ML20040F700
| ML20040F700 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 01/21/1982 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bauer E PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202100148 | |
| Download: ML20040F700 (6) | |
Text
._____
DANUARY 2 1 1982 t
f.
y
+
DISTRIBUTI0ti:
ilSIC Gray File =2 Docket File ORB #4 Rdg SSchwartz flRC PDR DEisenhut L PDR MFairtile TERA RIngram p 1i
/p Dockets flos. 50-277 OELD A-and 50-278 AE0D y'\\-
IE-3
/
ACRS-10 l-C 11r. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.
Vice President and General Counsel
'/
Philadelphia Electric Company
/
s 2301 i'arket Street
'x.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 N L'
Dear fir. Bauer:
This is in response to your Decembcr 18, 1981 letter requesting approval of a delay in the inplementation of your pronpt notification systen beyond the February 1,1982 deadline.
The revised energency plannigg regulation, which became effective
!!ovenber 3,1930, requimd that, by July 1,1981, licensees demonstrate that adninistrative and physical neans were established for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway Energency Planning Zone. l'any licensees did not neet this requirenent by July 1,1981; the failure was attributed to unforeseen difficulties and uncertainties surrounding the design, procurement and installation of tie prompt notification systems. As a consequence, the Comission proposed the extension of the July 1,1981 date to February 1, 1932, but detemined that if the systens were not installed and operable by February 1,1932, the licensees would be subject to enforcement action.
On December 30, 1931, a final rule chance, which was imediately effec-tive, delayed this implementation date for prompt public notification systens fron July 1,1981 to February 1,1982 (46 FR 63031). When the Comission chose the February 1,1932 deadline, they were aware that sone licensees were "tating that they night not be able to conplete installation of their systems by that date.
Even with this knowledge, the Comission decided that the February 1,1902 date was reasonable, given the fact that all licensees should have been able to meet this dead-line by having applied sufficient resources to the task without delay.
This is particularly true since the licensees have known of the require-
+oT nent since September 19, 1979, when the proposed rule changing 10 CFR 50 gg A;)pendix E was published in the Federal Reqister (44 FR 54303).
In view of the above, and the requirenents of the final rule on the pronpt en public notification systen, your request for a delay cannot be granted.
mn Eo However, in the course of the decision to delay the inplenentation date to February 1,1932, the Comission was aware as discussed above, that L
a licensees' inability to neet the July 1,1981 date could be attributed i
tw o to causes beyond his contml. The Comission will take into consideration l
any nitigating circunstances in determining the degree of enforcenent
.t
.v.
w 4
e 11r. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.,
action.
In this regard, your attention.is directed to Paragraph 3 of Part II of the Supplementary Information Section of the Final Rule published in the Federal Register on Decerter 30,1981 (FR Vol. 46, flo. 250, _ Pages 63031 - 03033 copy enclosed).
Sincerely.
80RIGIEAL SIC C BY T J0EN F. s?033.8 John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
FR Vol. 46, flo. 250 Pgs. 63031-63033 cc w/ enclosure:
See next page 1
4 i
3 ORB #4:DI)
...................y y C-0RB #4:DL
......r.g.........
omer >
.......................c
..J,.,$toit
.o _.>..MFai rti l.e/..c..b....*g..,p..
y..,y...
DATE)
......................o sne ronu ais oo-soi nncu ono OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom ini--um
"%^^
UNITED STATES 3
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
h,
, 7g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 8
January 21, 1982 s*,.*/
Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278 Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.
Vice President and General Counsel Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 i
Dear Mr. Bauer:
This is in response to your December 18,1981 letter requesting approval of a delay in the implementation of your prompt notification system beyond the February 1,1982 deadline, j
r i
The revised emergency planning regulation, which became effective November 3,1980, required that, by July 1,1981, licensees demonstrate j
that administrative and physical means were established for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone. Many licensees did not meet this requirement by July 1,1981; the failure was attributed to unforeseen difficulties and uncertainties surrounding the design, procurement and installation of the prompt notification systems. As a consequence, the Commission proposed the extension of the July 1,1981 date to February 1, 1982, but detennined that if the systems were not installed and operable by February 1,1982, the licensees would be subject to enforcement action.
