Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Alabama Power Company, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 30148-30150 [E5-2630]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
30148
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Notices
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to
submit an information collection
request to OMB and solicitation of
public comment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a
submittal to OMB for review of
continued approval of information
collections under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Information pertaining to the
requirement to be submitted:
1. The title of the information
collection: 10 CFR Part 26, ‘‘Fitness for
Duty Program.’’
2. Current OMB approval number:
3150–0146.
3. How often the collection is
required: On occasion.
4. Who is required or asked to report:
All licensees authorized to construct or
operate a nuclear power reactor; all
licensees authorized to use, possess, or
transport Category 1 nuclear material;
and contractors/vendors who have
developed a fitness-for-duty program
that is formally reviewed and approved
by a licensee, which meets the
requirements of part 26.
5. The number of annual respondents:
69.
6. The number of hours needed
annually to complete the requirement or
request: 61,143 (5,853 hours reporting
[an average of 4.3 hours/response] and
55,290 hours recordkeeping [an average
of 801 hours/recordkeeper]).
7. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 26, ‘‘Fitness
for Duty Program,’’ requires licensees of
nuclear power plants, contractors/
vendors who have developed a fitnessfor-duty program that is formally
reviewed by a licensee, and licensees
authorized to possess, use, or transport
Category 1 nuclear material to
implement fitness-for-duty programs to
assure that personnel are not under the
influence of any substance or mentally
or physically impaired, to retain certain
records associated with the management
of these programs, and to provide
reports concerning significant events
and program performance. Compliance
with these program requirements is
mandatory for licensees subject to 10
CFR part 26. In addition, licensees of
nuclear power plants are required to
comply with security order EA–03–038,
which implements work hour controls
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:52 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
for security force personnel and requires
licensees to retain certain records
associated with the management of this
security order.
Submit, by July 25, 2005, comments
that address the following questions:
1. Is the proposed collection of
information necessary for the NRC
toproperly perform its functions? Does
the information have practical utility?
2. Is the burden estimate accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the
information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology?
A copy of the draft supporting
statement may be viewed free of charge
at the NRC Public Document Room, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Room O–1 F21, Rockville, MD
20852. OMB clearance requests are
available at the NRC worldwide Web
site:https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/
doc-comment/omb/. The
document will be available on the NRC
home page site for 60 days after the
signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions about the
information collection requirements
may be directed to the NRC Clearance
Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, T–5 F53,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, by
telephone at 301–415–7233, or by
internet electronic mail at
infocollectsnrc.gov.
Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee)
for operation of the Joseph M. Farley
Nuclear Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 2,
located in Houston County, Alabama.
The proposed amendments would
revise FNP, Units 1 and 2 Technical
Specifications Plant Systems Section 3.7
and Design Features Section 4.3 to
establish spent fuel cask storage area
boron concentration limits and to
restrict the minimum burn up of spent
fuel assemblies associated with spent
fuel cask loading operations.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendments, 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 Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) section 50.92, this means that
operation of the facility in accordance
with the proposed amendments 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:
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day
of May, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton,
NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Services.
[FR Doc. E5–2632 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Cask loading operations will not require
any physical changes to part 50 structures,
systems, or components, nor will their
performance requirements be altered. The
potential to handle a spent fuel cask was
considered in the original design of the plant.
Therefore, the response of the plant to
previously analyzed Part 50 accidents and
related radiological releases will not be
adversely impacted, and will bound those
postulated during cask loading activities in
the cask storage area. Accordingly, the
proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Existing fuel handling procedures and
associated administrative controls remain
applicable for cask loading operations.
Additionally, the soluble boron
concentration required to maintain Keff ≤ 0.95
for postulated criticality accidents associated
with cask loading operations was also
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
Inc., Alabama Power Company, Joseph
M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2;
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendments to Facility Operating
License, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–2
and NPF–8, issued to Southern Nuclear
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM
25MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Notices
evaluated. The results of the analyses, using
a methodology previously approved by the
NRC, demonstrate that the amount of soluble
boron required to compensate for the positive
reactivity associated with these postulated
accidents (659 ppm) remains well below the
existing spent fuel pool minimum boron
concentration limit of 2000 ppm.
