License No. Dpr-28; Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Notice of Issuance of Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206, 69360-69361 [E5-6272]

Download as PDF 69360 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 15, 2005 / Notices Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend the meeting may notify Patricia Batie at (202) 295– 1500. United States/Chief of Staff; (301) 837– 1600. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Mary Ann Hadyka, Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05–22579 Filed 11–14–05; 8:45 am] [Docket Nos. 50–445 and 50–446] Dated: November 9, 2005. Victor M. Fortuno, Vice President for Legal Affairs, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary. [FR Doc. 05–22659 Filed 11–9–05; 4:29 pm] NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION SPECIAL NEEDS: BILLING CODE 7515–01–P Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research; Notice of Meeting BILLING CODE 7050–01–P NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Advisory Committee on the Electronic Records Archives; Notice of Meeting National Archives and Records Administration. ACTION: Notice of meeting. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) announces a meeting of the Advisory Committee on the Electronic Records Archives (ACERA). The committee serves as a deliberative body to advise the Archivist of the United States on technical, mission, and service issues related to the Electronic Records Archives (ERA). This includes, but is not limited to, advising and making recommendations to the Archivist on issues related to the development, implementation, and use of the ERA system. Date of Meeting: November 30, 2005. Time of Meeting: 9 a.m.–4 p.m. Place of Meeting: 700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20408– 0001. This meeting will be open to the public. However, due to space limitations and access procedures, the name and telephone number of individuals planning to attend must be submitted to the Electronic Records Archives Program at era.program@nara.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda • Committee organization and rules. • Review of NARA’s mission and activities in the electronic records arena. • Development of a plan of action for the committee. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lewis Bellardo, Deputy Archivist of the VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:50 Nov 14, 2005 Jkt 208001 In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– 463 as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting: Name: Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research (DMR) #1203. Dates and Times: December 8, 2005; 7:45 a.m.–8 p.m. (open: 8:15–11:45, 12:45–3:30, 5–6; closed: 3:30–5, 6–8). December 9, 2005; 8 a.m.–3 p.m. (open 9– 9:45). Place: Columbia University, New York, NY. Type of Meeting: Part open. Contact Person: Dr. Maija M. Kukla, Program Director, Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers, Division of Materials Research, Room 1065, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone (703) 292– 4940. Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations concerning progress of Materials Research Science and Engineering Center. Agenda: December 8, 2005—Closed to brief site visit panel. December 9, 2005—Open for Directors overview of Materials Research Science and Engineering Center and presentations. Closed to review and evaluate progress of Materials Research Science and Engineering Center. Reason for Closing: The work being reviewed may 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: November 8, 2005. Susanne Bolton, Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05–22635 Filed 11–14–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555–01–M PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 TXU Generation Company, LP; Biweekly Notice; Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses; Correction Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of Issuance; Correction. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document corrects a notice appearing in the Federal Register on October 25, 2005 (70 FR 61667), that incorrectly issued Amendment No. 120 for Units 1 and 2. The correct amendment No. is 122. This action is necessary to correct the incorrect amendment numbers. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mohan C. Thadani, PM, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulation Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone (301) 415–1476, e-mail: mct@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On page 61667, in the first column, in the first complete notice, sixteenth line, it is corrected to read from ‘‘Amendment Nos. 120 and 120’’ to ‘‘Amendment Nos. 122 and 122’’. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of November 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Mohan C. Thadani, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5–6273 Filed 11–14–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–271] License No. Dpr-28; Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Notice of Issuance of Director’s Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) has issued a Director’s Decision with regard to a Petition dated December 7, 2004, filed pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) section 2.206 by Mr. Raymond Shadis, hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Petitioner.’’ The Petition concerns the operation of the Vermont Yankee E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM 15NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 15, 2005 / Notices Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee). The Petition requested that the NRC take immediate action to address the degraded alert and notification system at Vermont Yankee. The Petition also requested that the NRC order Vermont Yankee to go into cold shutdown until Entergy Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) has provided a workable emergency warning system and until the NRC has verified the operability of that system. As the basis for his request, the Petitioner stated that the emergency warning system could not assure that the public would be notified in a timely manner should an emergency occur. The Petitioner stated that equipment and human failures over time were cumulatively sufficient to show that Vermont Yankee was operating without a functional emergency response plan. By teleconference on January 6, 2005, the Petitioner, along with two representatives of the organization Nuclear Free Vermont, discussed the petition with the NRC’s Petition Review Board. This teleconference gave the Petitioner and the licensee an opportunity to provide additional information and to clarify issues raised in the Petition. The NRC staff sent a copy of the proposed Director’s Decision to the Petitioner and to the licensee for comment by letters dated May 24, 2005. The Petitioner submitted comments by letter dated June 24, 2005, and these comments are addressed in the final Director’s Decision. The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has determined that the Petitioner’s request is denied. The reasons for this decision are explained in the Director’s Decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 (DD–05–03), the complete text of which is available for inspection at the Commission’s Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. A copy of the Director’s Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission’s review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission’s regulations. As provided for by this regulation, the Director’s Decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision, unless the Commission, on its own motion, VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:50 Nov 14, 2005 Jkt 208001 institutes a review of the Director’s Decision in that time. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of November 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5–6272 Filed 11–14–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Nuclear Security Coalition; BoilingWater Reactors of Mark I and II Design; Notice of Issuance of Director’s Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has issued a Director’s Decision with regard to a Petition dated August 10, 2004, filed by the Nuclear Security Coalition (the Petitioner, comprised of 45 independent organizations), pursuant to section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). The Petition was supplemented by Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, an organization which is a member of the Nuclear Security Coalition, on November 29, 2004; December 6, 2004; March 15, 2005; March 28, 2005; April 12, 2005; and April 19, 2005. The Petitioner requested that the NRC take the following actions: (1) Issue a demand for information to the licensees for all Mark I and II boiling-water reactors (BWRs) and conduct a 6-month study of options for addressing structural vulnerabilities; (2) present the findings of the study at a national conference attended by all interested stakeholders, providing for transcribed comments and questions; (3) develop a comprehensive plan that accounts for stakeholder concerns and addresses structural vulnerabilities of all Mark I and II BWRs within a 12month period; (4) issue orders to the licensees for all Mark I and II BWRs compelling incorporation of a comprehensive set of protective measures, including structural protections; and (5) make future operation of each Mark I and II BWR contingent on addressing their structural vulnerability with participation and oversight by a panel of local stakeholders. In a letter dated October 19, 2004, the NRC informed the Petitioner that the issues in the Petition were accepted for review under 10 CFR 2.206 and had been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for appropriate PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69361 action. A copy of the acknowledgment letter is publicly available in the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML042860465. A copy of the Petition is publicly available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML042370023. The Petitioners’ representatives met with NRC staff on September 23, 2004, to provide additional details in support of this request. This meeting was transcribed and the meeting summary with the transcript attached is publicly available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML042870571. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director’s Decision to the Petitioner for comment on June 29, 2005 (Accession No. ML051250010). The Petitioner and two of its member organizations commented on the proposed Director’s Decision by letters dated July 29, 2005 (Accession Nos. ML052340473; ML052350440; ML052310022). The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has determined that (1) The proposed demand for all licensees of Mark I and II BWRs to conduct a 6-month study of options for addressing structural vulnerabilities has, in effect, been granted; (2) the proposed national conference to present the findings of the study has been denied; (3) the proposed development of a comprehensive plan to account for stakeholder concerns and address structural vulnerabilities of all Mark I and II BWRs is considered to have been granted; (4) the proposed issuance of orders to the licensees for all Mark I and II BWRs compelling incorporation of a comprehensive set of protective measures is denied; and (5) the proposed requirement that future operation of each Mark I and II BWR be contingent on addressing their structural vulnerability, with participation and oversight by a panel of local stakeholders, is denied. The reasons for these decisions are explained in the Director’s Decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 (DD–05–04), the complete text of which is available in ADAMS, and is available for inspection at the Commission’s Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O– 1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records are accessible from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR reference staff at E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM 15NON1

