Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 58879-58881 [E6-16445]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 193 / Thursday, October 5, 2006 / Notices
b. Gulf Coast Rebuilding Initiative.
c. CFO Update.
d. GSE Housing Fund Update.
e. Center for Foreclosure Solutions.
f. NHSA Update.
VIII. Training Division Update.
IX. Adjournment.
Jeffrey T. Bryson,
General Counsel/Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–8538 Filed 10–3–06; 1:19 pm]
BILLING CODE 7570–02–M
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–382]
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Entergy Operations, Inc.; Notice of
Partial Denial of Amendment to Facility
Operating License and Opportunity for
Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the Commission)
has denied a portion of an amendment
request by Entergy Operations, Inc. (the
licensee), for an amendment to Facility
Operating License No. NPF–38, issued
to the licensee for operation of the
Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit
3, located in St. Charles Parish,
Louisiana. The Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of this amendment was
published in the Federal Register on
December 7, 2004 (69 FR 70717).
The purpose of the licensee’s
amendment request was to revise
Technical Specifications (TS) 3.7.4,
‘‘Ultimate Heat Sink,’’ to provide
clarification that the ambient
temperature monitoring requirement
that is specified in TS 3.7.4.d only
applies when the affected ultimate heat
sink train is considered to be operable
and to delete TS 3.7.4.c. Deleting TS
3.7.4.c would allow the plant to take
credit for the dry cooling tower fans that
are not protected from tornado missiles
when a tornado warning is in effect.
The NRC staff has concluded that the
portion of the licensee’s request
regarding deletion of TS 3.7.4.c cannot
be granted. The licensee was notified of
the Commission’s denial of the
proposed change by a letter dated
September 28, 2006.
By 30 days from the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register, the licensee may demand a
hearing with respect to the denial
described above. Any person whose
interest may be affected by this
proceeding may file a written petition
for leave to intervene pursuant to the
requirements of 10 CFR 2.309.
A request for hearing or petition for
leave to intervene must be filed with the
Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 Oct 04, 2006
Jkt 211001
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001 Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or
may be delivered to the Commission’s
Public Document Room (PDR), located
at One White Flint North, Public File
Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland, by the
above date. Because of possible delays
in delivery to mail to U.S. Government
offices, it is requested that petitions for
leave to intervene and requests for
hearing be transmitted to the Secretary
of the Commission either by means of
facsimile transmission to 301–415–1101
or by e-mail to hearingdocket@nrc.gov.
A copy of any petitions should also be
sent to the Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and because of possible delays in
delivery of mail to the U.S. Government
offices, 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 any petitions should also be sent to
N. S. Reynolds, Esquire, Winston &
Strawn, 1700 K Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20006–3817, attorney
for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see (1) The application for
amendment dated November 5, 2004,
and (2) the Commission’s letter to the
licensee dated September 28, 2006.
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and
will be accessible electronically through
the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System’s (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room link 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
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 September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Catherine Haney,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–16448 Filed 10–4–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58879
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50–528, Stn 50–529, and
STN 50–530]
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station,
Units 1, 2, and 3; 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–
41, Facility Operating License No. NPF–
51, and Facility Operating License No.
NPF–74, issued to Arizona Public
Service Company (the licensee) for the
operation of Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3,
respectively.
The proposed amendment would
modify requirements of Technical
Specification (TS) 3.7.2, ‘‘Main Steam
Isolation Valves (MSIVs),’’ to include
specific requirements (Conditions,
Required Actions, and Completion
Times) for the MSIV actuator trains.
Additionally, surveillance requirement
(SR) 3.7.2.1 will be revised to clearly
identify that each MSIV actuator train is
required to be tested to support the
operability of the associated MSIV.
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
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
58880
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 193 / Thursday, October 5, 2006 / Notices
The proposed changes to incorporate
requirements for the MSIV actuator trains do
not involve any design or physical changes
to the facility, including the MSIVs and
actuator trains themselves. The design and
functional performance requirements,
operational characteristics, and reliability of
the MSIVs and actuator trains remain
unchanged. Therefore, there is no impact on
the design safety function of the MSIVs to
close (as an accident mitigator), nor is there
any change with respect to inadvertent
closure of an MSIV (as a potential transient
initiator). Since no failure mode or initiating
condition that could cause an accident
(including any plant transient) evaluated in
the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station
(PVNGS) Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR) 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 or any other equipment
required for accident mitigation. With respect
to MSIV actuator train Completion Time, the
consequences of an accident are independent
of equipment Completion Time as long as
adequate equipment availability is
maintained. The proposed Condition A Note
takes into account the redundancy of the
actuator trains and the accident analysis
assumption that only 3 of 4 MSIVs close in
the accident. Adequate equipment
availability would therefore continue to be
available and Condition C [of TS 3.7.2] for an
inoperable MSIV would continue to support
the Palo Verde safety analysis. On this basis,
the consequences of applicable analyzed
accidents (such as a main steam line break)
are not significantly impacted by the
proposed changes.
