Carolina Power & Light Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 52167-52169 [E7-17971]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 12, 2007 / Notices
Total Respondents: 129,250.
Total Responses: 3,102,000.
Average Time per Response: 1.5
minutes.
Estimated Total Burden Hours:
77,550.
Frequency: On Occasion.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
$0.
Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintenance): $93,060.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for Office of
Management and Budget approval of the
information collection request; they will
also become a matter of public record.
Dated: September 6, 2007.
Hazel M. Bell,
Acting Chief, Branch of Management Review
and Internal Control, Division of Financial
Management, Office of Management,
Administration and Planning, Employment
Standards Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–17891 Filed 9–11–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–27–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–302]
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Carolina Power & Light 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–
72 issued to the Carolina Power & Light
Company (FPC, the licensee) for
operation of the Crystal River Nuclear
Plant, Unit No. 3 (CR–3), located in
Citrus County, Florida.
The proposed amendment would
change the Technical Specifications
(TSs) related to low pressure injection,
reactor building spray, decay heat
closed cycle cooling water, and decay
heat seawater systems to extend the
allowable completion time associated
with one inoperable train of these
systems.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:43 Sep 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
Part of the proposed changes introduces a
Condition for an inoperable LPI [low
pressure injection] with an AOT [allowed
outage time] of seven days, introduces
another Condition for an inoperable BS train
coincident with an inoperable Containment
Cooling train with an AOT of 72 hours, and
extends the AOT for one inoperable BS train,
DC train, and/or RW train to seven days.
These systems are not initiators for any
accident previously evaluated. The
consequences of an event during the
extended Completion Time are no more
severe than the consequences of the same
event during the current Completion Time.
Therefore, the consequences of an event
previously analyzed are not increased, so the
proposed change does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
Another part of the proposed changes
eliminates second Completion Times from
the CR–3 ITS [Improved TSs]. Second
Completion Times are not an initiator to any
accident previously evaluated. As a result,
the probability of an accident previously
evaluated is not affected. The consequences
of an accident during the revised Completion
Time are no different from the consequences
of the same accident during the existing
Completion Times. As a result, the
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated are not affected by this change. The
proposed changes do not alter or prevent the
ability of SSCs [structures, systems, or
components] from performing their intended
function to mitigate the consequences of an
initiating event within the assumed
acceptance limits. The proposed changes do
not affect the source term, containment
isolation, or radiological release assumptions
used in evaluating the radiological
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated. Further, the proposed changes do
not increase the types or amounts of
radioactive effluent that may be released
offsite, nor significantly increase individual
or cumulative occupational/public radiation
exposures. The proposed changes are
consistent with the safety analysis
assumptions and resultant consequences.
The proposed editorial/administrative
changes remove obsolete information and
provide clarification. These changes do not
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52167
affect any system that is an initiator for any
accidents previously evaluated. The
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated are not affected. The proposed
changes do not alter or prevent the ability of
SSCs from performing their intended
function to mitigate the consequences of an
initiating event. The proposed editorial/
administrative changes do not affect the
source term, containment isolation, or
radiological release assumptions used in
evaluating the radiological consequences of
an accident previously evaluated. Further,
the proposed editorial/administrative
changes do not increase the types or amounts
of radioactive effluent that may be released
offsite, nor significantly increase individual
or cumulative occupational/public radiation
exposures. The proposed changes are
consistent with the safety analysis
assumptions and resultant consequences.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes do not involve a
physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new
or different type of equipment will be
installed) or a change in the methods
governing normal plant operation. These
changes do not alter any assumptions made
in the safety analysis.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety.
One part of the proposed changes
introduces a Condition for an inoperable LPI
with an AOT of seven days, introduces
another Condition for an inoperable BS train
coincident with an inoperable Containment
Cooling train with an AOT of 72 hours, and
extends the AOT for one inoperable BS train,
DC train, and/or RW train to seven days. An
evaluation presented in Reference 8.3, and
accepted by the NRC, concluded that the
extended Completion Time did not result in
a significant reduction in the margin of
safety. An analysis performed by FPC also
drew the same conclusion. Therefore,
extending the AOT to seven days for these
components does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed change to delete the second
Completion Time from the CR–3 ITS does not
alter the manner in which safety limits,
limiting safety system settings or LCOs
[limiting conditions for operation] are
determined. The safety analysis acceptance
criteria are not affected by this change. The
proposed changes will not result in plant
operation in a configuration outside of the
design basis.
