Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 19551-19553 [E6-5595]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2006 / Notices
wishes to make an oral statement. Based
on its review of the requests received by
June 20, 2006, the Licensing Board
reserves the right to cancel or shorten
any of the sessions (Monday evening,
Tuesday morning or Tuesday afternoon)
due to a lack of adequate public interest.
Written requests to make an oral
statement should be submitted to:
Mail: Office of the Secretary,
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Fax: (301) 415–1101 (verification
(301) 415–1966).
E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov.
In addition, using the same method of
service, a copy of the written request to
make an oral statement should be sent
to the Chairman of this Licensing Board
as follows:
Mail: Alex S. Karlin, Chairman, c/o:
Jonathan Rund, Esq., Law Clerk, Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Mail
Stop T–3 E2C, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555–
0001.
Fax: (301) 415–5599 (verification
(301) 415–6094).
E-mail: jmr3@nrc.gov and
ksv@nrc.gov.
D. Written Limited Appearance
Statements (In Lieu of Oral Statements)
A written limited appearance
statement may be submitted to the
Board regarding this proceeding at any
time. Such statements should be sent to
the Office of the Secretary using the
methods prescribed above, with a copy
to the Licensing Board Chairman. A
person who has already filed a written
limited appearance statement in this
matter 7 is not required to resubmit it,
but should notify the Board, as specified
above, if he or she wishes to make an
oral statement during the June sessions.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
III. Notice of Evidentiary Hearing
In addition to the oral limited
appearance statement sessions
discussed above, the public is notified
that this Board subsequently will
conduct an evidentiary hearing on the
four contentions admitted in this
proceeding. The hearing will be
governed by the ‘‘Informal Hearing
Procedures’’ set forth in 10 CFR part,
subparts C and L, see 10 CFR 2.300–
2.390., 2.1200–2.1213, and is scheduled
to take place during the weeks of
September 11, and October 16, 2006.
Although the precise dates and
locations of the evidentiary hearings are
yet to be determined, it is the
7 See Licensing Board Memorandum and Order
(Scheduling Prehearing Conference Call and Oral
Argument) at 2–3 (October 1, 2004) (unpublished).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Apr 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
Commission’s policy and practice to
hold them in the general vicinity of the
site of the nuclear facility that is the
subject of the proceeding, so that
members of the public may attend.8 See
10 CFR 2.328–2.329, 2.331. However, it
appears that some of the contentions in
this proceeding involve some
proprietary commercial information,
which would require that those portions
of the evidentiary hearing be closed to
the general public, with only the
authorized parties able to attend.9 The
current plan is to hold the evidentiary
hearings in Vermont, if possible, except
for those portions of the proceeding that
may need to be closed to the public,
which may be held at NRC Headquarters
in Rockville, Maryland. The Board will
issue a subsequent order establishing
the exact dates, times, and locations for
the evidentiary hearing and copies of
these rulings will be available to the
public at the NRC Public Document
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland, and through the
NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov.
IV. Availability of Documentary
Information Regarding the Proceeding
Documents relating to this proceeding
are available for public inspection at the
Commission’s Public Document Room
or electronically from the publicly
available records component of NRC’s
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS
is accessible from the NRC Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html (the Public Electronic
Reading Room). 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 (800) 397–4209, (301) 415–
4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
V. Scheduling Information Updates
Any updated/revised scheduling
information regarding the evidentiary
hearing and limited appearance sessions
can be found on the NRC Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/
public-meetings/index.cfm or by calling
(800) 368–5642, extension 5036, or (301)
415–5036.
8 See Exelon Generation Co., LLC (Early Site
Permit for Clinton ESP Site), Licensing Board
Memorandum and Order (Denying Motion
Requesting Reconsideration of Initial Prehearing
Conference Location) at 2–3 (April 5, 2004)
(unpublished); 10 CFR part 2, Appendix A, § I(a)
(2004), deleted Final Rule, Changes to Adjudicatory
Process, 69 FR 2182, 2274 (January 14, 2004).
