Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 37544-37546 [E7-13360]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
37544
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Notices
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
I. Abstract
The NASA Explorer Schools (NES)
seeks a clearance to collect data from
educators to determine eligibility and
selection of schools to participate in
their three year project. To lessen the
impact on educators who will complete
the project application, the application
period must be open during the times
when they are less likely to be needed
in the classroom (e.g., summer break)
and can obtain any required school
board approvals.
II. Method of Collection
NASA will utilize a Web-based online
form to collect this information.
III. Data
Title: NASA Explorer Schools Project
Application.
OMB Number: 2700–0130.
Type of review: Regular.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
130.
Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 130.
Estimated Total Annual Cost: $0.
IV. Request for Comments
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of NASA, including
whether the information collected has
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of
NASA’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (3)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including automated
collection techniques or the use of other
forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection.
They will also become a matter of
public record.
Gary Cox,
Acting Deputy Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–13281 Filed 7–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Jul 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
[Docket No. 50–255]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.;
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment to Renewed 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–20 issued to Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (the licensee) for
operation of the Palisades Nuclear Plant
(PNP) located in Van Buren County,
Michigan.
The proposed amendment would
revise Technical Specification (TS)
3.5.5, ‘‘Trisodium Phosphate,’’ and the
associated surveillance requirements by
replacing the containment sump
buffering agent, trisodium phosphate
(TSP), with sodium tetraborate
decahydrate (STB). In particular, the
proposed amendment would revise the
TS Limiting Condition for Operation
(LCO) 3.5.5, with a new weight
requirement for STB.
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 amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment does not involve
a significant increase in the probability of an
accident previously evaluated because the
containment buffering agent is not an
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
initiator of any analyzed accident. The
proposed change does not impact any failure
modes that could lead to an accident.
The proposed amendment does not involve
a significant increase in the consequences of
an accident previously evaluated. The
buffering agent in containment is designed to
buffer the acids expected to be produced after
a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) and is
credited in the radiological analysis for
iodine retention. The proposed change of
replacing TSP with STB in containment
results in the radiological consequences
remaining under 10 CFR 100 limits and
General Design Criterion (GDC) ¥19 limits.
Therefore, operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed amendment
would not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create
the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated. STB is a passive component that
is proposed to be used at PNP as a buffering
agent to increase the pH of the initially acidic
post-LOCA containment water to a more
neutral pH.
Changing the proposed buffering agent
from TSP to STB does not constitute an
accident initiator or create a new or different
kind of accident previously analyzed. The
proposed amendment does not involve
operation of any required systems, structures
or components (SSCs) in a manner or
configuration different from those previously
recognized or evaluated. No new failure
mechanisms will be introduced by the
changes being requested.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment does not involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed amendment of changing the
buffering agent from TSP to STB results in
equivalent control of maintaining sump pH at
7.0 or greater, thereby controlling
containment atmosphere iodine and ensuring
the radiological consequences of a MHA
[Maximum Hypothetical Accident] are
within regulatory limits. The use of STB also
reduces the present potential for exacerbating
sump screen blockage due to a potential
chemical interaction between TSP and
certain calcium sources used in containment
to form calcium phosphate. This proposed
amendment removes this phosphate source
from containment, thereby reducing the
amount of precipitate that may be formed in
a postulated LOCA. The buffer change would
minimize the potential chemical effects and
should enhance the ability of the emergency
core cooling system to perform the postaccident mitigating functions.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not involve a significant reduction in the
margin of safety.
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Notices
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
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Jul 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37545
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.
Non-timely 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(a)(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
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
37546
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Notices
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 Mr. William Dennis, Assistant
General Counsel, Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton Ave.,
White Plains, NY 10601, the attorney for
the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated June 29, 2007, 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 Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System’s (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–
397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail
to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of July 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch III–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–13360 Filed 7–9–07; 8:45 am]
[Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499]
[Docket No. 50–250]
Florida Power and Light Company;
Notice of Withdrawal of Application for
Amendment to Facility Operating
License
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) has
granted the request of Florida Power
and Light Company (the licensee) to
withdraw its May 17, 2007, application
for proposed amendment to Facility
Operating License No. DPR–31 for the
Turkey Point Plant, Unit 3, located in
Dade County, Florida.
The proposed amendment would
have revised the Technical
Specifications to allow the use of an
alternate method of determining rod
position for control rods M–6 and G–5
with inoperable Analog Rod Position
Indicators. The Commission had
previously issued a Notice of
Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment published in the Federal
Register on May 24, 2007 (72 FR 29186).
However, by letter dated June 13, 2007,
the licensee withdrew the proposed
change.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated May 17, 2007, and
the licensee’s letter dated June 13, 2007,
which withdrew the application for
license amendment. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management Systems (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Persons
who do not have access to ADAMS or
who encounter problems in accessing
the documents located in ADAMS
should contact the NRC PDR Reference
staff by telephone at 1–800–397–4209,
or 301–415–4737 or by e-mail to:
pdr@nrc.gov.