Therefore, 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 actuator trains do
not involve any design or physical changes
to the facility, including the MSIVs 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 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 actuator trains
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 Oct 04, 2006
Jkt 211001
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 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, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing 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
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area
O1F21, 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,
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
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 193 / Thursday, October 5, 2006 / Notices
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 Oct 04, 2006
Jkt 211001
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 Michael G. Green, Senior
Regulatory Counsel, Pinnacle West
Capital Corporation, P.O. Box 52034,
Mail Station 8695, Phoenix, Arizona
85072–2034, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated September 26, 2006,
which is available for public inspection
at the Commission’s PDR, located at
One White Flint North, File Public Area
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible from
the 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 September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mel B. Fields,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–16445 Filed 10–4–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58881
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–361 and 50–362; License
Nos. NPF–10 and NPF–15]
In the Matter of Southern California
Edison Company the City of Anaheim,
CA; San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 2 and 3; Order
Approving Transfer of Licenses and
Conforming Amendments
I.
Southern California Edison Company
(SCE), San Diego Gas and Electric
Company (SDG&E), the City of
Riverside, California (Riverside), and
the City of Anaheim, California
(Anaheim), are the owners of San
Onofre Nuclear Generating Station,
Units 2 and 3 (SONGS 2 and 3), located
in San Diego County, California. With
respect to their ownership, they co-hold
the Facility Operating Licenses Nos.
NPF–10 and NPF–15, for SONGS 2 and
3. SCE is authorized to act as agent for
the other co-owners and has exclusive
responsibility and control under the
licenses over the physical construction,
operation, and maintenance of the
facility.
II.
By application dated March 10, 2006,
as supplemented May 16, 2006, SCE,
acting on behalf of itself and Anaheim,
requested pursuant to Title 10, Section
50.80 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR 50.80), that the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) consent
to certain license transfers to permit the
transfer of Anaheim’s 3.16-percent
undivided ownership interest in SONGS
2 and 3 to SCE, excluding Anaheim’s
interest in its spent fuel and in the
SONGS 2 and 3 independent spent fuel
storage installation (ISFSI). The initial
application and the supplement are
hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the
application’’ unless otherwise indicated.
SCE also requested, pursuant 10 CFR
50.90, approval of conforming license
amendments to reflect the transfer. The
conforming license amendments would
address Anaheim’s transfer of its above
stated ownership interests in the
facility. Anaheim will retain its
ownership interests in its spent nuclear
fuel and the facility’s ISFSI located on
the facility’s site, and financial
responsibility for its spent fuel and a
portion of the facility’s
decommissioning costs. Anaheim
proposes to remain a licensee for the
purposes of its retained interests and
liabilities.
Notice of consideration of approval of
the transfer of the Facility Operating
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 193 (Thursday, October 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58879-58881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16445]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50-528, Stn 50-529, and STN 50-530]
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; 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-41, Facility Operating License No. NPF-51, and Facility Operating
License No. NPF-74, issued to Arizona Public Service Company (the
licensee) for the operation of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station,
Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
The proposed amendment would modify requirements of Technical
Specification (TS) 3.7.2, ``Main Steam Isolation Valves (MSIVs),'' to
include specific requirements (Conditions, Required Actions, and
Completion Times) for the MSIV actuator trains. Additionally,
surveillance requirement (SR) 3.7.2.1 will be revised to clearly
identify that each MSIV actuator train is required to be tested to
support the operability of the associated MSIV.
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
[[Page 58880]]
The proposed changes to incorporate requirements for the MSIV
actuator trains do not involve any design or physical changes to the
facility, including the MSIVs and actuator trains themselves. The
design and functional performance requirements, operational
characteristics, and reliability of the MSIVs and actuator trains
remain unchanged. Therefore, there is no impact on the design safety
function of the MSIVs to close (as an accident mitigator), nor is
there any change with respect to inadvertent closure of an MSIV (as
a potential transient initiator). Since no failure mode or
initiating condition that could cause an accident (including any
plant transient) evaluated in the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station (PVNGS) Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)
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 or any other
equipment required for accident mitigation. With respect to MSIV
actuator train Completion Time, the consequences of an accident are
independent of equipment Completion Time as long as adequate
equipment availability is maintained. The proposed Condition A Note
takes into account the redundancy of the actuator trains and the
accident analysis assumption that only 3 of 4 MSIVs close in the
accident. Adequate equipment availability would therefore continue
to be available and Condition C [of TS 3.7.2] for an inoperable MSIV
would continue to support the Palo Verde safety analysis. On this
basis, the consequences of applicable analyzed accidents (such as a
main steam line break) are not significantly impacted by the
proposed changes.
Therefore, 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
actuator trains do not involve any design or physical changes to the
facility, including the MSIVs 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 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
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, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing 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
O1F21, 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, 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
[[Page 58881]]
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 Michael G. Green, Senior
Regulatory Counsel, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, P.O. Box 52034,
Mail Station 8695, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2034, attorney for the
licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated September 26, 2006, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White
Flint North, File Public Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible from the 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 September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mel B. Fields,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-16445 Filed 10-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