9 In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, portions of a
hearing may be closed to the public if the matters
at issue involve the discussion of confidential or
legally protected information.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19551
It is so ordered.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, April 10,
2006.
For the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board.10
Alex S. Karlin,
Chairman, Administrative Judge.
[FR Doc. E6–5582 Filed 4–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–275 and 50–323]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company;
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to
the Facility Operating Licenses Nos.
DPR–80 and DPR–82, issued to Pacific
Gas and Electric Company (PG&E/the
licensee) for operation of the Diablo
Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2
(DCPP) located in San Luis Obispo
County, California.
The proposed amendments would
delete Section 2F, ‘‘Antitrust’’ and
Appendix C, ‘‘Antitrust Conditions,’’
from the facility operating licenses.
According to the application, the
antitrust license conditions impose
what are known as the ‘‘Stanislaus
Commitments,’’ which were derived
from the licensing process for the
proposed, but never completed,
Stanislaus Nuclear Plant. The licensee
indicates that, as reflected in a 2003
Commission decision (which
subsequently was vacated), it appears to
PG&E that there is no legal authority in
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (AEA or Act), or in the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s
(NRC’s) regulations, for the NRC to
continue to impose these conditions
absent PG&E’s consent. Moreover, in
light of changes in the electric industry,
NRC imposition of these conditions and
the prospect of NRC enforcement of
these conditions are no longer necessary
to serve their original intended purpose.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendments, the Commission
will have made findings required by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
10 Copies of this order were sent this date by
Internet e-mail transmission to the representatives
for (1) licensees Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee
L.L.C. and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; (2)
intervenors Vermont Department of Public Service
and New England Coalition of Brattleboro,
Vermont; and (3) the Staff.
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
19552
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2006 / Notices
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
(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), § 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?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments are
administrative changes that do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated because the amendments do not
involve any change in the design,
configuration, or operation of the plant. All
limiting conditions for operation, limiting
safety system settings and safety limits
specified in the technical specifications (TS)
remain unchanged.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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 accident
from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments do not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated because:
• The amendments do not involve any
change in the design, configuration, or
operation of the plant. The current plant
design and design bases will remain the
same. The current plant safety analyses
remain complete and accurate in addressing
the design basis events and in analyzing
plant response and consequences.
• The limiting conditions for operations,
limiting safety system settings and safety
limits specified in TS are not affected by the
change.
• The amendments do not introduce a new
mode of plant operation or new accident
precursors, do not involve any physical
alterations to plant configurations, or make
changes to system set points that could
initiate a new or different kind of accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Apr 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments do not involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety
because:
• The amendments do not involve any
change in the design, configuration, or
operation of the plant. The change does not
affect either the way in which the plant
structures, systems, and components perform
their safety function or their design and
licensing bases.
• The amendments do not affect plant
safety margins that are established through
limiting conditions for operation, limiting
safety system settings and safety limits
specified in TS.
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 amendments until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license
amendments before expiration of the 60day period provided that its final
determination is that the amendments
involve no significant hazards
consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendments
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–
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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, 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
amendments to the subject facility
operating licenses 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
or a petition for leave to intervene.
Requests for a hearing and petitions 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 O1F21, 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
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2006 / Notices
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 amendments
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.
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 amendments and make them
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendments. 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
amendments.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Apr 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 or petition for
leave to intervene should also be sent to
Richard F. Locke, Esq., Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, P.O. Box 7442, San
Francisco, California 94120, the attorney
for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendments dated January 19, 2006,
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 24th day
of February 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19553
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan B. Wang,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Licensing Project Management,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–5595 Filed 4–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–361 and 50–362]
Southern California Edison Company
and San Diego Gas and Electric
Company, the City of Riverside,
California and the City of Anaheim,
California, San Onofre Nuclear
Generating Station, Units 2 and 3;
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) Part 50, Appendix G for Facility
Operating License No. NPF–10 and
NPF–15, issued to Southern California
Edison (the licensee), for operation of
the San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 2 and 3 (SONGS 2 and 3),
located in San Diego County, California.
