Notices. Notice of a Proposed Agreement with the State of Minnesota

9,544 words·~43 min read·/register/2005/11/23/05-22581

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 7515-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-443] Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1; FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of Application for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) has granted the request of FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE or the licensee) to withdraw its March 28, 2005, application for an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 for the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 (Seabrook), located in Rockingham County, New Hampshire. The proposed amendment would have revised the Seabrook Technical Specification

(TS)3/4.9.13, “Spent Fuel Assembly Storage,” to reflect a revised criticality safety analysis. This analysis was intended to support a two-zone spent fuel pool

(SFP)consisting of BORAFLEX® and BORAL® fuel assembly storage racks. Additionally, the proposed change would have created TS 3/4.9.15, “Spent Fuel Pool Boron Concentration,” to support the planned SFP changes. The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the **Federal Register** on May 10, 2005 (70 FR 24653). However, by letter dated October 24, 2005, FPLE withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 28, 2005, and the licensee's letter dated October 24, 2005, which withdrew the application for license amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the internet at the NRC Web site, *http://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 by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of November, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. G. Edward Miller, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-6454 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-263] Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-22 issued to the Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC or the licensee) for operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (Monticello) located in Wright County, Minnesota. The proposed amendment, requested by NMC in its application dated June 29, 2005, represents a full conversion from the Current Technical Specifications

(CTS)to a set of Improved Technical Specifications

(ITS)based on NUREG-1433, “Standard Technical Specifications General Electric Plants BWR/4,” Revision 3, dated April 2001. NUREG-1433 has been developed by the Commission's staff through working groups composed of NRC staff and industry representatives, and has been endorsed by the NRC staff as part of an industry-wide initiative to standardize and improve the Technical Specifications

(TSs)for nuclear power plants. As part of this submittal, the licensee has applied the criteria contained in the Commission's “Final Policy Statement on Technical Specification Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors (Final Policy Statement),” published in the **Federal Register** on July 22,1993 (58 FR 39132), to the CTS and using NUREG-1433 as a basis, proposed ITS for Monticello. The criteria in the Final Policy Statement was subsequently added to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), part 50.36, “Technical Specifications,” in a rule change that was published in the **Federal Register** on July 19, 1995 (60 FR 36953) and became effective on August 18, 1995. This notice is based on the application dated June 29, 2005, and any information provided to the NRC through the Monticello ITS Conversion Web page. To expedite its application review, the NRC staff will issue requests for additional information

(RAIs)through the Monticello ITS Conversion web page and the licensee will address the RAIs by providing responses on the Web page. Entry into the database is protected so that only designated licensee and NRC reviewers can enter information; however, the public can access the database to read the questions asked and the responses provided. To be in compliance with the regulations for written communications for license amendment requests and to have the database on the Monticello docket before the amendment would be issued, the licensee will provide a copy of the database in a submittal to the NRC after there are no further RAIs and before the amendment is to be issued. The public can access the database through the NRC Internet home page at *http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/techspecs.html.* Click on the link located near the bottom of the page titled “Improved Technical Specifications Data Base” to access the Excel Services Corporation ITS Licensing Databases. Click on “Monticello Nuclear Power Plant Licensing Database” to view comments and responses. The RAIs and responses are organized by ITS sections 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1 through 3.9, 4.0, and 5.0, and include beyond scope issues

(BSIs)which are discussed later in this notice. For every ITS section or BSI, RAIs can be read by clicking on the applicable ITS Section. Licensee responses are indicated by a solid blue triangle below the ITS Number or, if accessing from the ITS Section, at the bottom of the page. To read a response, click on the triangle. To page down through the ITS sections, click on “Next” along the top or bottom of the page. Click on “Previous” to return to the previous page. The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the CTS into five general groupings within the description of changes

(DOC)section of the application. These groupings are characterized as administrative changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC A.xx); more restrictive changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC M.xx); relocated specifications (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC R.xx); removed detail changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC LA.xx); and less restrictive changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC L.xx). The DOCs are numbered sequentially within each letter designator for each ITS Chapter, Section, or Specification, and the designations are A.xx for administrative changes, M.xx for more restrictive changes, R.xx for relocated specifications, LA.xx for removed detail changes, and L.xx for less restrictive changes. Administrative changes involve restructuring, renumbering, rewording, interpretation and complex rearranging of requirements, and other changes not affecting technical content or substantially revising an operating requirement. The reformatting, renumbering and rewording process reflects the attributes of NUREG-1433 and does not involve technical changes to the CTS. The proposed changes include:

(a)Poviding the appropriate numbers, etc., for NUREG-1433 bracketed information (information that must be supplied on a plant-specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant),

(b)identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and

(c)changing NUREG-1433 section wording to conform to existing licensee practices. Such changes are administrative in nature and do not impact initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or transient events. More restrictive changes invoke more stringent requirements compared to the CTS for facility operation. These more stringent requirements do not result in operation that will alter assumptions relative to the mitigation of an accident or transient event. The more restrictive requirements will not alter the operation of process variables, structures, systems, and components described in the safety analyses. For each requirement in the standard technical specification