Similarly, the proposed editorial/
administrative changes do not alter the
manner in which safety limits, limiting safety
system settings or LCOs are determined. The
safety analysis acceptance criteria are not
affected by this change. As such, the
proposed editorial/administrative changes
will not result in plant operation in a
configuration outside of the design basis.
E:\FR\FM\12SEN1.SGM
12SEN1
52168
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 12, 2007 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Therefore, the proposed change does 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
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:43 Sep 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention
and on which the petitioner intends to
rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must
also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the
petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner intends to rely to establish
those facts or expert opinion. The
petition must include sufficient
information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a
material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters
within the scope of the amendment
under consideration. The contention
must be one which, if proven, would
entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy
these requirements with respect to at
least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendment.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
Commission or the presiding officer of
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the petition, request and/or the
contentions should be granted based on
a balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition
for leave to intervene must be filed by:
(1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express
mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor,
E:\FR\FM\12SEN1.SGM
12SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 12, 2007 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852,
Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4)
facsimile transmission addressed to the
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101,
verification number is (301) 415–1966.
A copy of the request for hearing and
petition for leave to intervene should
also be sent to the Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and it is requested that copies be
transmitted either by means of facsimile
transmission to 301–415–3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy
of the request for hearing and petition
for leave to intervene should also be
sent to 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 22, 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, 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 6th day
of September 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda L. Mozafari,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch II–2, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–17971 Filed 9–11–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT
CORPORATION
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Sunshine Act Meeting; September 17,
2007 Public Hearing
Nonforeign Area Cost-of-Living
Allowances; 2006 Interim Adjustments
2 p.m., Monday,
September 17, 2007.
AGENCY:
TIME AND DATE:
Offices of the Corporation,
Twelfth Floor Board Room, 1100 New
York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.
PLACE:
STATUS:
Hearing Open to the Public at
2 p.m.
PURPOSE: Public Hearing in conjunction
with each meeting of OPIC’s Board of
Directors, to afford an opportunity for
any person to present views regarding
the activities of the Corporation.
Individuals wishing to
address the hearing orally must provide
advance notice to OPIC’s Corporate
Secretary no later than noon Friday,
September 14, 2007. The notice must
include the individual’s name, title,
organization, address, and telephone
number, and a concise summary of the
subject matter to be presented.
Oral presentations may not exceed ten
(10) minutes. The time for individual
presentations may be reduced
proportionately, if necessary, to afford
all participants who have submitted a
timely request to participate an
opportunity to be heard.
Participants wishing to submit a
written statement for the record must
submit a copy of such statement to
OPIC’s Corporate Secretary no later than
noon, Friday, September 14, 2007. Such
statements must be typewritten, doublespaced, and may not exceed twenty-five
(25) pages.
Upon receipt of the required notice,
OPIC will prepare an agenda for the
hearing identifying speakers, setting
forth the subject on which each
participant will speak, and the time
allotted for each presentation. The
agenda will be available at the hearing.
A written summary of the hearing will
be compiled, and such summary will be
made available, upon written request to
OPIC’s Corporate Secretary, at the cost
of reproduction.
PROCEDURES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Information on the hearing may be
obtained from Connie M. Downs at (202)
336–8438, via facsimile at (202) 218–
0136, or via e-mail at cdown@opic.gov.
Dated: September 6, 2007.
Connie M. Downs,
OPIC Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07–4496 Filed 9–10–07; 11:56 am]
BILLING CODE 3210–01–M
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:43 Sep 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
52169
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This notice publishes the
2006 interim adjustments for the Pacific
and Caribbean Nonforeign Area Cost-ofLiving Allowance (COLA) areas. The
Federal Government conducts COLA
surveys in Alaska, Hawaii, Guam,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands
to set COLA rates. These surveys are
conducted once every 3 years on a
rotating basis. In between COLA
surveys, the Government adjusts COLA
rates for the areas not surveyed using
the relative change in the Consumer
Price Index (CPI) for the COLA area
compared with the WashingtonBaltimore CPI. The Pacific and
Caribbean COLA areas were not
surveyed in 2006. Therefore, OPM is
calculating and publishing interim
adjustments for these COLA areas. This
notice also publishes a revised listing of
the 2005 estimated Washington, DC,
area middle income annual consumer
expenditure data.
DATES: We will consider comments
received on or before November 13,
2007.
Send or deliver comments
to Charles D. Grimes III, Deputy
Associate Director for Performance
Management and Pay Systems, Strategic
Human Resources Policy Division,
Office of Personnel Management, Room
7300B, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20415–8200; fax: (202) 606–4264; or
e-mail: COLA@opm.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J.
