Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 52173-52175 [E6-14511]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 170 / Friday, September 1, 2006 / Notices
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 should be
directed to the OMB reviewer listed
below by October 2, 2006. Comments
received after this date will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but
assurance of consideration cannot be
given to comments received after this
date. John A. Asalone, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(3150–0090), NEOB–10202, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington,
DC 20503.
Comments can also be e-mailed to
John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or
submitted by telephone at (202) 395–
4650.
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda
Jo. Shelton, 301–415–7233.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day
of August, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Beth C. St. Mary,
Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of
Information Services.
[FR Doc. E6–14515 Filed 8–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
0001. Attn: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff.
Hand delivered comments should also
be addressed to: the Office of the
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attn:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
This should be delivered between
7:30am and 4:15pm Federal Workdays.
Certain Documents relating to this
renewal may be examined at the NRC
Public Document Room, 11555
Rockville Pike, Room O1F21, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852. For more information,
contact the Public Document Room
Reference Staff at 1–800–397–4209, or at
301–415–4737, or by e-mail at
PDR@NRC.GOV.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Hughes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, telephone 301–415–1631, e-mail
DEH3@NRC.GOV.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day
of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brian E. Thomas,
Branch Chief, Research and Test Reactors
Branch, Division of Policy and Rulemaking,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–14512 Filed 8–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
United States Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Extension of comment period.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) has
granted the request of Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (the licensee) to
withdraw its December 15, 2004,
application for proposed amendment to
Facility Operating License No. DPR–28
for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station, located in Windham County.
The proposed amendment would
have revised the Technical
Specifications pertaining to control rod
operability, scram time and control rod
accumulator technical specification
surveillance testing requirements. The
Commission had previously issued a
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment published in the Federal
Register on January 18, 2005 (70 FR
2889). However, by letter dated August
10, 2006, the licensee withdrew the
proposed change.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On August 2, 2006 (71 FR
43818), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) published for public
comment a Notice of Acceptance for
Docketing of the Application and Notice
of Opportunity for Hearing Regarding
Renewal of the Ohio State University
Research Reactor. An additional 30 days
has been added to this Federal Register
Notice. The date for an applicant to file
a request for hearing and a petition for
leave to intervene has been extended to
October 2, 2006.
DATES: The comment period has been
extended and now expires on October 2,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Mail Written comments to:
the Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
16:21 Aug 31, 2006
amendment dated December 15, 2004,
as supplemented on December 12, 2005,
and July 6, 2006, and the licensee’s
letter dated August 10, 2006, which
withdrew the application for license
amendment. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management Systems (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/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,
or 301–415–4737 or by e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day
of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Shea,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I–
1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–14525 Filed 8–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
The Ohio State University Notice of
Acceptance for Docketing of the
Application and Notice of Opportunity
for Hearing Regarding Renewal of The
Ohio State University Research
Reactor Facility License No. R–75 for
an Additional 20-year Period;
Extension of Comment Period
VerDate Aug<31>2005
52173
Jkt 208001
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–271]
[Docket No. 50–482]
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station; Notice of Withdrawal of
Application for Amendment to Facility
Operating License
PO 00000
Frm 00122
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating
Corporation; Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment
to Facility Operating License No. NPF–
42, issued to Wolf Creek Nuclear
Operating Corporation (the licensee), for
operation of the Wolf Creek Generating
Station, located in Coffey County,
Kansas.
The proposed amendment would
revise Technical Specification (TS)
3.7.2, ‘‘Main Steam Isolation Valves
(MSIVs),’’ and TS 3.7.3, ‘‘Main
Feedwater Isolation Valves (MFIVs),’’ to
add the associated actuator trains to (1)
the limiting condition for operation
(LCO), (2) the conditions, required
actions, and completion times for the
LCO, and (3) the surveillance
requirements. Each MSIV and MFIV has
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
52174
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 170 / Friday, September 1, 2006 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
two actuator trains. The Table of
Contents for the TSs would be changed
to account for the resulting renumbering
of TS page numbers.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), and the Commission’s
regulations.
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission’s regulations in 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 amendment would
not (1) involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2)
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated; or (3)
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR
50.91(a), the licensee has provided its
analysis of the issue of no significant
hazards consideration, which is
presented below:
(1) Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to incorporate
requirements for the MSIV and MFIV
actuator trains do not involve any design or
physical changes to the facility, including the
MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator trains
themselves. The design and functional
performance requirements, operational
characteristics, and reliability of the MSIVs,
MFIVs, and actuator trains are thus
unchanged. There is therefore no impact on
the design safety function of the MSIVs and
MFIVs to close (as an accident mitigator), nor
is there any change with respect to
inadvertent closure of an MSIV or MFIV (as
a potential transient initiator). Since no
failure mode or initiating condition that
could cause an accident (including any plant
transient) evaluated per the Updated Safety
Analysis Report-described safety analyses is
created or affected, the change cannot
involve a significant increase in the
probability of an accident previously
evaluated.
With regard to the consequences of an
accident and the equipment required for
mitigation of the accident, the proposed
changes involve no design or physical
changes to the MSIVs, MFIVs, or any other
equipment required for accident mitigation.