(STS)that is more restrictive than the CTS which the licensee proposes to adopt in the ITS, the licensee has provided an explanation as to why it concluded that adopting the more restrictive requirement is desirable to ensure safe operation of the facility because of specific plant design features. Relocated changes involve relocating requirements and surveillances for structures, systems, components, or variables that do not meet the criteria for inclusion in TSs. Relocated changes are those CTS requirements that do not satisfy or fall within any of the four criteria specified in the 10 CFR 50.36(c) and, therefore, may be relocated to appropriate licensee-controlled documents. The licensee's application of the screening criteria is described in Enclosure 1 to the June 29, 2005, application. The affected structures, systems, components or variables are not assumed to be initiators of analyzed events and are not assumed to mitigate accident or transient events. The requirements and surveillances for these affected structures, systems, components, or variables will be relocated from the TSs to administratively-controlled documents such as the quality assurance program, the updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR), the ITS Bases, the Technical Requirements Manual that is incorporated by reference in the UFSAR, the core operating limits report, the offsite dose calculation manual, the inservice testing program, the inservice inspection program, or other licensee-controlled documents. Changes made to these documents will be made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 or other appropriate control mechanisms, and may be made without prior NRC review and approval. In addition, the affected structures, systems, components, or variables are addressed in existing surveillance procedures that are also subject to 10 CFR 50.59. Removed detail changes to the CTSs eliminate detail and relocate the detail to a licensee-controlled document. Typically, this involves details of system design and function, or procedural detail on methods of conducting a surveillance requirement (SR). These changes are supported, in aggregate, by a single generic no significant hazard consideration. The generic type of removed detail change is identified in italics at the beginning of the DOC. Less restrictive changes are those where CTS requirements are relaxed or eliminated, or new plant operational flexibility is provided. The “more significant” less restrictive requirements are justified on a case-by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to provide little or no safety benefit, their removal from the TSs may be appropriate. Relaxations previously granted to individual plants on a plant-specific basis were, in most cases, the result of

(a)generic NRC actions,

(b)new NRC staff positions that evolved from technological advancements and operating experience, or

(c)resolution of the Owners Groups' comments on the Improved STSs. Generic relaxations contained in NUREG-1433 were reviewed by the NRC staff and found to be acceptable because they are consistent with current licensing practices and NRC regulations. The licensee's design is being reviewed to determine if the specific design-basis and licensing basis are consistent with the technical basis for the model requirements in NUREG-1433, thus providing a basis for the ITS, or if relaxation of the requirements in the CTS is warranted based on the justification provided by the licensee. These administrative, relocated, more restrictive, and less restrictive changes to the requirements of the CTS do not result in operations that will alter assumptions relative to mitigation of an analyzed accident or transient event. There are also changes proposed that are different from the requirements in both the CTSs and the STSs of NUREG-1433. These are designated as BSIs and are discussed below. The first 15 BSIs were identified by the licensee and described in Enclosure 2 of their application. In some cases, a BSI may be addressed as a justification for deviation

(JFD)from the STS, and identified as ITS x.x, JFD x. The BSIs to the conversion, listed in the order of the applicable ITS specification or section, are as follows: 1. CTS 3.1.A refers to the “Setpoints” of the Reactor Protection System

(RPS)Instrumentation Functions in CTS Table 3.1.1 and CTS Table 3.1.1, and specifies the “Limiting Trip Settings” for the RPS Instrumentation Functions. The Limiting Trip Settings of CTS Table 3.1.1 Trip Functions 3.a, 4.a, and 4.c have been modified to reflect new “Allowable Values” as indicated for ITS Table 3.3.1.1-1 Functions 1.a and 2.a. This changes the CTS by requiring RPS Instrumentation to be set consistent with the new Allowable Values. (ITS 3.3.1.1, DOC L.12) 2. CTS Table 4.1.1 requires a weekly functional test of the Manual Scram Function. ITS Table 3.3.1.1-1 Function 11 and ITS SR 3.3.1.1.5 require the performance of the same test at a 31-day frequency. This changes the CTS by extending the Manual Scram functional test frequency from 7 days to 31 days. (ITS 3.3.1.1, DOC L.14) 3. CTS Table 3.2.5 specifies the “Trip Setting” for the Anticipated Transient Without Scram-Recirculation Pump Trip High Reactor Dome Pressure Function. The Trip Setting of CTS Table 3.2.5 Function 1 has been modified to reflect the new less restrictive Allowable Value as indicated in ITS SR 3.3.4.1.5.b (ITS 3.3.4.1, DOC L.4) 4. CTS Table 3.2.2 specifies the “Trip Setting” for Emergency Core Cooling System

