Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC; Issuance of Director's Decision, 66492-66493 [2012-26926]

Download as PDF 66492 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Notices I. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers (and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR Part 2. Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for processing and resolving requests under these procedures. It is so ordered. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of October 2012. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. ATTACHMENT 1—GENERAL TARGET SCHEDULE FOR PROCESSING AND RESOLVING REQUESTS FOR ACCESS TO SENSITIVE UNCLASSIFIED NON-SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION IN THIS PROCEEDING Day Event/activity 0 ......................... Publication of FEDERAL REGISTER notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instructions for access requests. Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with information: Supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding. Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 requestor/petitioner reply). Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requestor of the staff’s determination whether the request for access provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC staff also informs any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents). If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need’’ or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for requestor/petitioner to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds ‘‘need’’ for SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s grant of access. Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s). (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI. If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a final adverse determination by the NRC staff. Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent with decision issuing the protective order. Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline. (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers. Decision on contention admission. 10 ....................... 60 ....................... 20 ....................... 25 ....................... 30 ....................... 40 ....................... A ........................ A + 3 .................. A + 28 ................ A + 53 ................ A + 60 ................ >A + 60 .............. Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) has issued a Director’s Decision with regard to a petition filed by Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, State of New York. The petition, dated March 28, 2011, was supplemented by a transcript of a public meeting held on May 9, 2011, between representatives of the petitioner and the NRC. The petition concerns the operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2, and 3 (Indian Point), owned by Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC (Units 1 and 2) and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC (Unit 3) and operated by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee). The petitioner asked the NRC to take immediate action and issue an Order requiring the following actions regarding Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2, and 3, that would staff determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer or the Commission, as BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos.: 50–003, 50–247, 50–286; NRC–2012–0265: License Nos.: DPR–5, DPR–26, and DPR–64] WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES (1) identify the violations of paragraphs F and G of Section III of Appendix R, ‘‘Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,’’ to part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,’’ which exist as of the date of the petition (March 28, 2011), at Indian Point Units 1, 2, and 3, (2) compel Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy, or the licensee), and its affiliates to comply on or before September 20, 2011, with the requirements in paragraphs F and G for all fire zones in Indian Point Units 2 and 3, and any Indian Point Unit 1 fire zone or system, structure, or component that Indian Point Units 2 and 3, rely upon, and (3) convene an evidentiary applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI request submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures. [FR Doc. 2012–26762 Filed 11–2–12; 8:45 am] Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC; Issuance of Director’s Decision VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:30 Nov 02, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM 05NON1 WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Notices hearing before the Commission to adjudicate the violation of paragraphs F and G at Indian Point Units 1, 2, and 3, by Entergy and its affiliates. As the basis for the petition, the petitioner (1) cited the population centers adjacent to the Indian Point facility, (2) described past investigations by both the NRC’s Office of Investigations and the Government Accountability Office on fire barriers, most specifically Thermo-Lag and Hemyc, (3) stated his belief that the NRC staff has not been aggressive in resolving fire barrier issues or in taking meaningful enforcement action toward Indian Point, (4) focused on the exemptions to Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 that the licensee submitted in March 2009, that rely upon operator manual actions (OMAs) in a large number of fire areas at Indian Point, (5) stated his belief that the regulations do not authorize OMAs as a means for protecting a redundant system from fire, and (6) referenced the accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan resulting from the March 11, ¯ 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and questioned whether plant operators would be physically capable of performing these duties. Finally, the petitioner expressed his belief that (1) the NRC should reserve exemptions for extraordinary circumstances, (2) the NRC should not approve the exemptions, and (3) Entergy has not made a serious effort to comply with Federal regulations. On May 9, 2011, the petitioner and the licensee met with the NRC’s Petition Review Board. The meeting provided the petitioner and the licensee an opportunity to provide additional information and to clarify issues cited in the petition. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director’s Decision to the petitioner and the licensee for comment on July 2, 2012. Comments were received from both the petitioner and the licensee and are addressed in an attachment to the final Director’s Decision. The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation granted the petitioner’s request, in part, with respect to identifying violations of fire protection requirements at Indian Point and developing a schedule and date for full compliance with the applicable regulations. The petitioner’s request to order full compliance by September 20, 2011, and conduct an evidentiary hearing before the Commission to adjudicate the violations was denied. The reasons for this decision are explained in the Director’s Decision pursuant to 10 CFR Section 2.206 (DD– 12–03), the complete text of which is VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:30 Nov 02, 2012 Jkt 229001 available in Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML12240A077 and 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, and from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC’s Web site, http:www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room). 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 24th day of October 2012. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Eric J. Leeds, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2012–26926 Filed 11–2–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 30252; File No. 812–13740] Van Eck Funds, et al.; Notice of Application October 25, 2012. Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’). ACTION: Notice of application for an order under section 17(d) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’) and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions otherwise prohibited by section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act. AGENCY: Applicants request an order to permit certain registered open-end management investment companies to co-invest in Covered Private Placements (as defined below) with each other and/or with one or more affiliated private investment companies. APPLICANTS: Van Eck Funds, Van Eck VIP Trust (formerly known as Van Eck Worldwide Insurance Trust) (each, an ‘‘Existing Investment Company,’’ and together, the ‘‘Existing Investment Companies’’), Global Energy Opportunity Partners LP, Global Energy SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66493 Opportunity Fund, Ltd., Hard Asset Partners LP, Hard Assets Portfolio Ltd., Hard Assets ERISA Ltd., Hard Asset Partners 2X LP, Hard Assets 2X Fund Ltd., Hard Assets 2X Master Fund Ltd., Hard Assets Opportunity Fund LP, Hard Assets Opportunity Fund Ltd., Hard Assets Opportunity Master Fund Ltd., G–175 Strategies LP, G–175 Strategies Ltd., G–175 Strategies Master Fund Ltd., Van Eck Veda Emerging Markets Long/ Short Fund LP, Van Eck Veda Emerging Markets Long/Short Fund Ltd., Van Eck Veda Emerging Markets Long/Short Master Fund Ltd. (each, an ‘‘Existing Unregistered Account,’’ and collectively, the ‘‘Existing Unregistered Accounts’’), Van Eck Associates Corporation (‘‘VEAC’’) and Van Eck Absolute Return Advisers Corporation (‘‘VEARA’’). Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 31, 2009, and amended on June 29, 2010, April 27, 2012 and October 19, 2012. HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission’s Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on November 21, 2012, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer’s interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission’s Secretary. ADDRESSES: Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F St. NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. Applicants: c/o Joseph J. McBrien, Esq., Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Van Eck Associates Corporation, 335 Madison Avenue, 19th Floor, New York, NY 10017–4632. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura J. Riegel, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551–6873 or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6821 (Office of Investment Company Regulation, Division of Investment Management). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission’s Web site by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at https:// DATES: E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM 05NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 214 (Monday, November 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66492-66493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26926]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos.: 50-003, 50-247, 50-286; NRC-2012-0265: License Nos.: DPR-
5, DPR-26, and DPR-64]


Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, 
LLC, and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC; Issuance of Director's 
Decision

    Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) has 
issued a Director's Decision with regard to a petition filed by Eric T. 
Schneiderman, Attorney General, State of New York. The petition, dated 
March 28, 2011, was supplemented by a transcript of a public meeting 
held on May 9, 2011, between representatives of the petitioner and the 
NRC. The petition concerns the operation of the Indian Point Nuclear 
Generating Units 1, 2, and 3 (Indian Point), owned by Entergy Nuclear 
Indian Point 2, LLC (Units 1 and 2) and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, 
LLC (Unit 3) and operated by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy 
or the licensee).
    The petitioner asked the NRC to take immediate action and issue an 
Order requiring the following actions regarding Indian Point Nuclear 
Generating Units 1, 2, and 3, that would (1) identify the violations of 
paragraphs F and G of Section III of Appendix R, ``Fire Protection 
Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 
1979,'' to part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 
CFR), ``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,'' 
which exist as of the date of the petition (March 28, 2011), at Indian 
Point Units 1, 2, and 3, (2) compel Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 
(Entergy, or the licensee), and its affiliates to comply on or before 
September 20, 2011, with the requirements in paragraphs F and G for all 
fire zones in Indian Point Units 2 and 3, and any Indian Point Unit 1 
fire zone or system, structure, or component that Indian Point Units 2 
and 3, rely upon, and (3) convene an evidentiary

[[Page 66493]]

hearing before the Commission to adjudicate the violation of paragraphs 
F and G at Indian Point Units 1, 2, and 3, by Entergy and its 
affiliates.
    As the basis for the petition, the petitioner (1) cited the 
population centers adjacent to the Indian Point facility, (2) described 
past investigations by both the NRC's Office of Investigations and the 
Government Accountability Office on fire barriers, most specifically 
Thermo-Lag and Hemyc, (3) stated his belief that the NRC staff has not 
been aggressive in resolving fire barrier issues or in taking 
meaningful enforcement action toward Indian Point, (4) focused on the 
exemptions to Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 that the licensee submitted 
in March 2009, that rely upon operator manual actions (OMAs) in a large 
number of fire areas at Indian Point, (5) stated his belief that the 
regulations do not authorize OMAs as a means for protecting a redundant 
system from fire, and (6) referenced the accident at the Fukushima Dai-
ichi nuclear power plant in Japan resulting from the March 11, 2011, 
Great T[omacr]hoku Earthquake and questioned whether plant operators 
would be physically capable of performing these duties. Finally, the 
petitioner expressed his belief that (1) the NRC should reserve 
exemptions for extraordinary circumstances, (2) the NRC should not 
approve the exemptions, and (3) Entergy has not made a serious effort 
to comply with Federal regulations.
    On May 9, 2011, the petitioner and the licensee met with the NRC's 
Petition Review Board. The meeting provided the petitioner and the 
licensee an opportunity to provide additional information and to 
clarify issues cited in the petition.
    The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director's Decision to the 
petitioner and the licensee for comment on July 2, 2012. Comments were 
received from both the petitioner and the licensee and are addressed in 
an attachment to the final Director's Decision.
    The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation granted 
the petitioner's request, in part, with respect to identifying 
violations of fire protection requirements at Indian Point and 
developing a schedule and date for full compliance with the applicable 
regulations. The petitioner's request to order full compliance by 
September 20, 2011, and conduct an evidentiary hearing before the 
Commission to adjudicate the violations was denied. The reasons for 
this decision are explained in the Director's Decision pursuant to 10 
CFR Section 2.206 (DD-12-03), the complete text of which is available 
in Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession 
No. ML12240A077 and 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, 
and from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC's Web site, 
http:www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
    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 24th day of October 2012.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Eric J. Leeds,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2012-26926 Filed 11-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.