On December 30, 1981, a final rule change, which was immediately effec-tive, delayed this implementation date for prompt public notification systems from July 1,1981 to February 1,1982 (46 FR 63031). When the Conmission chose the February 1,1982 deadline, they were aware that some licensees were stating that they might not be able to complete installation of their systems by that date. Even with this knowledge, i
the Commission decided that the February 1,1982 date was reasonable, given the fact that all lice'isees should have been able to meet this dead-line by having applied sufficient resources to the task without delay.
This is particularly true sirce the licensees have known of the require-i ment since September 19, 1979, when the proposed rule changing 10 CFR 50 Appendix E was published in the Federal Register (44 FR 54308).
In view of the above, and the requirements of the final rule on the prompt public notification system, your request for a delay cannot be granted.
l However, in the course of the decision to delay the implementation date to February 1,1982, the Coninission was aware as discussed above, that a licensees' inability to meet the July 1,1981 date could be attributed i
to causes beyond his control. The Commission will take into consideration any mitigating circumstances in detennining the degree of enforcement i
Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.,
action.
In this regard, your attention is directed to Paragraph 3 of Part II of the Supplementary Information Section of the Final Rule published in the Federal Register on December 30,1981 (FR Vol. 46, No. 250, Pages 63031 - 63033 copy enclosed).
Sincerely, I
ohf F. Stolz, Chief
_jrating Reactors Branch #4 p
Tivision of Licensing
~'
Enclosure:
FR Vol. 46, No. 250 Pgs. 63031-63033 cc w/ enclosure:
See next page l
f e
P i
Philadelphia Electric Company cc w/ enclosure (s):
Eugene J. Bradley Philadelphia Electric Company Regional Radiation Representative Assistant General Counsel EPA Region III 2301 Market Street Curtis Building (Sixth Floor)
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 6th and Walnut Streets Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106 Troy B. Conner, Jr.
1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
M. J. Cooney, Superintendent Washington, D. C.
20006 Generation Division - Nuclear Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Government Publications Section Thonas A. Doming, Esq.
State Library of Pennsylvania Assistant Attorney General Education Building Department of Natural Resources Commonwealth and Walnut Streets Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17126 Philadelphia Electric Company ATTN: Mr. W. T. Ullrich Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Mr. R. A. Heiss, Coordinator Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 Pennsylvania State Clearinghouse Governor's Office of State Planning Albert R. Steel, Chairman and Development Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 1323 Peach Bottom Township Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 R. D. #1 Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 Curt Cowgill U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection and Enforcement Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station P. O. Box 399 4
Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 Mr. Ronald C. Haynes, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I Office of Inspection and Enforcement 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406
63031 Rules and Regulations reder i kest ier Vol. 46. No. ?.50 M'ednesday, December 30, 1981 Trus section of tne FEDERAL REGISTER On August 11,1981, the Commission This decision is based on a contains regafatory documents having discussed possible actions because recognition that emergency plans and general appbcabity and legal effect, most licensees failed to comply with the July preparedness have significantly of wtiich are keyed to and codfed in 1,1981 requirement contained in 10 CFR improved within the last year at and suarIt $o 50,47(b)(5) and 10 CFR 50 Appendix E, around every nuc! car power plant site.
8 pubt du er 5 tates p 4
Section IV.D.3. The licensees' failure to This significant improvement has been U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold meet the July 1,1981 date was attributed confirmed by NRC teams who have by the Superintendent of Documents.
to unforeseen difficulties and visited a number of plant sites to Pnces of new books are hsted in the uncertainties surrounding the design, evaluate the licensees' compliance with first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each procurement and installation of the the upgraded emergency planning prompt notification systems.
regulations of August 1980. In addition, m nth At the August 11.1981 meeting, the the Federal Emergency Management Commission approved publication of a
^8ency (FEMA) and the NRC have NUCLEAR REGULATORY proposed rule change which would momtored numerous nuclear emergency COMMISSION provide an extension of the July 1,1981 exercises involving State and local date to February 1,1982. (See 46 FR governments and the licensees, and to CFR Part 50 46587).That Federal Register notice again have witnessed a significant _
requested public comment during a 30 improvement on onsite and offsite Emergency Planning and day period ending October 21,1981.