(ECCS)Instrumentation Functions. The Trip Setting of CTS 3.2.2 Function C.3 has been modified to reflect new more restrictive Allowable Values as indicated for ITS Table 3.3.5.1-1 Functions 4.c, 4.d, 5.c and 5.d. (ITS 3.3.5.1, DOC M.8) 5. CTS Table 3.2.2 and Table 3.2.8 specify the “Trip Setting” for ECCS Instrumentation Functions. The Trip Settings of CTS Table 3.2.2 Functions A.1.b.i and A.2, and Table 3.2.8 Function C.1 have been modified to reflect new less restrictive Allowable Values as indicated for ITS Table 3.3.5.1-1 Functions 1.c, 1.d, 2.c, 2.d, and 3.d. In addition, the Allowable Value for ITS Table 3.3.5.1-1 Function 3.d only specifies a single Allowable value, which is applicable for both one- and two-tank operation. (ITS 3.3.5.1, DOC L.5) 6. CTS Table 3.2.8 specifies the “Trip Setting” for the Condensate Storage Tank Level—Low for two tank and one tank operation. The Trip Settings of CTS Table 3.2.8 Function C.1 have been modified to reflect a new less restrictive Allowable Value as indicated for ITS Table 3.3.5.2-1 Function 3. In addition, the Allowable Value for this Function only specifies a single Allowable Value, which is applicable for both one- and two-tank operation. (ITS 3.3.5.2, DOC L.3) 7. CTS Table 3.2.1 specifies the “Trip Settings” for the Primary Containment Isolation Instrumentation. The Trip Settings of CTS Table 3.2.1 Functions 3.d, 4.a, 4.b, 4.c, and 5.b have been modified to reflect more restrictive Allowable Values as indicated in ITS Table 3.3.6.1-1 Function 3.a, 3.b, 3.c, 4.c, and 5.a. (ITS 3.3.6.1, DOC M.9) 8. CTS Table 3.2.1 specifies the “Trip Settings” for the Primary Containment Isolation Instrumentation. The Trip Settings of CTS Table 3.2.1 Functions 1.b, 1.d, 5.a, 5.c, and 6.a have been modified to reflect new less restrictive Allowable Values as indicated in ITS Table 3.3.6.1-1 Functions 1.b, 1.c, 4.a, 4.b, and 6.a. (ITS 3.3.6.1, DOC L.9) 9. CTS Table 3.2.6 specifies the “Trip Settings” for the Loss of Power Instrumentation. The Trip Setting of CTS Table 3.2.6 Function 1 has been modified to reflect new more restrictive Allowable Values as indicated for ITS Table 3.3.8.1-1 Functions 2.a and 2.b. (ITS 3.3.8.1, DOC M.3) 10. CTS 3.2.C.2.b states that the Rod Block Monitor

(RBM)bypass time delay must be less than or equal to 2.0 seconds. ITS 3.3.2.1 does not require the RBM bypass time delay to be OPERABLE. This changes the CTS by deleting the RBM bypass time delay requirements. (ITS 3.3.2.1, DOC L.5) 11. CTS 4.14 does not provide a delayed entry into associated Conditions and Required Actions if a Post-Accident Monitoring

(PAM)channel is inoperable solely for performance of required surveillances. ITS SR Note 2 has been added to allow delayed entry into associated Conditions and Required Actions for up to 6 hours if a PAM channel is placed in an inoperable status solely for performance of required surveillances, provided the associated function remains capable. This changes the CTS by providing a delay time to enter Conditions and Required Actions for a PAM channel placed in an inoperable status solely for performance of required surveillances. (ITS 3.3.3.1, DOC L.2) 12. CTS 4.1.C.2 requires an instrument calibration of each RPS power monitoring channel every “Operating Cycle.” ITS SR 3.3.8.2.2 requires the performance of a CHANNEL CALIBRATION of the overvoltage, undervoltage, and underfrequency setpoints every 184 days. This changes the CTS by increasing the frequency of performing a CHANNEL CALIBRATION of the overvoltage, undervoltage, and underfrequency setpoints. (ITS 3.3.8.2, DOC M.3) 13. CTS 4.5.F.1 provides a cross-reference to the SRs in CTS 4.6.G. However, these are jet pump surveillances and reflect stability monitoring issues. ITS SR 3.4.1.2 requires verification of operation in the Normal Region of the power-to-flow map every 24 hours or in the Stability Buffer Region of the power-to-flow map, with power distribution controls as specified in the Core Operating Limits Report, every 24 hours. This changes the CTS by deleting the cross references to the SRs in CTS 4.6.G and adds a new SR. (ITS 3.4.1, DOC M.1) 14. CTS 6.8.B includes the Primary Coolant Sources Outside Containment program requirements. The Combustible Gas Control System

(CGCS)is included in this program. ITS 5.5.2 includes the same program requirements for the Primary Coolant Sources Outside Containment program, except the CGCS will not be included. This changes the CTS by deleting the program requirement for the CGCS in the Primary Coolant Sources Outside Containment program. (ITS 5.5, DOC L.4) 15. CTS 6.8.B.2 specifies that the integrated leak test requirements for each system outside containment that could contain highly radioactive fluids during a serious transient or accident must be performed at a refueling cycle or less. CTS 6.8.B also states that CTS 4.0.B (i.e. a 25 percent allowable grace period) is applicable. ITS 5.5.2.b specifies that the same test must be performed at least once per 24 months and that the provisions of ITS SR 3.0.2 (25 percent allowable grace period) are applicable. This changes the CTS by extending the frequency of the surveillance from 18 months to 24 months, with a maximum of 30 months accounting for the allowable grace period. (ITS 5.5, DOC L.5) 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. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, 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 2.309, which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/* . If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particu larity the interest of the petitioner/requestor 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 general requirements:

