Carolina Power and Light; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 4300-4302 [E7-1417]

Download as PDF 4300 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 30, 2007 / Notices and 203 of the Trade Act of 2002 and 20 CFR 671.140. Ira L. Mills, Departmental Clearance Officer/Team Leader. [FR Doc. E7–1388 Filed 1–29–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES National Endowment for the Arts; Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [P.L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35]. Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by contacting Sunil Iyengar via telephone at 202–682–5424 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail at research@arts.endow.gov. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY/TDD) may call 202– 682–5496 between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday. Comments should be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the National Endowment for the Arts, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 202–395– 7316, within 30 days from the date of this publication in the Federal Register. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:36 Jan 29, 2007 Jkt 211001 Agency: National Endowment for the Arts. Title: Big Read Program Evaluation. OMB Number: New. Frequency: One Time. Affected Public: Individuals. Estimated Number of Respondents: 14,120. Estimated Time Per Respondent: 8 minutes. Total Burden Hours: 1,883. Total Annualized Capital/Startup Costs: 0. Total Annual Costs (Operating/ Maintaining Systems or Purchasing Services): 0. Description: The National Endowment for the Arts plans to conduct an evaluation to assess the Big Read program at the national level. The Big Read is an initiative of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), in partnership with the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) and in cooperation with Arts Midwest, designed to revitalize the role of literature in American popular culture by providing citizens with the opportunity to read and discuss a single book of fiction within their communities. The evaluation is aimed at assessing the design of the 2007–08 Big Read program and to assess the program’s impact on literary reading habits in participating communities. The activities include collecting uniform data from all sites, coordinating local and national data collection—and still keep data collection burdens to a minimum. As a national study, the Big Read Evaluation will serve as a sound base from which to make estimates of the impact of the initiatives on partnering organizations, communities, and individuals. The Big Read evaluation data will also provide information on the characteristics of those who participate in the initiative and the degree to which the initiative is reaching previously under-represented groups. Sunil Iyengar, National Endowment for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 616, Washington, DC 20506–0001, telephone (202) 682–5424 (this is not a toll-free number), fax 202/682–5677. ADDRESSES: Murray Welsh, Director, Administrative Services, National Endowment for the Arts. [FR Doc. E7–1391 Filed 1–29–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7537–01–P PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–261] Carolina Power and Light; 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 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR–23 issued to Carolina Power and Light (the licensee) for operation of the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No. 2 located in Darlington County, South Carolina. The proposed amendment would modify Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.9 to add steam generator (SG) alternate repair criteria and TS 5.6.8 to add additional SG reporting requirements. 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. The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Increase in the Probability or Consequences of an Accident Previously Evaluated. The proposed change does not involve physical changes to any plant structure, system, or component. The inspection of the portion of the steam generator tubes within the tubesheet region is being changed to identify the appropriate scope of inspection and the criteria for plugging tubes that are found with degradation. The proposed requirements will continue to ensure that the probability of a steam generator tube rupture accident is not increased. Therefore, the probability of occurrence for a previously analyzed accident is not significantly E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM 30JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 30, 2007 / Notices ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES increased. The consequences of a previously analyzed accident are dependent on the initial conditions assumed for the analysis, the behavior of the fission product barriers during the analyzed accident, the availability and successful functioning of the equipment assumed to operate in response to the analyzed event, and the setpoints at which these actions are initiated. The proposed inspection and repair requirements will ensure that the plant continues to meet applicable design and safety analyses acceptance criteria. The proposed change does not affect the performance of any equipment used to mitigate the consequences of an analyzed accident. As a result, no analysis assumptions are impacted and there are no adverse effects on the factors that contribute to offsite or onsite dose as a result of an accident. The proposed change does not affect setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative actions. The proposed change ensures that plant structures, systems, and components are maintained consistent with the safety analysis and licensing bases. Based on this evaluation, there is no significant increase in the consequences of a previously analyzed accident. Therefore, this change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. The Proposed Change Does Not Create the Possibility of a New or Different Kind of Accident From Any Previously Evaluated. The proposed change does not involve any physical alteration of plant systems, structures, or components. No new or different equipment is being installed. No installed equipment is being operated in a different manner. There is no change to the parameters within which the plant is normally operated or in the setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative actions. The proposed inspection and repair criteria will establish appropriate requirements to ensure that the steam generator tubes are properly maintained. As a result, no new failure modes 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. The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin of Safety. There is no impact on any margin of safety resulting from the proposed steam generator tube inspection and repair criteria. The integrity of the steam generator tubes and associated primary to secondary leakage criteria will be maintained consistent with the applicable safety margins as established for HBRSEP, Unit No. 2, by use of the proposed steam generator alternate repair criteria. Therefore, this 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:36 Jan 29, 2007 Jkt 211001 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 4301 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 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, http://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 E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM 30JAN1 ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES 4302 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 30, 2007 / Notices 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, VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:36 Jan 29, 2007 Jkt 211001 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 David T. Conley, Associate General Counsel II—Legal Department, Progress Energy Service Company, LLC, Post Office Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated January 19, 2007, 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, http:// 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 23rd day of January 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Chandu P. Patel, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II– 2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7–1417 Filed 1–29–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Dockets No. 50–155 and 72–043] Consumers Energy Company Big Rock Point Plant; Notice of Consideration of Approval of Transfer of Facility Operating License and Conforming Amendment and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering the issuance of an order under 10 CFR 50.80 and 10 CFR 72.50 approving the transfer of Facility Operating License No. DPR–6 for Big Rock Point (BRP) Plant and Independent PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) License No. SFGL–16 for BRP currently held by Consumers Energy Company (Consumers). The transfer would be to Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC (Entergy Nuclear Palisades) to possess and own, and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENO), to control and operate, the ISFSI. The Commission is also considering amending the licenses for administrative purposes to reflect the proposed transfer. According to an application for approval filed by Consumers, Entergy Nuclear Palisades, and ENO, Entergy Nuclear Palisades would acquire ownership of the facility following approval of the proposed license transfer, and ENO would control and operate ISFSI. No physical change to the BRP facility or operational changes are being proposed in the application. The proposed amendment would replace references to Consumers in the license with references to Entergy Nuclear Palisades and ENO to reflect the proposed transfer. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80 and 10 CFR 72.50, no license, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of any license unless the Commission shall give its consent in writing. The Commission will approve an application for the transfer of a license, if the Commission determines that the proposed transferee is qualified to hold the license, and that the transfer is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission pursuant thereto. Before issuance of the proposed conforming 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. As provided in 10 CFR 2.1315, unless otherwise determined by the Commission with regard to a specific application, the Commission has determined that any amendment to the license of a utilization facility or to the license of an ISFSI which does no more than conform the license to reflect the transfer action involves no significant hazards consideration and no genuine issue as to whether the health and safety of the public will be significantly affected. No contrary determination has been made with respect to this specific license amendment application. In light of the generic determination reflected in 10 CFR 2.1315, no public comments with respect to significant hazards considerations are being solicited, notwithstanding the general comment procedures contained in 10 CFR 50.91. E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM 30JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 19 (Tuesday, January 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4300-4302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1417]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-261]