Agencies

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 15, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69360-69361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-6272]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-271]


License No. Dpr-28; Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and 
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Notice of Issuance of Director's 
Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206

    Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) has 
issued a Director's Decision with regard to a Petition dated December 
7, 2004, filed pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR) section 2.206 by Mr. Raymond Shadis, hereinafter referred to 
as the ``Petitioner.'' The Petition concerns the operation of the 
Vermont Yankee

[[Page 69361]]

Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee).
    The Petition requested that the NRC take immediate action to 
address the degraded alert and notification system at Vermont Yankee. 
The Petition also requested that the NRC order Vermont Yankee to go 
into cold shutdown until Entergy Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy 
Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) has provided a workable 
emergency warning system and until the NRC has verified the operability 
of that system.
    As the basis for his request, the Petitioner stated that the 
emergency warning system could not assure that the public would be 
notified in a timely manner should an emergency occur. The Petitioner 
stated that equipment and human failures over time were cumulatively 
sufficient to show that Vermont Yankee was operating without a 
functional emergency response plan.
    By teleconference on January 6, 2005, the Petitioner, along with 
two representatives of the organization Nuclear Free Vermont, discussed 
the petition with the NRC's Petition Review Board. This teleconference 
gave the Petitioner and the licensee an opportunity to provide 
additional information and to clarify issues raised in the Petition.
    The NRC staff sent a copy of the proposed Director's Decision to 
the Petitioner and to the licensee for comment by letters dated May 24, 
2005. The Petitioner submitted comments by letter dated June 24, 2005, 
and these comments are addressed in the final Director's Decision.
    The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has 
determined that the Petitioner's request is denied. The reasons for 
this decision are explained in the Director's Decision pursuant to 10 
CFR 2.206 (DD-05-03), the complete text of which is available for 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, located at One 
White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland, or electronically from the Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html.
    A copy of the Director's Decision will be filed with the Secretary 
of the Commission for the Commission's review in accordance with 10 CFR 
2.206 of the Commission's regulations. As provided for by this 
regulation, the Director's Decision will constitute the final action of 
the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision, unless the 
Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the Director's 
Decision in that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of November 2005.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
J.E. Dyer,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-6272 Filed 11-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.