(1)The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner;

(2)the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding;

(3)the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and

(4)the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for 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. The petition must include 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/requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy 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. Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by:

(1)First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff;

(2)courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff;

(3)E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, *HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV* ; or

(4)facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at

(301)415-1101, verification number is

(301)415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to *OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov* . A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent Jonathan Rogoff, Esq., 700 First Street, Hudson, WI 54016, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's application for amendment dated June 29, 2005, and the Monticello ITS Conversion Web page (as discussed above). Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://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 by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov* . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of November, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. John F. Stang, Sr. Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-6451 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [EA-01-082 and EA-04-172] In the Matter of: Williams Industrial Services Group, LLC, 2076 West Park Place, Stone Mountain, GA 30087; Confirmatory Order (Effective Immediately) Williams Industrial Services Group, LLC, (Williams) and its subsidiaries (collectively known as Williams Group) perform services for multiple reactor facilities regulated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission). Williams assumed the contractual obligations of Williams Service Group, LLC, formerly known as Williams Power Corporation (WPC), relating to services performed for NRC licensees. Williams' headquarters are located in Stone Mountain, Georgia. On May 22, 2000, the NRC's Office of Investigations

(OI)began an investigation into alleged employment discrimination, during March 2000, by WPC at FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company's (FENOC) Perry and Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plants. A predecisional enforcement conference

(PEC)was held with FENOC and WPC at the NRC Region III office on September 26, 2001. Subsequent to the PEC, a supplemental investigation was conducted by OI Report No. 3-2000-025S and an apparent violation concerning the completeness and accuracy of information was identified during that investigation. On February 24, 2005, the NRC staff issued Notices of Violation (Notices) to FENOC and to WPC. The NRC also issued an order on February 25, 2005, to the supervisor prohibiting involvement in NRC-licensed activities for three years for deliberately providing materially inaccurate information to the NRC in violation of 10 CFR 50.5(a)(2). The Notice to WPC described violations of 10 CFR 50.7, “Employee protection,” for discrimination and of 10 CFR 50.5(a)(2), “Deliberate misconduct,” for deliberate inaccurate statements to the NRC. The NRC also informed WPC that FENOC had been offered an opportunity to pursue resolution of the 10 CFR 50.7 violation with alternative dispute resolution (ADR). In ADR, a neutral mediator with no decision-making authority facilitates discussions between concerned parties to assist them in reaching an agreement on resolving concerns. If FENOC had elected to enter into ADR, the NRC would have offered WPC an opportunity to participate. FENOC did not elect to enter into ADR, and on March 28, 2005, FENOC admitted to the 10 CFR 50.7 violation. In a letter dated March 25, 2005, Williams Service Group, LLC

(WSG)disputed the violations cited against WPC. On April 15, 2005, WSG requested an opportunity to enter into ADR with the NRC in order to resolve the violations cited in the Notice. The NRC granted the request, and on July 26, 2005, the NRC and WSG met at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, at which time a settlement was reached. Based upon the corrective actions taken as documented in the WSG letter dated March 25, 2005, and the commitments noted in Section IV below, the NRC hereby withdraws the 10 CFR 50.5(a)(2) violation cited against WPC on February 24, 2005. In addition, the 10 CFR 50.7 violation, originally issued as severity level III, is hereby re-characterized as a violation without severity level specified. By letter dated March 25, 2005, and as further discussed during the July 26, 2005, ADR meeting, Williams stated that it already had taken steps to enhance awareness of and compliance with its safety conscious work environment

(SCWE)program at NRC-license facilities. These completed actions include:

(1)Enacting a new SCWE policy approved by the Williams Board of Directors in August 2002,

(2)ensuring that new employees receive site-specific information on Williams' SCWE policy as well as ways to raise safety concerns to Williams supervision, licensees and the NRC, and