Accordingly, the same limit has been
proposed for cask loading operations in the
cask storage area. Therefore, the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated is not created.
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
An NRC approved methodology was used
to perform the criticality analysis which
provides the basis to incorporate a new burn
up versus enrichment curve into the plant
Technical Specifications to ensure criticality
requirements are met during spent fuel cask
loading. Accordingly, the existing minimum
boron concentration limit for the spent fuel
of 2000 ppm will continue to remain
bounding during cask loading operations.
Existing criticality limits will also be
maintained should it be postulated that the
spent fuel pool be flooded when connected
to the cask storage area with unborated water
(Keff < 1.0) or should it become flooded with
borated water to 400 ppm (Keff ≤ 0.95) during
cask loading operations. This determination
accounts for uncertainties at a 95-percent/95percent probability/confidence level.
Proposed Technical Specification 3.7.17
requires that the spent fuel transfer canal gate
and the cask storage area gate be open except
when moving the spent fuel cask into or out
of the cask storage area. The cask storage area
will be isolated from the spent fuel pool
volume during movement of the cask into
and out of the cask storage area. Due to the
minimal time that spent fuel will be stored
in the cask storage area with the cask storage
area isolated from the spent fuel pool
volume, a boron dilution event is not
considered credible while the cask storage
area is isolated. However, should it be
postulated that a boron dilution event does
occur during this time period, Keff will
remain less than 1.0 should the cask storage
area become fully flooded with unborated
water. Therefore, there will not be a
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Based upon the preceding information,
SNC has concluded that the requested license
amendment does not involve a significant
hazards consideration.
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:52 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
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
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30149
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
E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM
25MYN1
30150
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Notices
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.
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-
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:52 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy
of the request for hearing and petition
for leave to intervene should also be
sent to M. Stanford Blanton, Esq., Balch
and Bingham, Post Office Box 306, 1710
Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham,
Alabama 35201, attorney for the
licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated May 17, 2005, 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 at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day
of May, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Evangelos Marinos,
Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate II,
Division of Licensing Project Management,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5–2630 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030–05004]
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment for Northern States Power
Company D.B.A. Xcel Energy
Pathfinder Site, Sioux Falls, SD
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Notice of availability.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chad Glenn, Project Manager,
Decommissioning Directorate, Division
of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Telephone: (301) 415–6722; fax number:
(301) 415–5398; e-mail: cjg1@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) is considering the issuance of a
license amendment to Materials License
No. 22–08799–02 issued to Northern
States Power Company D.B.A. Xcel
Energy (the licensee) to authorize
decommissioning at its Pathfinder site
in Minnehaha County, South Dakota for
unrestricted use and termination of this
license. NRC has prepared an
Environmental Assessment (EA) in
support of this amendment in
accordance with the requirements of 10
CFR Part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC
has concluded that a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) is
appropriate. The amendment will be
issued following the publication of this
Notice.
II. EA Summary
The purpose of the proposed
amendment is to authorize
decommissioning of the licensee’s
Pathfinder site in Sioux Falls, South
Dakota for unrestricted use to allow for
license termination. Specifically, the
proposed amendment would
incorporate the Pathfinder
Decommissioning Plan (DP) into the
license and authorize decommissioning
activities in accordance with the DP. On
February 17, 2004, Xcel Energy
submitted the Pathfinder DP for NRC
approval and requested a license
amendment. Xcel Energy’s request was
published in the Federal Register on
August 4, 2004 (69 FR 47185) with a
notice of an opportunity to request a
hearing and an opportunity to provide
comments on the amendment and its
environmental impacts. The NRC staff
has received no hearing request or
comments on the proposed amendment.
