Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 63040-63042 [E6-18022]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
63040
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 208 / Friday, October 27, 2006 / Notices
written objections including evidence
and argument that establish that the
grant of the license would not be
consistent with the requirements of 35
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.
Competing applications completed and
received by NASA within fifteen (15)
days of the date of this published notice
will also be treated as objections to the
grant of the contemplated partially
exclusive license.
Objections submitted in response to
this notice will not be made available to
the public for inspection and, to the
extent permitted by law, will not be
released under the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the
prospective license may be submitted to
Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel,
NASA Langley Research Center, MS
141, Hampton, VA 23681–2199.
Telephone (757) 864–9260; Facsimile
(757) 864–9190.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robin W. Edwards, Patent Attorney,
Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Langley
Research Center, MS 141. Telephone
(757) 864–3230; Facsimile (757) 864–
9190. Information about other NASA
inventions available for licensing can be
found online at https://
techtracs.nasa.gov/.
Dated: October 20, 2006.
Keith T. Sefton,
Deputy General Counsel, Administration and
Management.
[FR Doc. E6–18056 Filed 10–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–275]
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Pacific Gas and Electric Company;
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. DPR–
80, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric
Company (PG&E/the licensee), for
operation of the Diablo Canyon Power
Plant, Unit No. 1, located in San Luis
Obispo County, California.
The proposed amendment would
revise Technical Specification (TS)
Section 3.8.4, ‘‘DC Sources—
Operating,’’ Condition B to extend the
completion time (CT) to restore an
inoperable battery from 2 hours to 12
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Oct 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
hours, provided certain required actions
are taken. The extended CT would allow
sufficient time to correct a degraded
condition (e.g., either bypass or replace
an inoperable battery cell) without
introducing time pressure as an error
precursor. PG&E has requested that this
amendment be processed on a one-time
exigent basis to support timely
corrective action for the degraded
condition affecting a single cell that
impacts the long-term reliability of Vital
Battery 1–1. This amendment is being
requested on an exigent basis so that the
plant will avoid the risk of a TSrequired shutdown should the degraded
battery cause the Vital Battery 1–1 to be
inoperable.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act) and the Commission’s
regulations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for
amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff
must determine that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration. Under the Commission’s
regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means
that operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed
amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from
any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR
50.91(a), the licensee has provided its
analysis of the issue of no significant
hazards consideration, which is
presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes add provisions to
increase the completion time (CT) from two
hours to twelve hours, on a one-time basis for
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 1 Vital
Battery 1–1. Additional Required Actions are
specified when this battery, associated with
the plant Class 1E Direct Current (DC)
electrical power subsystem, is inoperable.
The proposed changes do not physically alter
any plant structures, systems, or components,
and are not accident initiators: therefore,
there is no effect on the probability of
accidents previously evaluated. As part of the
single failure design feature, loss of any one
DC electrical power subsystem does not
prevent the minimum safety function from
being performed. Also, the proposed changes
do not affect the type or amounts of
radionuclides release following an accident,
or affect the initiation and duration of their
release. Therefore, the consequences of
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
accidents previously evaluated, which rely
on the Class 1E battery to mitigate, are not
significantly increased.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different [kind of]
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not involve a
change in design, configuration, or method of
operation of the plant. The proposed changes
will not alter the manner in which
equipment is initiated, nor will the
functional demands on credit equipment be
changed. The proposed changes do not
impact the interaction of any systems whose
failure or malfunction can initiate an
accident. There are no identified redundant
components affected by these changes and
thus there are no new common cause failures
or any existing common cause failures that
are affected by extending the CT. The
proposed changes do not create any new
failure modes.
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 changes are based upon both
a deterministic evaluation and a riskinformed assessment.
The deterministic evaluation concluded
that though one battery associated with the
Class 1E DC electrical power subsystem is
inoperable, the redundant operable Class 1E
DC electrical power subsystems will be able
to perform the safety function as described in
the accident analysis.