(3)conducting more-detailed SCWE training sessions to employees facilitated by Williams' senior management. Furthermore, by letter dated September 2, 2005, Williams stated that, in addition to the actions already taken to enhance awareness of and compliance with its SCWE program, Williams agrees to take certain additional corrective measures as noted in Section IV of this Confirmatory Order. On October 25, 2005, Williams consented to the NRC issuing this Confirmatory Order with the commitments, as described in Section IV below. Williams further agreed in its October 28, 2005, letter that this Order is to be effective upon issuance and that it has waived its right to a hearing. The NRC has concluded that its concerns can be resolved through NRC's confirmation of the commitments as outlined in this Order. I find that Williams' commitments as set forth in Section IV are acceptable and necessary and conclude that with these commitments the public health and safety are reasonably assured. In view of the foregoing, I have determined that the public health and safety require that the Williams' commitments be confirmed by this Order. Based on the above and the Williams' consent, this Order is immediately effective upon issuance. Williams is required to provide the NRC with a letter summarizing its actions by no later than eight months from the date of the Confirmatory Order. Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 103, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR Part 50, *It is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that:* By no later than six months from the date of issuance of the Confirmatory Order, unless otherwise stated, Williams Industrial Services Group, LLC, will: 1. Broadly communicate throughout Williams Group the false statement issue and its consequences, including the consequences to the involved WPC Site Supervisor. 2. Modify its existing “Ethics Policy” to include an explicit reference to the necessity for complete and candid communications with government agencies. 3. Incorporate the revised Ethics Policy into all future SCWE training by Williams Group. 4. Require its General Counsel to conduct a comprehensive review of industry SCWE “best practices” and compare these practices with the existing Williams Group program in order to ensure that the Williams Group program incorporates industry trends and developments. 5. Continue its existing SCWE training program and train all Williams Group supervisory and management level employees involved in nuclear work. The training program will incorporate both 10 CFR 50.5 and 10 CFR 50.7 awareness. Additionally, Williams will ensure that on-site employees are provided SCWE training either from the licensee or from the Williams Group site project manager upon badging at a licensed facility. 6. Engage an independent auditor to perform an audit of Williams Group's SCWE training, within 12 months of issuance of the Confirmatory Order and every year thereafter for a total of three years, in order to ensure the effectiveness of the SCWE program. At the conclusion of the three years independent audit cycle, Williams Group will institute internal audits, as described in item #7 below. 7. Require that Williams internal auditing function conduct annual audits of the SCWE training program in order to ensure and verify that all Williams Group managers, supervisors and contractor employees receive and acknowledge SCWE, 10 CFR 50.5, and 10 CFR 50.7 training. 8. Ensure that the results of each audit are provided to senior Williams Group management for appropriate action, and that the results of both the independent audit and subsequent Williams' analysis and/or actions are made available to the Commission for review upon request. Towards this end, Williams will notify the Commission when the audits and management responses are complete and documented. 9. Designate a manager whose responsibilities include overall administration of the SCWE program. This manager will be responsible for ensuring that the program is being communicated to all Williams Group site and contract employees, the program is up-to-date and incorporates best practices, the audits described above take place as scheduled, results of audits are communicated to senior management, and appropriate followup is performed and corrective actions are taken based upon the audit findings. This manager will report directly to the Williams president for these SCWE activities. 10. Require its General Counsel to review employment practices as they relate to SCWE policy, in order to ensure that all Williams Group employment practices are consistent with 10 CFR 50.7. 11. Modify its performance appraisal system to ensure that performance appraisals for Williams Group site supervisors/project managers at NRC-licensed facilities include a rating factor that addresses implementation of the SCWE program. The Director, Office of Enforcement, may relax or rescind, in writing, any of the above conditions upon a showing by Williams Industrial Services Group, LLC, of good cause. Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other than Williams Industrial Services Group, LLC, may request a hearing within 20 days of its issuance. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good cause for the extension. Any request for a hearing shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555. Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the Assistant General Counsel for Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the same address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 2443 Warrenville Road, Suite 210, Lisle, IL 60532-4351, and to Williams Group. Because of potential disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government Offices, it is requested that requests for hearing be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to *hearingdocket@nrc.gov* and also to the Office of the General Counsel either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to *OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov* . If a person requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and (f). If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Confirmatory Order should be sustained. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section IV above shall be final 20 days from the date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received. An answer or a request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated this 15th day of November, 2005. Michael R. Johnson, Director, Office of Enforcement. [FR Doc. E5-6450 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION State of Minnesota: NRC Draft Staff Assessment of a Proposed Agreement Between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of Minnesota AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of a Proposed Agreement with the State of Minnesota. SUMMARY: By letter dated July 6, 2004, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota requested that the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)enter into an Agreement with the State as authorized by section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act). Under the proposed Agreement, the Commission would discontinue, and Minnesota would assume, portions of the Commission's regulatory authority exercised within the State. As required by the Act, NRC is publishing the proposed Agreement for public comment. NRC is also publishing the summary of a Draft Staff Assessment of the Minnesota Program. Comments are requested on the proposed Agreement and the NRC Draft Staff Assessment which finds the Program adequate to protect public health and safety and compatible with NRC's program for regulation of agreement material. The proposed Agreement would release (exempt) persons who possess or use certain radioactive materials in Minnesota from portions of the Commission's regulatory authority. The Act requires that NRC publish those exemptions. Notice is hereby given that the pertinent exemptions have been previously published in the **Federal Register** and are codified in the Commission's regulations as 10 CFR part 150. DATES: The comment period expires December 9, 2005. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission cannot assure consideration of comments received after the expiration date. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to Mr. Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments may be submitted electronically at *nrcrep@nrc.gov.* The NRC maintains an Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The documents may be accessed through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* . If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room

(PDR)reference staff at

(800)397-4209, or

(301)415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Copies of comments received by NRC may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Public File Area O-1-F21, Rockville, Maryland. Copies of the request for an Agreement by the Governor of Minnesota including all information and documentation submitted in support of the request, and copies of the full text of the NRC Draft Staff Assessment are also available for public inspection in the NRC's Public Document Room—ADAMS Accession Numbers: ML041960496, ML041960499, ML052440344, ML050130375, ML050140452, ML051330043, ML051740384, ML051650073, ML052200424, and ML053060372. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cardelia Maupin, Office of State and Tribal Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone

(301)415-3340 or e-mail *CHM1@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since section 274 of the Act was added in 1959, the Commission has entered into Agreements with 33 States. The Agreement States currently regulate approximately 17,200 agreement material licenses, while NRC regulates approximately 4,700 licenses. Under the proposed Agreement, approximately 167 NRC licenses will transfer to Minnesota. NRC periodically reviews the performance of the Agreement States to assure compliance with the provisions of section 274. Section 274e requires that the terms of the proposed Agreement be published in the **Federal Register** for public comment once each week for four consecutive weeks. This Notice is being published in fulfillment of the requirement. I. Background

(a)Section 274d of the Act provides the mechanism for a State to assume regulatory authority, from the NRC, over certain radioactive materials 1 and activities that involve use of the materials. 1 The radioactive materials are:

(a)Byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act;

(b)byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(2) of the Act;

(c)source materials as defined in section 11z. of the Act; and

(d)special nuclear materials as defined in section 11aa. of the Act, restricted to quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass. In a letter dated July 6, 2004, Governor Pawlenty certified that the State of Minnesota has a program for the control of radiation hazards that is adequate to protect public health and safety within Minnesota for the materials and activities specified in the proposed Agreement, and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for these materials and activities. Included with the letter was the text of the proposed Agreement, which is shown in Appendix A to this Notice. The radioactive materials and activities (which together are usually referred to as the “categories of materials”) which the State of Minnesota requests authority over are:

(1)The possession and use of byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act;

(2)the possession and use of source materials; and

(3)the possession and use of special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass, as provided for in regulations or orders of the Commission.

(b)The proposed Agreement contains articles that: —Specify the materials and activities over which NRC's authority is discontinued and transferred; —Specify the activities over which the Commission will retain regulatory authority; —Continue the authority of the Commission to safeguard nuclear materials and restricted data; —Commit the State of Minnesota and NRC to exchange information as necessary to maintain coordinated and compatible programs; —Provide for the reciprocal recognition of licenses; —Provide for the amendment, suspension or termination of the Agreement; and —Specify the effective date of the proposed Agreement. The Commission reserves the option to modify the terms of the proposed Agreement in response to comments, to correct errors, and to make editorial changes. The final text of the Agreement, with the effective date, will be published after the Agreement is approved by the Commission, and signed by the Chairman of the Commission and the Governor of Minnesota.

(c)Minnesota currently registers users of naturally-occurring and accelerator-produced radioactive materials. Authority for Minnesota's radiation control unit and proposed Agreement State activities is primarily found in Minnesota Statutes, sections 144.12-144.121, and in the Minnesota Rules Chapter 4731. Section 144.1202 provides the authority for the Governor to enter into an Agreement with the Commission and contains provisions for the orderly transfer of regulatory authority over affected licensees from NRC to the State. After the effective date of the Agreement, licenses issued by NRC would continue in effect as Minnesota licenses until the licenses expire or are replaced by State-issued licenses.

(d)The NRC Draft Staff Assessment finds that the Minnesota Program is adequate to protect public health and safety, and is compatible with the NRC program for the regulation of agreement materials. II. Summary of the NRC Draft Staff Assessment of the Minnesota Program for the Control of Agreement Materials NRC staff has examined the Minnesota request for an Agreement with respect to the ability of the Minnesota radiation control program to regulate agreement materials. The examination was based on the Commission's policy statement “Criteria for Guidance of States and NRC in Discontinuance of NRC Regulatory Authority and Assumption Thereof by States Through Agreement” (referred to herein as the “NRC criteria”), published on January 23, 1981 (46 FR 7540), as amended by policy statements published on July 16, 1981 (46 FR 36969), and on July 21, 1983 (48 FR 33376).

(a)*Organization and Personnel.* The agreement materials program will be located within the existing Environmental Health Division (Program) of the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). The Program will be responsible for implementation of all regulatory activities related to the proposed Agreement. The educational requirements for the Program staff members are specified in the Minnesota State personnel position descriptions, and meet the NRC criteria with respect to formal education or combined education and experience requirements. All current staff members hold at least bachelor's degrees in physical or life sciences, or have a combination of education and experience at least equivalent to a bachelor's degree. Several staff members hold advanced degrees, and all staff members have had additional training plus working experience in radiation protection. The Program supervisor has more than 20 years work experience in radiation protection. The Program performed, and NRC staff reviewed, an analysis of the expected Program workload under the proposed Agreement. Based on the NRC staff review of the State's staff analysis, Minnesota has an adequate number of staff to regulate radioactive materials under the terms of the Agreement. The Program will employ a staff of 3.5 full-time professional/technical and administrative employees for the agreement materials program. The distribution of the qualifications of the individual staff members will be balanced to the distribution of categories of licensees transferred from NRC.

