TXU Generation Company LP; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Unit 1; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-87 Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 56191-56193 [05-19236]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 185 / Monday, September 26, 2005 / Notices
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–445]
TXU Generation Company LP;
Comanche Peak Steam Electric
Station, Unit 1; Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License No. NPF–87
Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and
Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendment to
Facility Operating License No. NPF–87,
issued to TXU Generation Company LP
(the licensee), for operation of the
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station
(CPSES), Unit 1, located in Somervell
County, Texas.
The proposed amendment would
revise Technical Specification (TS)
5.6.5, ‘‘Core Operating Limits Report
(COLR),’’ by adding topical report
WCAP–13060–P–A, ‘‘Westinghouse
Fuel Assembly Reconstitution
Evaluation Methodology,’’ to the list of
NRC approved methodologies to be used
at CPSES, Unit 1.
By application dated April 27, 2005,
as supplemented by letter dated July 20,
2005, the licensee requested the
approval of the proposed amendment by
October 8, 2005. The approval of the
proposed amendment is needed to
permit the licensee to use the
reconstitution method of fuel assembly
repair at CPSES Unit 1. The NRC staff
inadvertently did not publish a Federal
Register notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses, and Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, in time to permit a 30
days period for prior public comment as
required by Section 50.91 of Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR). The Commission finds that
exigent circumstances exist, in that the
licensee and the Commission must act
quickly and that time does not permit
the Commission to publish a Federal
Register notice allowing 30 days for
prior public comment, and it also
determines that the amendment
involves no significant hazards.
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.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for
amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff
must determine that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:49 Sep 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
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. Do the proposed changes involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change is
administrative in nature and as such
does not impact the condition or
performance of any plant structure,
system or component. The core
operating limits are established to
support Technical Specifications 3.1,
3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.9. The core operating
limits ensure that fuel design limits are
not exceeded during any conditions of
normal operation or in the event of any
Anticipated Operational Occurrence
(AOO). The methods used to determine
the core operating limits for each
operating cycle are based on methods
previously found acceptable by the NRC
and listed in TS section 5.6.5.b.
Application of these approved methods
will continue to ensure that acceptable
operating limits are established to
protect the fuel cladding integrity
during normal operation and AOOs. The
requested Technical Specification
change does not involve any plant
modifications or operational changes
that could affect system reliability,
performance, or possibility of operator
error. The requested change does not
affect any postulated accident
precursors, does not affect any accident
mitigation systems, and does not
introduce any new accident initiation
mechanisms.
As a result, the proposed change to
the CPSES Technical Specifications
does not involve any increase in the
probability or the consequences of any
accident or malfunction of equipment
important to safety previously evaluated
since neither accident probabilities nor
consequences are being affected by this
proposed administrative change.
2. Do the proposed changes create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56191
The proposed change is
administrative in nature, and therefore
does not involve any change in station
operation or physical modifications to
the plant. In addition, no changes are
being made in the methods used to
respond to plant transients that have
been previously analyzed. No changes
are being made to plant parameters
within which the plant is normally
operated or in the setpoints, which
initiate protective or mitigative actions,
and no new failure modes are being
introduced.
Therefore, the proposed
administrative change to the CPSES
Technical Specifications does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind
of accident or malfunction of equipment
important to safety from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a
significant reduction in a margin of
safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change is
administrative in nature and does not
impact station operation or any plant
structure, system or component that is
relied upon for accident mitigation.
Furthermore, the margin of safety
assumed in the plant safety analysis is
not affected in any way by the proposed
administrative change.
Therefore, the proposed change to the
CPSES Technical Specifications does
not involve any 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 14 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 the 14-day notice period.