With respect to MSIV and MFIV actuator
train Completion Times, the consequences of
an accident are independent of equipment
Completion Times as long as adequate
equipment availability is maintained. The
proposed MSIV and MFIV actuator
Completion Times take into account the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:21 Aug 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
redundancy of the actuator trains, only 3 of
4 MSIVs and MFIVs are assumed to close in
the accident analyses, and are limited in
extent consistent with other Completion
Times specified in the Technical
Specifications. Adequate equipment
availability would therefore continue to be
required by the Technical Specifications. On
this basis, the consequences of applicable,
analyzed accidents (such as a main steam
line break) are not significantly impacted by
the proposed changes.
Based on all of the above, the proposed
changes do not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously analyzed.
(2) Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to incorporate
requirements for the MSIV and MFIV
actuator trains do not involve any design or
physical changes to the facility, including the
MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator trains
themselves. No physical alteration of the
plant is involved, as no new or different type
of equipment is to be installed. The proposed
changes do not alter any assumptions made
in the safety analyses, nor do they involve
any changes to plant procedures for ensuring
that the plant is operated within analyzed
limits. As such, no new failure modes or
mechanisms that could cause a new or
different kind of accident from any
previously evaluated are being introduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
(3) Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to incorporate
requirements for the MSIV and MFIV
actuator trains does not alter the manner in
which safety limits or limiting safety system
settings are determined. No changes to
instrument/system actuation setpoints are
involved. The safety analysis acceptance
criteria are not impacted by this change and
the proposed change will not permit plant
operation in a configuration outside the
design basis.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant reduction in the margin
of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received
within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 (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 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 O1F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 170 / Friday, September 1, 2006 / Notices
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
requestors/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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:21 Aug 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
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-
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52175
mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy
of the request for hearing and petition
for leave to intervene should also be
sent to Jay Silberg, Esq., Pillsbury
Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037,
attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated August 25, 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 28th day
of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–14511 Filed 8–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 040–08980]
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment for Heritage Minerals, Inc.;
Manchester Township, NJ
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marjorie McLaughlin, Project Manager,
Decommissioning Branch, Division of
Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 475
Allendale Road, King of Prussia,
Pennsylvania, 19406–1415. Telephone:
(610) 337–5240; fax number: (610) 337–
5269; e-mail: mmm3@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering the
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 170 (Friday, September 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52173-52175]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14511]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-482]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
NPF-42, issued to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the
licensee), for operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station, located
in Coffey County, Kansas.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
3.7.2, ``Main Steam Isolation Valves (MSIVs),'' and TS 3.7.3, ``Main
Feedwater Isolation Valves (MFIVs),'' to add the associated actuator
trains to (1) the limiting condition for operation (LCO), (2) the
conditions, required actions, and completion times for the LCO, and (3)
the surveillance requirements. Each MSIV and MFIV has
[[Page 52174]]
two actuator trains. The Table of Contents for the TSs would be changed
to account for the resulting renumbering of TS page numbers.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 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 amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required
by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
(1) Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to incorporate requirements for the MSIV
and MFIV actuator trains do not involve any design or physical
changes to the facility, including the MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator
trains themselves. The design and functional performance
requirements, operational characteristics, and reliability of the
MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator trains are thus unchanged. There is
therefore no impact on the design safety function of the MSIVs and
MFIVs to close (as an accident mitigator), nor is there any change
with respect to inadvertent closure of an MSIV or MFIV (as a
potential transient initiator). Since no failure mode or initiating
condition that could cause an accident (including any plant
transient) evaluated per the Updated Safety Analysis Report-
described safety analyses is created or affected, the change cannot
involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident
previously evaluated.
With regard to the consequences of an accident and the equipment
required for mitigation of the accident, the proposed changes
involve no design or physical changes to the MSIVs, MFIVs, or any
other equipment required for accident mitigation. With respect to
MSIV and MFIV actuator train Completion Times, the consequences of
an accident are independent of equipment Completion Times as long as
adequate equipment availability is maintained. The proposed MSIV and
MFIV actuator Completion Times take into account the redundancy of
the actuator trains, only 3 of 4 MSIVs and MFIVs are assumed to
close in the accident analyses, and are limited in extent consistent
with other Completion Times specified in the Technical
Specifications. Adequate equipment availability would therefore
continue to be required by the Technical Specifications. On this
basis, the consequences of applicable, analyzed accidents (such as a
main steam line break) are not significantly impacted by the
proposed changes.
Based on all of the above, the proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously analyzed.
(2) Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to incorporate requirements for the MSIV
and MFIV actuator trains do not involve any design or physical
changes to the facility, including the MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator
trains themselves. No physical alteration of the plant is involved,
as no new or different type of equipment is to be installed. The
proposed changes do not alter any assumptions made in the safety
analyses, nor do they involve any changes to plant procedures for
ensuring that the plant is operated within analyzed limits. As such,
no new failure modes or mechanisms that could cause a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated are being
introduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
(3) Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to incorporate requirements for the MSIV and
MFIV actuator trains does not alter the manner in which safety
limits or limiting safety system settings are determined. No changes
to instrument/system actuation setpoints are involved. The safety
analysis acceptance criteria are not impacted by this change and the
proposed change will not permit plant operation in a configuration
outside the design basis.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in the margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result,
for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of
this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to
Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room
(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 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
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
[[Page 52175]]
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 requestors/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion.
The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
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 Jay Silberg, Esq.,
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC
20037, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated August 25, 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 28th day of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-14511 Filed 8-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P