(b)*Legislation and Regulations.* The MDH is designated by law in section 144.1202 of the Minnesota Statutes to be the radiation control agency. The law provides the MDH the authority to issue licenses, issue orders, conduct inspections, and to enforce compliance with regulations, license conditions, and orders. Licensees are required to provide access to inspectors. The MDH is authorized to promulgate regulations. The State's regulations are found in Minnesota Rules Chapter 4731 effective June 2004. The NRC staff reviewed and forwarded comments on these regulations to the Minnesota staff. The NRC staff review verified that, with the comments incorporated, the Minnesota rules, and with the addition of legally binding requirements to incorporate recent changes to 10 CFR part 35 and 71 contain all of the provisions that are necessary in order to be compatible with the regulations of the NRC on the effective date of the Agreement between the State and the Commission. The MDH has extended the effect of the rules, where appropriate, to apply to naturally-occurring or accelerator-produced radioactive materials (NARM), in addition to agreement materials. The NRC staff is satisfied that the Minnesota Program, will not regulate in areas reserved to the NRC in matters concerning or affecting the proposed Agreement.

(c)*Storage and Disposal.* Minnesota has also adopted NRC compatible requirements for the handling and storage of radioactive material. Minnesota will not seek authority to regulate the land disposal of radioactive material as waste. The Minnesota waste disposal requirements cover the preparation, classification and manifesting of radioactive waste, generated by Minnesota licensees, for transfer for disposal to an authorized waste disposal site or broker.

(d)*Transportation of Radioactive Material.* Minnesota has adopted regulations compatible with NRC regulations in 10 CFR part 71. Part 71 contains the requirements that licensees must follow when preparing packages containing radioactive material for transport. Part 71 also contains requirements related to the licensing of packaging for use in transporting radioactive materials.

(e)*Recordkeeping and Incident Reporting.* Minnesota has adopted the sections compatible with the NRC regulations which specify requirements for licensees to keep records, and to report incidents, accidents, or events involving materials.

(f)*Evaluation of License Applications.* Minnesota has adopted regulations compatible with the NRC regulations that specify the requirements which a person must meet in order to get a license to possess or use radioactive materials. Minnesota has also developed a licensing procedures manual, along with the accompanying regulatory guides, which are adapted from similar NRC documents and contain guidance for the Program staff when evaluating license applications.

(g)*Inspections and Enforcement.* The Minnesota radiation control program has adopted a schedule providing for the inspection of licensees as frequently as the inspection schedule used by NRC. The Program has adopted procedures for the conduct of inspections, the reporting of inspection findings, and the reporting of inspection results to the licensees. The Program has also adopted, by rule based on the Minnesota Statutes, procedures for the enforcement of regulatory requirements.

(h)*Regulatory Administration.* The MDH is bound by requirements specified in State law for rulemaking, issuing licenses, and taking enforcement actions. The Program has also adopted administrative procedures to assure fair and impartial treatment of license applicants. Minnesota law prescribes standards of ethical conduct for State employees.

(i)*Cooperation with Other Agencies.* Minnesota law deems the holder of an NRC license on the effective date of the proposed Agreement to possess a like license issued by Minnesota. The law provides that these former NRC licenses will expire on the date of expiration specified in the NRC license. Minnesota also provides for “timely renewal.” This provision affords the continuance of licenses for which an application for renewal has been filed more than 30 days prior to the date of expiration of the license. NRC licenses transferred while in timely renewal are included under the continuation provision. Minnesota Rules Chapter 4731 provides exemptions from the State's requirements for licensing of sources of radiation for NRC and U.S. Department of Energy contractors or subcontractors. The proposed Agreement commits Minnesota to use its best efforts to cooperate with the NRC and the other Agreement States in the formulation of standards and regulatory programs for the protection against hazards of radiation and to assure that the Minnesota Program will continue to be compatible with the NRC's program for the regulation of agreement materials. The proposed Agreement stipulates the desirability of reciprocal recognition of licenses, and commits the Commission and Minnesota to use their best efforts to accord such reciprocity. III. Staff Conclusion Subsection 274d of the Act provides that the Commission shall enter into an agreement under subsection 274b with any State if:

(a)The Governor of the State certifies that the State has a program for the control of radiation hazards adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the agreement materials within the State, and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for the agreement materials; and

(b)The Commission finds that the State program is in accordance with the requirements of subsection 274o, and in all other respects compatible with the NRC's program for the regulation of materials, and that the State program is adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials covered by the proposed Agreement. On the basis of its Draft Staff Assessment, the NRC staff concludes that the State of Minnesota meets the requirements of the Act. The State's program, as defined by its statutes, regulations, personnel, licensing, inspection, and administrative procedures, is compatible with the program of the NRC and adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials covered by the proposed Agreement. NRC will continue the formal processing of the proposed Agreement which includes publication of this Notice once a week for four consecutive weeks for public review and comment. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of November, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. Appendix A—An Agreement Between the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of Minnesota for the Discontinuance of Certain Commission Regulatory Authority and Responsibility within the State Pursuant to Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended *Whereas,* The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) is authorized under section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to enter into agreements with the Governor of any State providing for discontinuance of the regulatory authority of the Commission within the State under Chapters 6, 7, and 8, and section 161 of the Act with respect to byproduct materials as defined in sections 11e.(1) and