Preparedness for Production and To date, comments have been The decision to delay the Utilization Facilities received from four NRC licensees, five implementation data is also based on AcENCY: Nuclear Regulatory individuals or organizations in the the recognition that there exist Commission.
nuclear industry, one from the general customary warning systems (police.
ACTION: Final rule.
public, three from environmental radio, telephone) which are viewed as organizations, one from a mass transit sufficiently effective m many postulated
SUMMARY
- The Commission is making system director, and one from a State accident scenarios. In view of the above, two changes to its emergency planning governor.The comments received from the Commission finds that there exists sufficient reason to beheve that regulations. The change to 10 CFR Part the general public and from the appropriate protective measures can 50, Appendix E delays the date by which environmental organizations were prompt public notification systems must against delaying the implementation and will be taken for the protection of be operational around all nuclear power date to February 1982.The letters from the health and safety of the public in the plants.The change to i 50.54 clarifies the other commenters generally agree event of a radiological emergency during the language of the rule to conform with with extending the implementation date the extended time period for the Commission's intent at the time of along with additional suggestions.
compliance.
promulgation.
One suggested modification to the II. The Amendment to 10 CFR 50.54 EFFECTIVE DATE* December 30,1981.
proposed rule change, which has been accepted and included in these final Add tionally.10 CFR 50.54(s)(2),
FOR FURTHER INFORM ATION CONTACT:
amendments. is not to eliminate the cumn y requins a t, Michael T. Jamgochlan, iluman Factors Branch. Office of Nuclear Regulatory four-m nth penod for correction of any
- For operating power reactors, the licensee.
Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory defictencies identified during the initial State, and local emergency response plans Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 testing of the prompt notification shall be implemented by April 1.1981, except (telephone 301-443-5942)..
system. The Commission now believes as provided in Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E that the elimination of this four. month of this part. If after April 1.1931, the NRC SUPPLEM ENTARY INFORM ATION period would be inconsistent with the finds that the state of energency I.The Amendment to 10 CFR Part 50, need to perform a reasonable test of the preparednese does not provide reasonable Appendix E system and make any needed changes assurance that adequate protective measures as indicated by the test results. The.
can and will be taken in the event of a On August 19,198'. the NRC enclosed effective regulation radiological etnergency and if the deficiencies O
published a revised emergency plannm.g incorporates this concept.The are not corrected within four months of that regulation which became effective on installation date, however, remains finding. the Commission will determine hovember 3,1980. The rule required February 1,1982, and any licensee not whether the reactor shall be shut down until licensees to demonstrate, among other completing the installation by that date such deficiencies are remedied or whether things, by July 1.1981:
would be subject to. enforcement action.
other enforcement action is appropriate."
"that administratise and physical means After evaluating all public comment it has come to the Commission's as ac mmission has attention that because this section of the pr id ng pro p st etbns t e public within the plume esposure pathway EPZ, The cidgd to publish, as immediately regulation was written as one des %n objective shall be to have the effective, a final rule change to 10 CFR paragraph, it can be interpreted to mean capabihty to essentially complete the initial Part 50. Appendix E which will delay the that the four-month period for the notification of the public within the plume implementation date for the prompt correction of emergency preparedness esposure pathway EPZ within about 15 public notification systems from July 1, deficiencies does not apply to "Section minutes."
1981 to February 1,1982.
IV.D.3 of Appendix E."
\\
j
' ~.