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Jul 09, 2007
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day
of June 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Mozafari,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch II–2, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–13357 Filed 7–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
STP Nuclear Operating Company;
South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2;
Notice of Consideration of Approval of
Application Regarding Proposed
Indirect Transfer of Control of Facility
Operating Licenses, and Opportunity
for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission, NRC) is
considering the issuance of an order
under 10 CFR 50.80 approving the
indirect transfer of control of Facility
Operating Licenses, numbered NPF–76
and NPF–80, for the South Texas Project
(STP), Units 1 and 2, respectively, to the
extent owned by NRG South Texas LP
(NRG South Texas).1
STP Nuclear Operating Company
(STPNOC), acting on behalf of itself and
NRG South Texas and its corporate
parent, NRG Energy Inc. (NRG Energy),
requests that the NRC consent to the
indirect transfer of control of STP, Units
1 and 2, licenses to the extent owned by
NRG South Texas. NRG South Texas
owns 44 percent of STP, Units 1 and 2.
NRG Energy plans to reorganize its
corporate structure by creating a new
publicly-held holding company (NRG
HoldCo) that will become the parent
company for NRG Energy and its
subsidiaries. NRG Energy is seeking
NRC consent to the indirect transfer of
control of its licenses that result from
the establishment of NRG HoldCo. In
addition to its 44 percent undivided
ownership interest in STP, Units 1 and
2, NRG South Texas holds a
corresponding interest in STPNOC, a
not-for-profit Texas corporation, which
is the licensed operator of STP, Units 1
and 2. Thus, the indirect transfer of
control of NRG South Texas also results
in the indirect transfer of this interest in
STPNOC. STPNOC states that this is not
a controlling interest in STPNOC and,
therefore, there will be no indirect
transfer of STPNOC’s licenses to operate
on behalf of the owners. The applicant
indicates that if the NRC concludes that
indirect transfer of control of NRG
South Texas’ interest in STPNOC
requires prior NRC consent, it requests
such consent.
According to an application for
approval filed by STPNOC, in
connection with the NRG Energy plans
to reorganize its corporate structure by
operating a new publicly-held holding
1 On June 29, 2007, the NRC granted an
amendment request changing the name of one of the
licensees from Texas Genco, LP, to NRG South
Texas LP.
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37544-37546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13360]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-255]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment to Renewed 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-20 issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the
licensee) for operation of the Palisades Nuclear Plant (PNP) located in
Van Buren County, Michigan.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
3.5.5, ``Trisodium Phosphate,'' and the associated surveillance
requirements by replacing the containment sump buffering agent,
trisodium phosphate (TSP), with sodium tetraborate decahydrate (STB).
In particular, the proposed amendment would revise the TS Limiting
Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.5.5, with a new weight requirement for
STB.
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 amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase
in the probability of an accident previously evaluated because the
containment buffering agent is not an initiator of any analyzed
accident. The proposed change does not impact any failure modes that
could lead to an accident.
The proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase
in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The
buffering agent in containment is designed to buffer the acids
expected to be produced after a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) and
is credited in the radiological analysis for iodine retention. The
proposed change of replacing TSP with STB in containment results in
the radiological consequences remaining under 10 CFR 100 limits and
General Design Criterion (GDC) -19 limits.
Therefore, operation of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated. STB is a passive component that is proposed to be used at
PNP as a buffering agent to increase the pH of the initially acidic
post-LOCA containment water to a more neutral pH.
Changing the proposed buffering agent from TSP to STB does not
constitute an accident initiator or create a new or different kind
of accident previously analyzed. The proposed amendment does not
involve operation of any required systems, structures or components
(SSCs) in a manner or configuration different from those previously
recognized or evaluated. No new failure mechanisms will be
introduced by the changes being requested.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety. The proposed amendment of changing the
buffering agent from TSP to STB results in equivalent control of
maintaining sump pH at 7.0 or greater, thereby controlling
containment atmosphere iodine and ensuring the radiological
consequences of a MHA [Maximum Hypothetical Accident] are within
regulatory limits. The use of STB also reduces the present potential
for exacerbating sump screen blockage due to a potential chemical
interaction between TSP and certain calcium sources used in
containment to form calcium phosphate. This proposed amendment
removes this phosphate source from containment, thereby reducing the
amount of precipitate that may be formed in a postulated LOCA. The
buffer change would minimize the potential chemical effects and
should enhance the ability of the emergency core cooling system to
perform the post-accident mitigating functions.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
reduction in the margin of safety.
[[Page 37545]]
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 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.
Non-timely 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(a)(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
[[Page 37546]]
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 Mr. William Dennis, Assistant General Counsel, Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton Ave., White Plains, NY 10601, the
attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated June 29, 2007, 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 Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-
800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of July 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-13360 Filed 7-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