(2)of the Act, source materials, and special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass; and, *Whereas,* The Governor of the State of Minnesota is authorized under § 144.1202, Subdivision 1, Minnesota Statutes, to enter into this Agreement with the Commission; and, *Whereas,* The Governor of the State of Minnesota certified on July 6, 2004, that the State of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the State) has a program for the control of radiation hazards adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials within the State covered by this Agreement, and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for such materials; and, *Whereas,* The Commission found on [date] that the program of the State for the regulation of the materials covered by this Agreement is compatible with the Commission's program for the regulation of such materials and is adequate to protect public health and safety; and, *Whereas,* The State and the Commission recognize the desirability and importance of cooperation between the Commission and the State in the formulation of standards for protection against hazards of radiation and in assuring that State and Commission programs for protection against hazards of radiation will be coordinated and compatible; and, *Whereas,* The Commission and the State recognize the desirability of the reciprocal recognition of licenses, and of the granting of limited exemptions from licensing of those materials subject to this Agreement; and, *Whereas,* This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; *Now, therefore,* It is hereby agreed between the Commission and the Governor of the State acting in behalf of the State as follows: Article I Subject to the exceptions provided in Articles II, IV, and V, the Commission shall discontinue, as of the effective date of this Agreement, the regulatory authority of the Commission in the State under Chapters 6, 7, and 8, and section 161 of the Act with respect to the following materials: A. Byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act; B. Source materials; C. Special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass. Article II This Agreement does not provide for discontinuance of any authority and the Commission shall retain authority and responsibility with respect to: A. The regulation of the construction and operation of any production or utilization facility or any uranium enrichment facility; B. The regulation of the export from or import into the United States of byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials, or of any production or utilization facility; C. The regulation of the disposal into the ocean or sea of byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials waste as defined in the regulations or orders of the Commission; D. The regulation of the disposal of such other byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials as the Commission from time to time determines by regulation or order should, because of the hazards or potential hazards thereof, not be so disposed without a license from the Commission; E. The evaluation of radiation safety information on sealed sources or devices containing byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials and the registration of the sealed sources or devices for distribution, as provided for in regulations or orders of the Commission. F. The regulation of the land disposal of by-product, source, or special nuclear materials waste received from other persons; G. The extraction or concentration of source material from source material ore and the management and disposal of the resulting byproduct material. Article III With the exception of those activities identified in Article II, paragraphs A through D, this Agreement may be amended, upon application by the State and approval by the Commission, to include one or more of the additional activities specified in Article II, paragraphs E, F, and G, whereby the State may then exert regulatory authority and responsibility with respect to those activities. Article IV Notwithstanding this Agreement, the Commission may from time to time by rule, regulation, or order, require that the manufacturer, processor, or producer of any equipment, device, commodity, or other product containing source, byproduct, or special nuclear materials shall not transfer possession or control of such product except pursuant to a license or an exemption from licensing issued by the Commission. Article V This Agreement shall not affect the authority of the Commission under subsection 161b or 161i of the Act to issue rules, regulations, or orders to protect the common defense and security, to protect restricted data, or to guard against the loss or diversion of special nuclear materials. Article VI The Commission will cooperate with the State and other Agreement States in the formulation of standards and regulatory programs of the State and the Commission for protection against hazards of radiation and to assure that Commission and State programs for protection against hazards of radiation will be coordinated and compatible. The State agrees to cooperate with the Commission and other Agreement States in the formulation of standards and regulatory programs of the State and the Commission for protection against hazards of radiation and to assure that the State's program will continue to be compatible with the program of the Commission for the regulation of materials covered by this Agreement. The State and the Commission agree to keep each other informed of proposed changes in their respective rules and regulations, and to provide each other the opportunity for early and substantive contribution to the proposed changes. The State and the Commission agree to keep each other informed of events, accidents, and licensee performance that may have generic implication or otherwise be of regulatory interest. Article VII The Commission and the State agree that it is desirable to provide reciprocal recognition of licenses for the materials listed in Article I licensed by the other party or by any other Agreement State. Accordingly, the Commission and the State agree to develop appropriate rules, regulations, and procedures by which such reciprocity will be accorded. Article VIII The Commission, upon its own initiative after reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State, or upon request of the Governor of the State, may terminate or suspend all or part of this Agreement and reassert the licensing and regulatory authority vested in it under the Act if the Commission finds that

(1)such termination or suspension is required to protect public health and safety, or

(2)the State has not complied with one or more of the requirements of Section 274 of the Act. The Commission may also, pursuant to section 274j of the Act, temporarily suspend all or part of this Agreement if, in the judgment of the Commission, an emergency situation exists requiring immediate action to protect public health and safety and the State has failed to take necessary steps. The Commission shall periodically review actions taken by the State under this Agreement to ensure compliance with section 274 of the Act which requires a State program to be adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials covered by this Agreement and to be compatible with the Commission's program. Article IX This Agreement shall become effective on [date], and shall remain in effect unless and until such time as it is terminated pursuant to Article VIII. Done at [City, State] this [date] day of [month], [year]. For the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Nils J. Diaz, *Chairman.* For the State of Minnesota. Tim Pawlenty, *Governor.* [FR Doc. 05-22581 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 6

Traces to 6 documents

CFR