The risk assessment performed to support
this license amendment request concluded
that with additional Required Actions the
increase in plant risk is small and consistent
with the NRC’s Safety Goal Policy Statement,
‘‘Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment
Methods in Nuclear Activities: Final Policy
Statement,’’ and guidance contained in
Regulatory Guides (RG) 1.174, ‘‘An Approach
for using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in
Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific
Changes to the Licensing Basis,’’ and RG
1.177, ‘‘An Approach for Plant-Specific RiskInformed Decisionmaking: Technical
Specifications.’’
Together, the deterministic evaluation and
the risk-informed assessment provide
assurance that the plant Class 1E DC
electrical power subsystem will be able to
perform its design function with a longer CT
for an inoperable Unit 1 Vital Battery 1–1 and
risk is not significantly impacted by the
change.
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
27OCN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 208 / Friday, October 27, 2006 / Notices
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received
within 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
expiration of the 14-day notice period.
However, should circumstances change
during the notice period, such that
failure to act in a timely way would
result, for example, in derating or
shutdown of the facility, the
Commission may issue the license
amendment before the expiration of the
14-day notice period, provided that its
final determination is that the
amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public
and State comments received. Should
the Commission take this action, it will
publish in the Federal Register a notice
of issuance. The Commission expects
that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted
by mail to the Chief, 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, 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 and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Oct 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
Issuance of Orders’’ in 10 CFR part 2.
Interested persons should consult a
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
available at the Commission’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area 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/doc-collections/cfr/. If a
request for a hearing or petition for
leave to intervene is filed by the above
date, the Commission or a presiding
officer designated by the Commission or
by the Chief Administrative Judge of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or
petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a
notice of a hearing or an appropriate
order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a
petition for leave to intervene shall set
forth with particularity the interest of
the petitioner in the proceeding, and
how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The petition
should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted
with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) The
name, address and telephone number of
the requestor or petitioner; (2) the
nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
right under the Act to be made a party
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
property, financial, or other interest in
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
effect of any decision or order which
may be entered in the proceeding on the
requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The
petition must also identify the specific
contentions which the petitioner/
requestor seeks to have litigated at the
proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or
fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner/requestor shall
provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention
and on which the petitioner intends to
rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must
also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the
petitioner/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends
to rely to establish those facts or expert
opinion. The petitioner/requestor must
provide sufficient information to show
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63041
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/
requestor to relief. A petitioner/
requestor who fails to satisfy these
requirements with respect to at least one
contention will not be permitted to
participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendment.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
Commission or the presiding officer of
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the petition, request and/or the
contentions should be granted based on
a balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition
for leave to intervene must be filed by:
(1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express
mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852,
Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4)
facsimile transmission addressed to the
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101,
verification number is (301) 415–1966.
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
27OCN1
63042
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 208 / Friday, October 27, 2006 / Notices
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 Richard F. Locke, Esq., Pacific
Gas and Electric Company, P.O. Box
7442, San Francisco, California 94120,
attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated October 18, 2006,
which is available for public inspection
at 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. Publicly available records
will be accessible electronically 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.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 20th day
of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan Wang,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–18022 Filed 10–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Application for a License To Export
High-Enriched Uranium
Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(b)(2)
‘‘Public Notice of Receipt of an
Application,’’ please take notice that the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission has
received the following request for an
export license. Copies of the request can
be accessed through the Public
Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html at the NRC Homepage.
A request for a hearing or petition for
leave to intervene may be filed within
30 days after publication of this notice
in the Federal Register. Any request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene
shall be served by the requestor or
petitioner upon the applicant, the Office
of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555; the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555; and the Executive Secretary,
U.S. Department of State, Washington,
DC 20520.
In its review of the application for a
license to export special nuclear
material as defined in 10 CFR Part 110
and noticed herein, the Commission
does not evaluate the health, safety or
environmental effects in the recipient
nation of the material to be exported.
The information concerning the
application follows.