Stanley Austin, (202) 606–2838; fax:
(202) 606–4264; or e-mail:
COLA@opm.gov.
ADDRESSES:
Subpart B
of part 591 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, requires the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) to set
nonforeign area cost-of-living allowance
(COLA) rates for U.S. Postal Service and
white-collar Federal employees in
Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern
Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). Section
591.223(a) prescribes that we conduct
these surveys on a rotating basis, once
every 3 years. Section 591.224 requires
we adjust the previous COLA survey
price indexes for the areas not surveyed
by using the relative change in the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\12SEN1.SGM
12SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52167-52169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17971]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-302]
Carolina Power & Light 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-72 issued to the Carolina Power & Light Company (FPC, the licensee)
for operation of the Crystal River Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 3 (CR-3),
located in Citrus County, Florida.
The proposed amendment would change the Technical Specifications
(TSs) related to low pressure injection, reactor building spray, decay
heat closed cycle cooling water, and decay heat seawater systems to
extend the allowable completion time associated with one inoperable
train of these systems.
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 not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Part of the proposed changes introduces a Condition for an
inoperable LPI [low pressure injection] with an AOT [allowed outage
time] of seven days, introduces another Condition for an inoperable
BS train coincident with an inoperable Containment Cooling train
with an AOT of 72 hours, and extends the AOT for one inoperable BS
train, DC train, and/or RW train to seven days. These systems are
not initiators for any accident previously evaluated. The
consequences of an event during the extended Completion Time are no
more severe than the consequences of the same event during the
current Completion Time. Therefore, the consequences of an event
previously analyzed are not increased, so the proposed change does
not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Another part of the proposed changes eliminates second
Completion Times from the CR-3 ITS [Improved TSs]. Second Completion
Times are not an initiator to any accident previously evaluated. As
a result, the probability of an accident previously evaluated is not
affected. The consequences of an accident during the revised
Completion Time are no different from the consequences of the same
accident during the existing Completion Times. As a result, the
consequences of an accident previously evaluated are not affected by
this change. The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the
ability of SSCs [structures, systems, or components] from performing
their intended function to mitigate the consequences of an
initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The proposed
changes do not affect the source term, containment isolation, or
radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological
consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Further, the
proposed changes do not increase the types or amounts of radioactive
effluent that may be released offsite, nor significantly increase
individual or cumulative occupational/public radiation exposures.
The proposed changes are consistent with the safety analysis
assumptions and resultant consequences.
The proposed editorial/administrative changes remove obsolete
information and provide clarification. These changes do not affect
any system that is an initiator for any accidents previously
evaluated. The consequences of an accident previously evaluated are
not affected. The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the
ability of SSCs from performing their intended function to mitigate
the consequences of an initiating event. The proposed editorial/
administrative changes do not affect the source term, containment
isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating
the radiological consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Further, the proposed editorial/administrative changes do not
increase the types or amounts of radioactive effluent that may be
released offsite, nor significantly increase individual or
cumulative occupational/public radiation exposures. The proposed
changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and
resultant consequences.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes do not involve a physical alteration of the
plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be
installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant
operation. These changes do not alter any assumptions made in the
safety analysis.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety.
One part of the proposed changes introduces a Condition for an
inoperable LPI with an AOT of seven days, introduces another
Condition for an inoperable BS train coincident with an inoperable
Containment Cooling train with an AOT of 72 hours, and extends the
AOT for one inoperable BS train, DC train, and/or RW train to seven
days. An evaluation presented in Reference 8.3, and accepted by the
NRC, concluded that the extended Completion Time did not result in a
significant reduction in the margin of safety. An analysis performed
by FPC also drew the same conclusion. Therefore, extending the AOT
to seven days for these components does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed change to delete the second Completion Time from
the CR-3 ITS does not alter the manner in which safety limits,
limiting safety system settings or LCOs [limiting conditions for
operation] are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria
are not affected by this change. The proposed changes will not
result in plant operation in a configuration outside of the design
basis.
Similarly, the proposed editorial/administrative changes do not
alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system
settings or LCOs are determined. The safety analysis acceptance
criteria are not affected by this change. As such, the proposed
editorial/administrative changes will not result in plant operation
in a configuration outside of the design basis.
[[Page 52168]]
Therefore, the proposed change does 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
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 requestors/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion.
The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition,
request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing
of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications
Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor,
[[Page 52169]]
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 22, 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, 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 6th day of September 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda L. Mozafari,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-17971 Filed 9-11-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
