Utility Name; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 5226-5228 [05-1771]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
5226
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 1, 2005 / Notices
fabricated with Optimized ZIRLOTM.
Based on the staff’s evaluation, as set
forth above, the staff considers that
granting the proposed exemption will
not defeat the underlying purpose of 10
CFR 50.44, 10 CFR 50.46, or Appendix
K to 10 CFR part 50. Accordingly,
special circumstances, are present
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii).
3.3.5. Other Standards in 10 CFR 50.12
The staff examined the rest of the
licensee’s rationale to support the
exemption request, and concluded that
the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM would
satisfy 10 CFR 50.12(a) as follows:
(1) The requested exemption is
authorized by law:
No law precludes the activities
covered by this exemption request. The
Commission, based on technical reasons
set forth in rulemaking records,
specified the specific cladding materials
identified in 10 CFR 50.44, 10 CFR
50.46, and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix K.
Cladding materials are not specified by
statute.
(2) The requested exemption does not
present an undue risk to the public
health and safety as stated by the
licensee:
The LTA safety evaluation will ensure that
these acceptance criteria [in the
Commission’s regulations] are met following
the insertion of LTAs containing Optimized
ZIRLOTM material. Fuel assemblies using
Optimized ZIRLOTM cladding will be
evaluated using NRC-approved analytical
methods and plant specific models to address
the changes in the cladding material
properties. The safety analysis for VSNS is
supported by the applicable technical
specification. The VSNS reload cores
containing Optimized ZIRLOTM cladding
will continue to be operated in accordance
with the operating limits specified in the
technical specifications. LTAs utilizing
Optimized ZIRLOTM cladding will be placed
in non-limiting core locations. Thus, the
granting of this exemption request will not
pose an undue risk to public health and
safety.
The NRC staff has evaluated these
considerations as set forth in Section 3.1
of this exemption. For the reasons set
forth in that section, the staff concludes
that Optimized ZIRLOTM may be used
as a cladding material for no more than
four LTAs to be placed in nonlimiting
core locations during VSNS’s next
refueling outage, and that an exemption
from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.44,
10 CFR 50.46, and 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix K does not pose an undue
risk to the public health and safety.
4.0 Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), the exemption is authorized by
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:06 Jan 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
law, will not present an undue risk to
the public health and safety, and is
consistent with the common defense
and security. Also, special
circumstances are present. Therefore,
the Commission hereby grants SCE&G
exemptions from the requirements of 10
CFR 50.44, 10 CFR 50.46, and 10 CFR
part 50, Appendix K, to allow four LTAs
containing fuel rods with Optimized
ZIRLOTM and several different
developmental clad alloys.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the
Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will not have
a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment (70 FR 1742).
This exemption is effective upon
issuance.
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 14th
day of January 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James E. Lyons,
Deputy Director, Division of Licensing Project
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05–1772 Filed 1–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–390]
Utility Name; Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment
to Facility Operating License No. NPF–
90 issued to the Tennessee Valley
Authority (the licensee) for operation of
the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN),
Unit 1, located in Rhea County,
Tennessee.
The proposed change allows entry
into a mode or other specified condition
in the applicability of a Technical
Specification (TS), while in a condition
statement and the associated required
actions of the TS, provided the licensee
performs a risk assessment and manages
risk consistent with the program in
place for complying with the
requirements of title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), part 50,
section 50.65(a)(4). Limiting Condition
for Operation (LCO) 3.0.4 exceptions in
individual TSs would be eliminated,
several notes or specific exceptions are
revised to reflect the related changes to
LCO 3.0.4, and Surveillance
Requirement (SR) 3.0.4 is revised to
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
reflect the LCO 3.0.4 allowance. The No
Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination concerning this change
was published in the Federal Register
on January 18, 2005 (70 FR 2901).
A separate change, not described in
the above Federal Register notice, was
also included in the licensee’s
application. In accordance with TS Task
Force (TSTF)—285, Charging Pump
Swap Low-Temperature OverPressurization Allowance, LCO 3.4.12,
Cold Overpressure Mitigation System
(COMS), is being revised to modify and
relocate two notes in the WBN TSs. The
changes are all administrative, except a
change which would allow two charging
pumps to be made capable of injecting
into the Reactor Coolant System to
support pump swap operations for a
period not to exceed 1 hour instead of
the currently allowed 15 minutes.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), and the Commission’s
regulations.