Therefore, as provided by 10 CFR 51.21
and 51.33, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
By letter dated January 28, 2005, the
licensee submitted a license amendment
request where, among other changes, the
licensee requested the use of an
alternate methodology for calculating
the stress intensity factor KIm due to
internal pressure loading. As required
by the safety evaluation on topical
report Combustion Engineering (CE)
Topical Report NPSD–683–A, Revision
6, dated March 16, 2001, the licensee,
by its supplement dated January 12,
2006, included a request for an
exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix G for pressure
temperature (P–T) limits since the
alternate methodology applies the CE
Nuclear Steam Supply System method
for calculating KIm stress intensity
values.
The proposed action would exempt
the licensee from certain requirements
of Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 to
allow the application of the
methodology in CE NPSD–683–A,
Revision 6, ‘‘The Development of a RCS
[Reactor Coolant System] Pressure and
Temperature Limits Report for the
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 72 (Friday, April 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19551-19553]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5595]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to the Facility Operating Licenses
Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(PG&E/the licensee) for operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant,
Units 1 and 2 (DCPP) located in San Luis Obispo County, California.
The proposed amendments would delete Section 2F, ``Antitrust'' and
Appendix C, ``Antitrust Conditions,'' from the facility operating
licenses. According to the application, the antitrust license
conditions impose what are known as the ``Stanislaus Commitments,''
which were derived from the licensing process for the proposed, but
never completed, Stanislaus Nuclear Plant. The licensee indicates that,
as reflected in a 2003 Commission decision (which subsequently was
vacated), it appears to PG&E that there is no legal authority in the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA or Act), or in the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) regulations, for the NRC to continue to
impose these conditions absent PG&E's consent. Moreover, in light of
changes in the electric industry, NRC imposition of these conditions
and the prospect of NRC enforcement of these conditions are no longer
necessary to serve their original intended purpose.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended
[[Page 19552]]
(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), Sec. 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?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments are administrative changes that do not
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an accident previously evaluated because the amendments do not
involve any change in the design, configuration, or operation of the
plant. All limiting conditions for operation, limiting safety system
settings and safety limits specified in the technical specifications
(TS) remain unchanged.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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 accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments do not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated
because:
The amendments do not involve any change in the design,
configuration, or operation of the plant. The current plant design
and design bases will remain the same. The current plant safety
analyses remain complete and accurate in addressing the design basis
events and in analyzing plant response and consequences.
The limiting conditions for operations, limiting safety
system settings and safety limits specified in TS are not affected
by the change.
The amendments do not introduce a new mode of plant
operation or new accident precursors, do not involve any physical
alterations to plant configurations, or make changes to system set
points that could initiate a new or different kind of accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments do not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety because:
The amendments do not involve any change in the design,
configuration, or operation of the plant. The change does not affect
either the way in which the plant structures, systems, and
components perform their safety function or their design and
licensing bases.
The amendments do not affect plant safety margins that
are established through limiting conditions for operation, limiting
safety system settings and safety limits specified in TS.
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 amendments until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendments before expiration of the
60-day period provided that its final determination is that the
amendments involve no significant hazards consideration. In addition,
the Commission may issue the amendments 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
(PDR), 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 amendments to the subject
facility operating licenses 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 or a petition
for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and petitions 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 O1F21, 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
[[Page 19553]]
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
amendments 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.
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
amendments and make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendments. 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 amendments.
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 or petition
for leave to intervene should also be sent to Richard F. Locke, Esq.,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O. Box 7442, San Francisco,
California 94120, the attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendments dated January 19, 2006, 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 24th day of February 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan B. Wang,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Licensing
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-5595 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