However, should circumstances change
during the notice period, such that
failure to act in a timely way would
result, for example, in derating or
shutdown of the facility, the
Commission may issue the license
amendment before the expiration of the
14-day notice period, provided that its
final determination is that the
amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public
and State comments received. Should
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
56192
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 185 / Monday, September 26, 2005 / Notices
the Commission take this action, it will
publish in the Federal Register a notice
of 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 (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, 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 and
Issuance of Orders’’ 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:49 Sep 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
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/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends
to rely to establish those facts or expert
opinion. The petitioner/requestor must
provide 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
amendments 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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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(c)(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 George L. Edgar, Esq., Morgan,
Lewis and Bockius, 1800 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20036, attorney for the
licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendments dated April 27, 2005, and
supplement dated July 20, 2005, which
are available for public inspection 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 ADAMS Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site https://www.nrc.gov/
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 185 / Monday, September 26, 2005 / Notices
reading-rm.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 21st day
of September 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mohan C. Thadani,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project
Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05–19236 Filed 9–23–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–52469; File No. SR–Amex–
2005–089]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Rule Change to Adopt
Options Licensing Fees for Certain
Vanguard ETF Options
September 19, 2005.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on
September 9, 2005, the American Stock
Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items
have been prepared by Amex. Amex
submitted the proposed rule change
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3
and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4 which
renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to modify its
options fee schedule by adopting a percontract side licensing fee for the orders
of specialists, registered options traders
(‘‘ROTs’’), firms, non-member market
makers, and broker-dealers in
connection with transactions in options
on certain Vanguard exchange-traded
funds (‘‘ETFs’’).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on Amex’s Web site
https://www.amex.com, at Amex’s
principal office, and at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission,
Amex included statements concerning
the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed
rule change. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. Amex has prepared
summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange has entered into
numerous license agreements with
issuers and owners of indexes for the
purpose of trading options on certain
ETFs. The requirement to pay an index
licensing fee to third parties is a
condition to the listing and trading of
these ETF options. In many cases, the
Exchange is required to pay a significant
licensing fee to issuers or index owners
that may not be reimbursed. In an effort
to recoup the costs associated with
certain index licenses, the Exchange has
established a per-contract side licensing
fee for the orders of specialists, ROTs,
firms, non-member market makers, and
broker-dealers collected on every
transaction in certain designated
products in which such market
participant is a party.5
The purpose of the proposal is to
charge a per-contract side licensing fee
in connection with transactions in
certain options on the Vanguard ETFs
(‘‘Vanguard ETF Options’’). Specifically,
Amex seeks to charge an options
licensing fee of $0.10 per contract side
for specialist, ROT, firm, non-member
market maker, and broker-dealer orders
executed on the Exchange in connection
with the following Vanguard ETFs:
(1) Vanguard Consumer Discretionary
VIPERs (symbol: VCR);
(2) Vanguard Consumer Staples
VIPERs (symbol: VDC);
(3) Vanguard Energy VIPERs (symbol:
VDE);
1 15
2 17
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:49 Sep 23, 2005
5 See File No. SR–Amex–2005–087 (filed on
August 31, 2004, and pending before the
Commission).
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56193
(4) Vanguard Financials VIPERs
(symbol: VFH);
(5) Vanguard Health Care VIPERs
(symbol: VHT);
(6) Vanguard Industrials VIPERs
(symbol: VIS);
(7) Vanguard Information Technology
VIPERs (symbol: VGT);
(8) Vanguard Materials VIPERs
(symbol: VAW);
(9) Vanguard Utilities VIPERs
(symbol: VPU);
(10) Vanguard Telecommunication
Services VIPERs (symbol: VOX);
(11) Vanguard REIT VIPERs (symbol:
VNQ);
(12) Vanguard Small-Cap Growth
VIPERs (symbol: VBK);
(13) Vanguard Small-Cap Value
VIPERs (symbol: VBR);
(14) Vanguard Mid-Cap VIPERs
(symbol: VO);
(15) Vanguard Large-Cap VIPERs
(symbol: VV);
(16) Vanguard Growth VIPERs
(symbol: VUG);
(17) Vanguard Value VIPERs (symbol:
VTV); and
(18) Vanguard Small-Cap VIPERs
(symbol: VB).
In addition, the Exchange also
proposes to charge an options licensing
fee of $0.09 per contract side for
specialist, ROT, firm, non-member
market maker, and broker-dealer orders
executed on the Exchange in connection
with the Vanguard Extended Market
VIPERs (symbol: VXF). The proposal
also revises Section V (Options
Licensing Fee) of the Options Fee
Schedule to designate the SPDR O-Strip
by its symbol ‘‘OOO.’’ In all cases, the
fees set forth in the Options Fee
Schedule are charged only to Exchange
members through whom the orders are
placed.