C2032 Fedetal D :.tcr / Vol. 40. No. 250 / Wednnby. Dectmber 30, 1981 / Rules and Rc;;ulatiens This is a misinterpr tation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement D.Notifeccticn Pmcedures Commission's intent, which was that the Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
- 3. A hcensee shall have the capabihty to four. month period is to apply to any Act of 1980. Pub. L 93-3M. t' r NRC has
" U
P
"' # ' S' '"d'
I F
deficiencies identified in the emergency determined:(1) That the deHtg of the plans.The Commission is therefore implementation date for the pompt
$e*U,$'n's an"e e g eli e.see modifymg I 50.54[s][2) to more clearly public notification systems will not have shall demonstrate that the State / local reflect that intent The four. month a significant economic impact on a officials have the capabihty to make a public period provided in i 50.51(s][2), wd. l not substantial number of small entities, notification decision promptly on being apply to any licensee for the installation pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility informed by the licensee of an emergency and initial test of the public notificatica Act of 1950, section 635(b) and (2) that condition. By February 1.1931 each nuc! ear system by February 1.1982. If a licensee the nde change to i 50.54(s)(2)is not power reactor licensee shall demonstrate that admmistrative and physical means have been is not in compliance with this subject to the prodsions of the estawsW fu alerung a@ meg Fompt requirement for installation and testing Regulatory Flexibility Act of1980' I" * *#"*
by February 1,1982, the Commission because the Commission has determined
,xp sure h y 5e r m[nt w11I consider taking appropriate
' pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 that a notice of period in 10 CFR 50.54(s)(2) for the correction enforcement rctions promptly at that proposed rulemaking for i 50.54 (s)(2) of emergency plan deficiencies shall not time. In determining appropriate need not be issued and that the rule may apply to the initialinstallation of this public enforcement action to initiate, the be promulgated in final fann and notification system that is required by Commission will take into account, become effective on December 30,1991.
February 1.1982. Thefour monthperiod will among othet factors. the demonstrated opp!y to correction ef deficiencies identified diligence of the licensee in attempting to Paperwork Reduction Act Statement during the initialinstallation and testing of fulfill the prompt public notification Pursuant to the provisions of the the promptpublie notification systems es we// os those deficiencies d scorered capability requirement ille Commission Paperwork Reduction Act of 1930 (Pub.
pt will consider whether the licensee has L 96-511), the NRC has c2ade a fubc!l"[
a' tion s! akl be te ve kept the NRC Informed of the steps that determination that this final rule does the capability to essential!y complete the it has taken. when those steps were not impose new recordkeeping.
initial notification of the public within the taken and any significant problems information collection, or reporting plume exposure pathway EPZ within about encountered, and the updated timetable requirements.
15 minutes.The use of this notificatinn which the licensee expects will be met Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of capability will range from immediate in achieving fuH compliance with the 19M, as amended, the Energy notification of the public (within 15 minutes of the time that State and local officials are prompt public notification capabilitT Reorganization Act of1974. as amended, requirements. The four. month period and section 553 of title 5 of the United nc ified that a situation exists requiring
"#8'"' ' **I ' # O* ""' U*I '"*"
Y will, however, apply to correction of States Code, the following amendments deficiencies identified during the initial to 10 CFR Part 50 are published as "g em hu ent[of h
ta e a I algo a
test of the prompt pubhc notification documents subject to codification:
make a judgment whether cr not to activate systems as well as those deficiencies the public notification system. Where there is discovered thereafter.
PART 50-DOMESTIC LICENSING OF a decision to activate the notification system.
Because the amendment to PRODUCTION ANDUTILIZATION the State and local officials will determine I 50.54(s)(2)is interpretative and of a FACILITIES whether to activate the entire notification system simultaneously or in a graduated or minor nature, slmply resolving an The authority citation for Part 50 staged manner.The msponsibility for ambiguity in the rules to the na s as H ws:
activating such a public notification system Commission's intended meaning at the
.mc of promulgation, the Commission Authority: Secs.103.104.181.1n 189, 68 shall remain with the appropriate Stat.9% 937J48. 953. 9R 9E 9% as gonmmental au6mbs.
finds good cause to dispense with amendea t42 U.S C. 2133. 2134. 2201. 2232.