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR
50.92, this means that operation of the
facility in accordance with the proposed
amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from
any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR
50.91(a), the licensee has provided its
analysis of the issue of no significant
hazards consideration, which is
presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change to the WBN TS is
consistent with improvements made to the
Standard Technical Specifications for
Westinghouse Plants and continues to
provide controls for safe operation within the
required limits. The probability of occurrence
or the consequences of an accident are not
significantly increased as a result of the
increased time from 15 minutes to one hour
to allow pump swap operations. The one
hour time period is reasonable considering
the small likelihood of an event during this
brief period and the other administrative
controls available (e.g., operator action to
stop any pump that inadvertently starts) and
considering the required vent paths in
accordance with the LCO. The proposed
change does not affect degradation of
accident mitigation systems. The proposed
E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM
01FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 1, 2005 / Notices
revision continues to maintain the required
safety functions.
Accordingly, the probability of an accident
or the consequences of an accident
previously evaluated is not significantly
increased.
2. Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change improves the WBN
TS consistent with improvements made to
the Standard Technical Specifications (STS)
for Westinghouse Plants and continues to
provide controls for safe operation within the
required limits. The subject change improves
currently allowed pump swap provisions by
realistically addressing time to safely and
deliberately secure the operating pump and
place the alternate pump in service, and
provides additional assurance that seal
injection requirements are not compromised.
No new or different accident potential is
created by the subject change. The change
does not adversely impact plant equipment,
test methods, or operating practices.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to the WBN TS is
consistent with improvements made to the
Standard Technical Specifications for
Westinghouse Plants and provides improved
pump swap provisions which should
enhance safe operation within required
limits. The change does not adversely impact
plant equipment, test methods, or operating
practices. The proposed change does not
affect degradation of accident mitigation
systems and continues to maintain the
required safety functions of COMS to assure
that the reactor vessel is adequately protected
against exceeding pressure and temperature
limits. Therefore, the proposed change does
not involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received
within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license
amendment before expiration of the 60day period provided that its final
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:06 Jan 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards
consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment
prior to the expiration of the 30-day
comment period should circumstances
change during the 30-day comment
period such that failure to act in a
timely way would result, for example,
in derating or shutdown of the facility.
Should the Commission take action
prior to the expiration of either the
comment period or the notice period, it
will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the
Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that
the need to take this action will occur
very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted
by mail to the Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of
Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and should cite the publication
date and page number of this Federal
Register notice. Written comments may
also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two
White Flint North, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30
a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room, located at One White
Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and
petitions for leave to intervene is
discussed below.
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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5227
NRC Web site, https://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 particularity the interest of
the petitioner in the proceeding, and
how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The petition
should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted
with particular reference to the
following 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/requestor 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 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.
E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM
01FEN1
5228
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 20 / Tuesday, February 1, 2005 / Notices
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.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendment.
Nontimely 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 email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy
of the request for hearing and petition
for leave to intervene should also be
sent to the General Counsel, Tennessee
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:06 Jan 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
Valley Authority, ET 11A, 400 West
Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, TN
37902, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated September 15, 2004,
which is available for public inspection
at the Commission’s PDR, located at
One White Flint North, File Public Area
O1 F21, 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, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–
397–4209, (301) 415–4737, or by e-mail
to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 25th
day of January 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Douglas V. Pickett,
Senior Project Manager, Section II, Project
Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05–1771 Filed 1–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Workshop on Regulatory Structure for
New Plant Licensing, Part 1:
Technology-Neutral Framework
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has issued a working
draft of a NUREG report ‘‘Regulatory
Structure for New Plant Licensing, Part
1: Technology-Neutral Framework’’
(draft NUREG–3–2005) for public
review and comment. The purpose of
this working draft NUREG is to provide
an approach, scope, and acceptance
criteria that could be used by the NRC
staff to develop a technology-neutral set
of requirements for future plant
licensing. At the present time, the
material contained in the working draft
NUREG is preliminary and does not
represent a final staff position, but
rather is an interim product issued for
the purpose of engaging stakeholders
early in the development of the
document and to support a workshop to
be held in March 2005. As such, certain
sections of this document are
incomplete and are planned to be
completed following receipt of initial
stakeholder feedback. It is the staff’s
intent to complete this document in late
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2005 and issue it as a final draft for
stakeholder review and comment.
The work represented in this
document is, however, considered
sufficiently developed to illustrate one
possible way to establish a technologyneutral approach to future plant
licensing and to identify the key
technical and policy issues which must
be addressed; accordingly, it can serve
as a useful vehicle for engaging
stakeholders and facilitating discussion.
The NRC staff has issued a working
draft NUREG on ‘‘Regulatory Structure
for New Plant Licensing, Part 1:
Technology-Neutral Framework.’’ The
NRC staff requests comments within 90
days from the issuing date of this
Federal Register Notice. Comments may
be accompanied by relevant information
or supporting data. Please mention draft
NUREG–3–2005 in the subject line of
your comments. You may submit
comments by any one of the following
methods.