The NRC staff has prepared an EA in
support of the proposed license
amendment. The staff has reviewed the
Pathfinder DP and examined the
environmental impacts of
decommissioning. Based on its review,
the staff has also determined that the
environmental impacts are enveloped
by the generic analysis performed in
support of ‘‘Radiological Criteria for
License Termination’’ (62 FR 39058).
Additionally, no non-radiological
impacts were identified. The staff also
finds that the proposed
decommissioning of the site is in
compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402, the
radiological criteria for unrestricted use.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the EA, NRC has
concluded that there are no significant
environmental impacts from the
proposed amendment and has
E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM
25MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30148-30150]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-2630]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Alabama Power Company,
Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-2 and NPF-8, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
(the licensee) for operation of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant
(FNP), Units 1 and 2, located in Houston County, Alabama.
The proposed amendments would revise FNP, Units 1 and 2 Technical
Specifications Plant Systems Section 3.7 and Design Features Section
4.3 to establish spent fuel cask storage area boron concentration
limits and to restrict the minimum burn up of spent fuel assemblies
associated with spent fuel cask loading operations.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR) section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed amendments 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?
Cask loading operations will not require any physical changes to
part 50 structures, systems, or components, nor will their
performance requirements be altered. The potential to handle a spent
fuel cask was considered in the original design of the plant.
Therefore, the response of the plant to previously analyzed Part 50
accidents and related radiological releases will not be adversely
impacted, and will bound those postulated during cask loading
activities in the cask storage area. Accordingly, the proposed
changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Existing fuel handling procedures and associated administrative
controls remain applicable for cask loading operations.
Additionally, the soluble boron concentration required to maintain
Keff <= 0.95 for postulated criticality accidents
associated with cask loading operations was also
[[Page 30149]]
evaluated. The results of the analyses, using a methodology
previously approved by the NRC, demonstrate that the amount of
soluble boron required to compensate for the positive reactivity
associated with these postulated accidents (659 ppm) remains well
below the existing spent fuel pool minimum boron concentration limit
of 2000 ppm. Accordingly, the same limit has been proposed for cask
loading operations in the cask storage area. Therefore, the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated is not created.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
An NRC approved methodology was used to perform the criticality
analysis which provides the basis to incorporate a new burn up
versus enrichment curve into the plant Technical Specifications to
ensure criticality requirements are met during spent fuel cask
loading. Accordingly, the existing minimum boron concentration limit
for the spent fuel of 2000 ppm will continue to remain bounding
during cask loading operations. Existing criticality limits will
also be maintained should it be postulated that the spent fuel pool
be flooded when connected to the cask storage area with unborated
water (Keff < 1.0) or should it become flooded with
borated water to 400 ppm (Keff <= 0.95) during cask
loading operations. This determination accounts for uncertainties at
a 95-percent/95-percent probability/confidence level. Proposed
Technical Specification 3.7.17 requires that the spent fuel transfer
canal gate and the cask storage area gate be open except when moving
the spent fuel cask into or out of the cask storage area. The cask
storage area will be isolated from the spent fuel pool volume during
movement of the cask into and out of the cask storage area. Due to
the minimal time that spent fuel will be stored in the cask storage
area with the cask storage area isolated from the spent fuel pool
volume, a boron dilution event is not considered credible while the
cask storage area is isolated. However, should it be postulated that
a boron dilution event does occur during this time period,
Keff will remain less than 1.0 should the cask storage
area become fully flooded with unborated water. Therefore, there
will not be a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Based upon the preceding information, SNC has concluded that the
requested license amendment does not involve a significant hazards
consideration.
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
[[Page 30150]]
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.
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 M. Stanford Blanton,
Esq., Balch and Bingham, Post Office Box 306, 1710 Sixth Avenue North,
Birmingham, Alabama 35201, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated May 17, 2005, 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 at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of May, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Evangelos Marinos,
Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-2630 Filed 5-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