The proposed options licensing fees
will allow the Exchange to recoup its
costs in connection with index licensing
fees for the trading of the Vanguard ETF
Options. The fees will be collected on
every Vanguard ETF Option order of a
specialist, ROT, firm, non-member
market maker, and broker-dealer
executed on the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that collection of a
per-contract side licensing fee in
connection with Vanguard ETF Options
orders placed by those market
participants that are the beneficiaries of
the Exchange’s index license agreements
is justified and consistent with the rules
of the Exchange.
The Exchange notes that Amex in
recent years has revised a number of
fees to better align Exchange fees with
the actual cost of delivering services and
to reduce Exchange subsidies of such
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 185 (Monday, September 26, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56191-56193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19236]
[[Page 56191]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-445]
TXU Generation Company LP; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station,
Unit 1; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License No. NPF-87 Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendment to Facility Operating License No.
NPF-87, issued to TXU Generation Company LP (the licensee), for
operation of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Unit 1,
located in Somervell County, Texas.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
5.6.5, ``Core Operating Limits Report (COLR),'' by adding topical
report WCAP-13060-P-A, ``Westinghouse Fuel Assembly Reconstitution
Evaluation Methodology,'' to the list of NRC approved methodologies to
be used at CPSES, Unit 1.
By application dated April 27, 2005, as supplemented by letter
dated July 20, 2005, the licensee requested the approval of the
proposed amendment by October 8, 2005. The approval of the proposed
amendment is needed to permit the licensee to use the reconstitution
method of fuel assembly repair at CPSES Unit 1. The NRC staff
inadvertently did not publish a Federal Register notice of
Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses,
and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, in
time to permit a 30 days period for prior public comment as required by
Section 50.91 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).
The Commission finds that exigent circumstances exist, in that the
licensee and the Commission must act quickly and that time does not
permit the Commission to publish a Federal Register notice allowing 30
days for prior public comment, and it also determines that the
amendment involves no significant hazards.
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.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine 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. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change is administrative in nature and as such does
not impact the condition or performance of any plant structure, system
or component. The core operating limits are established to support
Technical Specifications 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.9. The core
operating limits ensure that fuel design limits are not exceeded during
any conditions of normal operation or in the event of any Anticipated
Operational Occurrence (AOO). The methods used to determine the core
operating limits for each operating cycle are based on methods
previously found acceptable by the NRC and listed in TS section
5.6.5.b. Application of these approved methods will continue to ensure
that acceptable operating limits are established to protect the fuel
cladding integrity during normal operation and AOOs. The requested
Technical Specification change does not involve any plant modifications
or operational changes that could affect system reliability,
performance, or possibility of operator error. The requested change
does not affect any postulated accident precursors, does not affect any
accident mitigation systems, and does not introduce any new accident
initiation mechanisms.
As a result, the proposed change to the CPSES Technical
Specifications does not involve any increase in the probability or the
consequences of any accident or malfunction of equipment important to
safety previously evaluated since neither accident probabilities nor
consequences are being affected by this proposed administrative change.
2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change is administrative in nature, and therefore does
not involve any change in station operation or physical modifications
to the plant. In addition, no changes are being made in the methods
used to respond to plant transients that have been previously analyzed.
No changes are being made to plant parameters within which the plant is
normally operated or in the setpoints, which initiate protective or
mitigative actions, and no new failure modes are being introduced.
Therefore, the proposed administrative change to the CPSES
Technical Specifications does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident or malfunction of equipment important to
safety from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change is administrative in nature and does not impact
station operation or any plant structure, system or component that is
relied upon for accident mitigation. Furthermore, the margin of safety
assumed in the plant safety analysis is not affected in any way by the
proposed administrative change.
Therefore, the proposed change to the CPSES Technical
Specifications does not involve any 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 14 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 the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should
[[Page 56192]]
the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of 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
(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 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 and Issuance of Orders'' 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/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts
or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor must provide 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 amendments 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.
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(c)(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 George L. Edgar, Esq.,
Morgan, Lewis and Bockius, 1800 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036,
attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendments dated April 27, 2005, and supplement dated
July 20, 2005, which are available for public inspection 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 ADAMS
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site
https://www.nrc.gov/
[[Page 56193]]
reading-rm.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 21st day of September 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mohan C. Thadani,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate IV, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05-19236 Filed 9-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