Mail comments to Rules and
Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington DC 20555–
0001.
E-mail comments to
NRCREP@nrc.gov. You may also submit
comments via the NRC’s rulemaking
Web site at https://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Address questions about our rulemaking
Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415–
5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov.
Hand deliver comments to: Rules and
Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission at (301) 415–5144.
Requests for information about the
draft NUREG may be directed to Mr. A.
Singh at (301) 415–0250 or e-mail
AXS3@nrc.gov.
Comments will be most helpful if
received by April 22, 2005. Comments
received after this date will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but
the NRC is able to ensure consideration
only for comments received on or before
this date.
The NRC intends to conduct a
workshop on March 14–16, 2005, to
help facilitate the review and comment
process. This workshop will be held in
the auditorium at NRC headquarters,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
Please notify Mr. A. Singh at (301)
415–0250 or e-mail AXS3@nrc.gov, if
you plan to attend the workshop so that
you can be pre-registered. Preregistration will help facilitate your
entry into the NRC facility for the
workshop. In addition, please arrive at
NRC headquarters 45 minutes prior to
the start of the workshop so that you
E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM
01FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5226-5228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1771]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-390]
Utility Name; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to
Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
NPF-90 issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee) for
operation of the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Unit 1, located in Rhea
County, Tennessee.
The proposed change allows entry into a mode or other specified
condition in the applicability of a Technical Specification (TS), while
in a condition statement and the associated required actions of the TS,
provided the licensee performs a risk assessment and manages risk
consistent with the program in place for complying with the
requirements of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
part 50, section 50.65(a)(4). Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO)
3.0.4 exceptions in individual TSs would be eliminated, several notes
or specific exceptions are revised to reflect the related changes to
LCO 3.0.4, and Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.0.4 is revised to
reflect the LCO 3.0.4 allowance. The No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination concerning this change was published in the
Federal Register on January 18, 2005 (70 FR 2901).
A separate change, not described in the above Federal Register
notice, was also included in the licensee's application. In accordance
with TS Task Force (TSTF)--285, Charging Pump Swap Low-Temperature
Over-Pressurization Allowance, LCO 3.4.12, Cold Overpressure Mitigation
System (COMS), is being revised to modify and relocate two notes in the
WBN TSs. The changes are all administrative, except a change which
would allow two charging pumps to be made capable of injecting into the
Reactor Coolant System to support pump swap operations for a period not
to exceed 1 hour instead of the currently allowed 15 minutes.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated;
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change to the WBN TS is consistent with
improvements made to the Standard Technical Specifications for
Westinghouse Plants and continues to provide controls for safe
operation within the required limits. The probability of occurrence
or the consequences of an accident are not significantly increased
as a result of the increased time from 15 minutes to one hour to
allow pump swap operations. The one hour time period is reasonable
considering the small likelihood of an event during this brief
period and the other administrative controls available (e.g.,
operator action to stop any pump that inadvertently starts) and
considering the required vent paths in accordance with the LCO. The
proposed change does not affect degradation of accident mitigation
systems. The proposed
[[Page 5227]]
revision continues to maintain the required safety functions.
Accordingly, the probability of an accident or the consequences
of an accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change improves the WBN TS consistent with
improvements made to the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for
Westinghouse Plants and continues to provide controls for safe
operation within the required limits. The subject change improves
currently allowed pump swap provisions by realistically addressing
time to safely and deliberately secure the operating pump and place
the alternate pump in service, and provides additional assurance
that seal injection requirements are not compromised. No new or
different accident potential is created by the subject change. The
change does not adversely impact plant equipment, test methods, or
operating practices. Therefore, the proposed change does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to the WBN TS is consistent with
improvements made to the Standard Technical Specifications for
Westinghouse Plants and provides improved pump swap provisions which
should enhance safe operation within required limits. The change
does not adversely impact plant equipment, test methods, or
operating practices. The proposed change does not affect degradation
of accident mitigation systems and continues to maintain the
required safety functions of COMS to assure that the reactor vessel
is adequately protected against exceeding pressure and temperature
limits. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result,
for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of
this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to
Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document
Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
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 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, https://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 particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following 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/requestor 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 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.
[[Page 5228]]
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.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Nontimely 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 to the General Counsel,
Tennessee Valley Authority, ET 11A, 400 West Summit Hill Drive,
Knoxville, TN 37902, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated September 15, 2004, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White
Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 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, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of January 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Douglas V. Pickett,
Senior Project Manager, Section II, Project Directorate II, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05-1771 Filed 1-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