+
advance notice and opportunity for 2233, 2239); secs. 201. 202, 206. E8 Sta t.1243,
- 2. I 50.54(s)(2) is rev.ised to read as pubhc comment thereon as unnecessary.
1244.1246 (42 U.S C. 5841. 5842. 5846). unless f Hows:
For this reason. this change shaU be otherwise noted. Section so.78 also issued effective as a final rule on December 30, under sec.122. 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S C. 2152).
I 50.54 Conditions ct Heenses.
Section 50. 78-50.81 also tssued under sec. 1981.
Likewise. the Commission is 164. 0a Stat 954 as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234).
Secti ns m1m02 issued under see.188 (s) * *
- publishing the final amendments to 10 2
u es CFR Part 50, Appendix E (extending the
$S (2)(i) For operating power reactors, the a 9 8.
Em ed licensee, State, and local emergency implementation date for the installation U.S.C. 22731.150 41ft) issued under sac.1511, response plans shall be implemented by of a prompt public notification system) 08 StaL 949 (42 U.S.C. 2201(i: 11 50.70.50.71, as eifective immediately upon and 50.78 issued under sec.1610. 68 Stat. 950 April 1,1981, except as provided in " publication, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. as amended (42 U.S.C.2201(oll, and the law. Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to this I 553(d)(1). since the rule is expected to referred to in Appendices. part. (ii) If after April 1,1981, the NRC finds relieve the obligation of certain Appendix E I Amended] m@cy paparass 8 8 licensns with respect to the present
- 1. Section I july 1.1981 deadline for operational Part 50 is rev.V.D.3 of Appendix E todoes not provide reasonable assurance ised to read as follows:
i public notification systems. In that that adequate protective measures can an be tahn in 6e emit of a i regard the Commission notes that the Appendis E-Emergency Planning and radiological emergency (Including ' final rule, when effective, will bn preparedness for Production and Utilization applied to ongoing licensing proceedings 'racilities. findings based on requirements of Appendix E. Section IV.D.3) and if the now pending and to issues or contentions therein. Union of Concerned Scientists v. AEC, 499 F. s110G9 (D.C. .n, n.pt,t;on g,,,,,,,,a in co,.p,,,tw, ch3r:ge pu%shed in the Federal Resister on Cir.1974). teat showing char:ges from the propowd rule September 21.1981.
Federal Repister / Vol. 40, No. 250 / Wednesday, Decembcr{,mpt, / Rules and Repulations C30t deficiencies (including deficiencies applies to the application. Dated at Bethesda. htaryland. this tith day based on requirements o/ Appendix E. recordkeeping, and reporting of December.1981. Section IV.D.3) are not corrected within requirements contained in NRC For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. four months of that finding,the regulations. Winiam J. DircLs, Commission will determine whether the On October 30,1981, the NRC Eaccutive DimetorforOperations. reactor shall be shut down until such obtained OhiB reapproval for the p om n.m n:a umt a s.-1 deficiencies are remedied or whether information collection requirements sumo coor rsso-os-u other enforcement action is appropriate. contained in to CFR Part 50.This ~ in determining whether a shutdown or amendment adds a new { 50.8 to Part 50 other enforcement action is appropria%, setting out the OhiB approval number. DEPART MENT OF E NERGY the Commission shall take into account. the expiration date of the current among other factors, whether the approval, and a list of sections within 10 CFR Part 503 licensco can demonstrate to the Part 50 that contain an approved IDocket.f o. ERA-R-81-06) Commission's satisfaction that the information collection requirement This deficiencies in the plan are not amendment also removes the note Powerptsat and Industrial FucI Use Act significant for the plant in question, or concerning the expired CAO clearance of 1978; Final Rules that adequate interim compensating that follows i 50.110. actions have been or will be taken Because this is a nonsubstantive correction promptly, or that that there are other amendment dealing with a minor. In FR Doc. 81-34770 appearing on co.apelling reasons for contmued procedural matter, good cause exists for page 59872 in the issue of hionday, operation. finding that the notice and comment December 7.1981, make the following procedures of the Administrative corrections: Pr cedure Act(5 U.S.C.553)are (1)In i 503.G(c)(2), the following line's Dated at Washington, D C. this 23rd day of unnecessary and for making the were inadvertently omitted above the December.1901. ame equation on page 59906: For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. nd Fe 19 Samuel I. Chilk. as amended, the Energy Reorganization EQ4 DELTA = COST Secirtary of the Commission. Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. (ALTERNATE)-COST (OIL) where irmoi-rori raa imt s u.=1 552 and 553, the following amendments COST (ALTERNATE) and COST (OIL) owwo coot 7swei-u to 10 CFR Part 50 are published as a are determined by: document subject to codification.The (2)In 5 503.36(a), paragraph (5) was 10 CFR Part 50 authority citation for this document is: incorrectly designated as (b); therefore, on page 59914, first column. in the 30th Reporting, Recerdkeeping, and PART 50-DOMESTIC LICENSING OF line, **(b) For powerplants..." should App!! cation Requirements; Approval PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 'have read "(5) For powerplants...". AGcNCY: Nuclear Regulatory FACILITIES eumo cooc isos41-u Commission. Authority: Sec.161 Pub. L 8Mo3. 68 Stc t. ACTios: Final rule. M8 (42 U.S.C. 2201) FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BOARD SUM M ARY:'rhe Nuclear Regulatory
- j. Section 50.8 is added to read as 12 CFR Parts 522 and 545 ws.
Commission is amending its regulations [No. 81-800] on the domestic licensing of production f 50.8 Reporting, recordkeeping, and and utili: ation facilities to indicate application requirements: OMB approvat. Payment of Litigation Expenses of - Office of hianagement and Budget (a) the Nuclear Regulatory Federal Home Loan Bank Officers, approval of the information collection Commission has submitted the Directors, and Employees requirements contained in the information collection requirements regulations. This action is required bY contained in this part of the Office of Dated: December 17.1981. the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 hianagement and Budget (OhiB) for AcENCY:FederalIIome Loan Bank iFrECTIVE DATE: December 30,198L approval as required by the Paperwork Board. udon Act M L MW O2 ACTION: Final rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: approved the information collection Steve Scott. Chief. Document requirements on October 30,1981.
SUMMARY
- The Federal Home Loan Bank (1) The OhiB approval number is Board is amending the Regulations for echn 1 Info tion a d oc ent 3150-0011.
the Federalllome Loan Bank System to Control Office of Administratioi2 (2) Oh1B approval expires April 30, liberalize the terms on which the Banks Telephone: (301) 402-8585. . 1982. may pay expenses of officers, directors. S UPPLLM ENT ARY INFORM ATION:The
- (b) The approved information and employees involved in litigation Paperwork Reduction Act of 1900 (Pub.
collection requirements include the arising out of their Bank duties.The I. N-511; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) application recordkeeping, and amendment will allow the Federal Home transferred the responsibility for reporting requirements contained in Loan Banks to establish their own approving the information collection 11 50.30, 50.33, 50.33a. 50.34(b), (c). (d), policies regarding litigation expenses. requirements imposed by the Nuclear (f), 50.34 a. 50.35(b), 50.36, 50.30a. 50.48 EFFECTIVE D ATE: December 17.1981. Regulatory Commission (NRC) on the 50.54(f), (p), (q). (r), (s), (t), (u), 50.55(e). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ** public from the General Accounting 50.55a. 50 59(b). (c) 50.71(a). (b), (c). (d), Office (GAO) to the Office of (c). 50.72(a) (b) 50.80,50.82. 50.90, and James C. Stewart ((202) 377--N57), Office, hianagement and Budget (OhiB). e Appendices A. B, C, E G. II. J. K. and R. f ["Bo (' a
- 00 S
Act requires that each existing information collection requirement be i 50.110 ! Amended] Washington. D.C. 20552. reapproved by OhtB as existing GAO 2.The note following i 50.110 is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORM ATION:The c!carances expire.This requirement removed. Federalllome Loan Bank Board is -- -_ _}}