NRC EXPORT LICENSE APPLICATION FOR HIGH-ENRICHED URANIUM
Name of Applicant
Date of Application
Description of material
End use
Date Received
Application Number
Docket Number
Material type
DOE/NNSA–Y12 National Security Complex
October 5, 2006
High-Enriched Uranium
(93.35%)
Total quantity
Up to 15.5 kg Uranium
(14.46925 kg U–235)
To fabricate targets for irradiation in the National Research Universal (NRU)
Reactor to produce medical radioisotopes.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
October 10, 2006
XSNM03473
11005654
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Oct 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
27OCN1
Recipient
country
Canada.
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 208 (Friday, October 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63040-63042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18022]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-275]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company; 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.
DPR-80, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E/the licensee),
for operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit No. 1, located in
San Luis Obispo County, California.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
Section 3.8.4, ``DC Sources--Operating,'' Condition B to extend the
completion time (CT) to restore an inoperable battery from 2 hours to
12 hours, provided certain required actions are taken. The extended CT
would allow sufficient time to correct a degraded condition (e.g.,
either bypass or replace an inoperable battery cell) without
introducing time pressure as an error precursor. PG&E has requested
that this amendment be processed on a one-time exigent basis to support
timely corrective action for the degraded condition affecting a single
cell that impacts the long-term reliability of Vital Battery 1-1. This
amendment is being requested on an exigent basis so that the plant will
avoid the risk of a TS-required shutdown should the degraded battery
cause the Vital Battery 1-1 to be inoperable.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated;
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes add provisions to increase the completion
time (CT) from two hours to twelve hours, on a one-time basis for
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 1 Vital Battery 1-1. Additional
Required Actions are specified when this battery, associated with
the plant Class 1E Direct Current (DC) electrical power subsystem,
is inoperable. The proposed changes do not physically alter any
plant structures, systems, or components, and are not accident
initiators: therefore, there is no effect on the probability of
accidents previously evaluated. As part of the single failure design
feature, loss of any one DC electrical power subsystem does not
prevent the minimum safety function from being performed. Also, the
proposed changes do not affect the type or amounts of radionuclides
release following an accident, or affect the initiation and duration
of their release. Therefore, the consequences of accidents
previously evaluated, which rely on the Class 1E battery to
mitigate, are not significantly increased.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different [kind of] accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not involve a change in design,
configuration, or method of operation of the plant. The proposed
changes will not alter the manner in which equipment is initiated,
nor will the functional demands on credit equipment be changed. The
proposed changes do not impact the interaction of any systems whose
failure or malfunction can initiate an accident. There are no
identified redundant components affected by these changes and thus
there are no new common cause failures or any existing common cause
failures that are affected by extending the CT. The proposed changes
do not create any new failure modes.
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 changes are based upon both a deterministic
evaluation and a risk-informed assessment.
The deterministic evaluation concluded that though one battery
associated with the Class 1E DC electrical power subsystem is
inoperable, the redundant operable Class 1E DC electrical power
subsystems will be able to perform the safety function as described
in the accident analysis.
The risk assessment performed to support this license amendment
request concluded that with additional Required Actions the increase
in plant risk is small and consistent with the NRC's Safety Goal
Policy Statement, ``Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods in
Nuclear Activities: Final Policy Statement,'' and guidance contained
in Regulatory Guides (RG) 1.174, ``An Approach for using
Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-
Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis,'' and RG 1.177, ``An
Approach for Plant-Specific Risk-Informed Decisionmaking: Technical
Specifications.''
Together, the deterministic evaluation and the risk-informed
assessment provide assurance that the plant Class 1E DC electrical
power subsystem will be able to perform its design function with a
longer CT for an inoperable Unit 1 Vital Battery 1-1 and risk is not
significantly impacted by the change.
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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
[[Page 63041]]
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to
take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, 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, 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 and Issuance of Orders'' in 10 CFR part 2.
Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which
is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area 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/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing
or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the
Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by
the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or
the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts
or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor must provide sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to
matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The
contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/
requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these
requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition,
request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing
of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). ?>
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications
Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV;
or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification
number is (301) 415-1966.
[[Page 63042]]
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 Richard F. Locke, Esq., Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O.
Box 7442, San Francisco, California 94120, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated October 18, 2006, which is available
for public inspection at 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. Publicly available
records will be accessible electronically 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.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 20th day of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan Wang,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-18022 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