Carolina Power and Light; 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 Renewed Facility Operating 
License No. DPR-23 issued to Carolina Power and Light (the licensee) 
for operation of the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit 
No. 2 located in Darlington County, South Carolina.
    The proposed amendment would modify Technical Specification (TS) 
5.5.9 to add steam generator (SG) alternate repair criteria and TS 
5.6.8 to add additional SG reporting requirements.
    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. The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Increase 
in the Probability or Consequences of an Accident Previously 
Evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve physical changes to any 
plant structure, system, or component. The inspection of the portion 
of the steam generator tubes within the tubesheet region is being 
changed to identify the appropriate scope of inspection and the 
criteria for plugging tubes that are found with degradation. The 
proposed requirements will continue to ensure that the probability 
of a steam generator tube rupture accident is not increased. 
Therefore, the probability of occurrence for a previously analyzed 
accident is not significantly

[[Page 4301]]

increased. The consequences of a previously analyzed accident are 
dependent on the initial conditions assumed for the analysis, the 
behavior of the fission product barriers during the analyzed 
accident, the availability and successful functioning of the 
equipment assumed to operate in response to the analyzed event, and 
the setpoints at which these actions are initiated. The proposed 
inspection and repair requirements will ensure that the plant 
continues to meet applicable design and safety analyses acceptance 
criteria. The proposed change does not affect the performance of any 
equipment used to mitigate the consequences of an analyzed accident. 
As a result, no analysis assumptions are impacted and there are no 
adverse effects on the factors that contribute to offsite or onsite 
dose as a result of an accident. The proposed change does not affect 
setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative actions. The 
proposed change ensures that plant structures, systems, and 
components are maintained consistent with the safety analysis and 
licensing bases. Based on this evaluation, there is no significant 
increase in the consequences of a previously analyzed accident. 
Therefore, this change does not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. The Proposed Change Does Not Create the Possibility of a New 
or Different Kind of Accident From Any Previously Evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve any physical alteration of 
plant systems, structures, or components. No new or different 
equipment is being installed. No installed equipment is being 
operated in a different manner. There is no change to the parameters 
within which the plant is normally operated or in the setpoints that 
initiate protective or mitigative actions. The proposed inspection 
and repair criteria will establish appropriate requirements to 
ensure that the steam generator tubes are properly maintained. As a 
result, no new failure modes 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. The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Reduction 
in the Margin of Safety.
    There is no impact on any margin of safety resulting from the 
proposed steam generator tube inspection and repair criteria. The 
integrity of the steam generator tubes and associated primary to 
secondary leakage criteria will be maintained consistent with the 
applicable safety margins as established for HBRSEP, Unit No. 2, by 
use of the proposed steam generator alternate repair criteria. 
Therefore, this 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 
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 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, http://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

[[Page 4302]]

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 David T. Conley, 
Associate General Counsel II--Legal Department, Progress Energy Service 
Company, LLC, Post Office Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602, 
attorney for the licensee.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated January 19, 2007, 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, http://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 23rd day of January 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chandu P. Patel,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-1417 Filed 1-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P