 10601.

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 31st day of

May 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

George F. Wunder,

Project Manager, Project Directorate I–1,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–14044 Filed 6–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Biweekly Notice

Applications and Amendments to

Facility Operating Licenses Involving

No Significant Hazards Considerations

I. Background

Pursuant to Public Law 97-415, the

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(the Commission or NRC staff) is

publishing this regular biweekly notice.

Public Law 97-415 revised section 189

of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as

amended (the Act), to require the

Commission to publish notice of any

amendments issued, or proposed to be

issued, under a new provision of section

189 of the Act. This provision grants the

Commission the authority to issue and

make immediately effective any

amendment to an operating license

upon a determination by the

Commission that such amendment

involves no significant hazards

consideration, notwithstanding the

pendency before the Commission of a

request for a hearing from any person.

This biweekly notice includes all

notices of amendments issued, or

proposed to be issued from May 11,

1996, through May 23, 1996. The last

biweekly notice was published on May

22, 1996 (61 FR 25696).

Notice Of Consideration Of Issuance Of

Amendments To Facility Operating

Licenses, Proposed No Significant

Hazards onsideration Determination,

And Opportunity For A Hearing

The Commission has made a

proposed determination that the

following amendment requests involve

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. The basis for this

proposed determination for each

amendment request is shown below.

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 before

action is taken. 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 Chief, Rules Review and

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom

of Information and Publications

Services, Office of Administration, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555-0001, 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 a hearing and petitions

for leave to intervene is discussed

below.

By July 5, 1996, 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 for the particular

facility involved. 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 a 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 a 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