Arizona Public Service Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 20961-20963 [E8-8271]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 75 / Thursday, April 17, 2008 / Notices
and hearing impairments. Individuals
who have a disability and need an
accommodation to attend the meeting
may notify Patricia D. Batie, at (202)
295–1500.
Dated: April 15, 2008.
Victor M. Fortuno,
Vice President & General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 08–1151 Filed 4–15–08; 3:30 pm]
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–529]
sroberts on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Arizona Public Service 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 (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment
to Facility Operating License No. STN
50–529 to Arizona Public Service
Company (APS or the licensee) for
operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station (Palo Verde), Unit 2,
located in Maricopa County, Arizona.
The proposed amendment in the
licensee’s application dated April 10,
2008, would revise Technical
Specification (TS) 3.5.5, Refueling
Water Tank (RWT), to increase the
minimum required RWT level
indications and the corresponding
borated water volumes in TS Figure
3.5.5–1, ‘‘Minimum Required RWT
Volume,’’ by 3 percent. This change will
ensure that there is adequate water
volume available in the RWT to ensure
that the engineered safety feature (ESF)
pumps and the new containment
recirculation sump strainers will meet
their design functions during loss-ofcoolant accidents (LOCAs).
This condition is exigent for Unit 2,
as it entered into a refueling outage on
March 29, 2008, and during that outage
the new containment sump strainers
will be installed as part of the licensee’s
commitments related to NRC Generic
Letter 2004–02, ‘‘Potential Impact of
Debris Blockage on Emergency
Recirculation during Design Basis
Accidents at Pressurized-Water
Reactors.’’ Without this amendment, the
necessary modifications cannot be
completed before startup from the
refueling outage. Palo Verde is
scheduled to restart on or about May 11,
2008.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Apr 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
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.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for
amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff
must determine that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration. Under the Commission’s
regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means
that operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed
amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from
any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR
50.91(a), the licensee has provided its
analysis of the issue of no significant
hazards consideration, which is
presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change would raise the RWT
minimum level by 3% to ensure that there is
adequate water volume available at the
containment recirculation sumps for the
limiting small break LOCA scenario for
submergence of the new strainer designs that
are being installed in Unit 2 in the spring
2008 outage. The new strainers are designed
and tested to operate submerged at the start
of recirculation actuation post-LOCA. This
change ensures that the level of water at the
strainers supports this assumption of the
design.
The RWT water volume is not an initiator
of any accident previously evaluated. As a
result, the probability of an accident
previously evaluated is not affected. The
proposed change does not alter or prevent the
ability of structures, systems, and
components from performing their intended
function to mitigate the consequences of an
initiating event within the assumed
acceptance limits.
The effect on containment flood level,
equipment qualification, and containment
sump pH [potential of hydrogen] remains
within the limits assumed in the design and
accident analyses. The calculated maximum
containment flood level is based on the RWT
water level associated with the bottom of the
RWT overflow nozzle. This change does not
revise the location of the RWT overflow
nozzle and there is no change in the
calculated maximum flood level. As a result,
the proposed change has no impact on the
qualification of equipment above the
maximum containment flood level. For the
same reason the impact of the proposed
change on post-LOCA sump pH is bounded
by the current analysis for post-LOCA sump
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20961
pH. In that analysis, the calculated minimum
post-LOCA sump pH is based on the
maximum RWT water level associated with
the bottom of the RWT overflow nozzle. The
maximum flood level is not affected by this
change. In addition, the change is
conservative with respect to the calculated
maximum post-LOCA sump pH since it is
increasing the minimum required RWT
volume.
The proposed change does 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 change does 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 change is consistent with the safety
analysis assumptions and resultant
consequences.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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 change does not involve a physical
alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or
different components or physical changes are
involved with this change) or a change in the
methods governing normal plant operation.
The change does not alter any assumptions
made in the safety analysis.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to raise the required
RWT minimum water volume does not alter
the manner in which safety limits, limiting
safety system settings or limiting conditions
for operation are determined. The safety
analysis acceptance criteria are not affected
by this change. The proposed change will not
result in plant operation in a configuration
outside of the design basis.
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 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
sroberts on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
20962
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 75 / Thursday, April 17, 2008 / Notices
expiration of the 14-day notice period.
However, should circumstances change
during the notice period, such that
failure to act in a timely way would
result, for example, in derating or
shutdown of the facility, the
Commission may issue the license
amendment before the expiration of the
14-day notice period, provided that its
final determination is that the
amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public
and State comments received. Should
the Commission take this action, it will
publish in the Federal Register a notice
of issuance. The Commission expects
that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted
by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing Branch, Division
of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and should cite the publication
date and page number of this Federal
Register notice. Written comments may
also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two
White Flint North, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30
a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room, located at One White
Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and
petitions for leave to intervene is
discussed below.
Within 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice, a person(s)
may file a request for a hearing with
respect to issuance of the amendment to
the subject facility operating license and
any person(s) whose interest may be
affected by this proceeding and who
wishes to participate as a party in the
proceeding must file a written request
via electronic submission through the
NRC E-filing system 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 person(s) 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Apr 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
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.
Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or
fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner/requestor shall
provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention
and on which the petitioner intends to
rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must
also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the
petitioner/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends
to rely to establish those facts or expert
opinion. The petitioner/requestor must
provide sufficient information to show
that a genuine dispute exists with the
applicant on a material issue of law or
fact. Contentions shall be limited to
matters within the scope of the
amendment under consideration. The
contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the petitioner/
requestor to relief. A petitioner/
requestor who fails to satisfy these
requirements with respect to at least one
contention will not be permitted to
participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendment.
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
A request for hearing or a petition for
leave to intervene must be filed in
accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule,
which the NRC promulgated on August
28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing
process requires participants to submit
and serve documents over the Internet
or in some cases to mail copies on
electronic storage media. Participants
may not submit paper copies of their
filings unless they seek a waiver in
accordance with the procedures
described below.
To comply with the procedural
requirements of E-Filing, at least five (5)
days prior to the filing deadline, the
petitioner/requestor must contact the
Office of the Secretary by e-mail at
hearingdocket@nrc.gov, or by calling
(301) 415–1677, to request (1) a digital
ID certificate, which allows the
participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign
documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is
participating; and/or (2) creation of an
electronic docket for the proceeding
(even in instances in which the
petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or
representative) already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Each
petitioner/requestor will need to
download the Workplace Forms
ViewerTM to access the Electronic
Information Exchange (EIE), a
component of the E-Filing system. The
Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and
is available at https://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html.
Information about applying for a digital
ID certificate is available on NRC’s
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals/applycertificates.html. Once a petitioner/
requestor has obtained a digital ID
certificate, had a docket created, and
downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then
submit a request for hearing or petition
for leave to intervene. Submissions
should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the filer submits its
documents through EIE. To be timely,
an electronic filing must be submitted to
the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the due date. Upon
receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing
system time-stamps the document and
sends the submitter an e-mail notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
EIE system also distributes an e-mail
notice that provides access to the
document to the NRC Office of the
General Counsel and any others who
have advised the Office of the Secretary
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
sroberts on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 75 / Thursday, April 17, 2008 / Notices
that they wish to participate in the
proceeding, so that the filer need not
serve the documents on those
participants separately. Therefore,
applicants and other participants (or
their counsel or representative) must
apply for and receive a digital ID
certificate before a hearing request/
petition to intervene is filed so that they
can obtain access to the document via
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically may
seek assistance through the ‘‘Contact
Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC
technical help line, which is available
between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
The help line number is (800) 397–4209
or locally, (301) 415–4737. Participants
who believe that they have a good cause
for not submitting documents
electronically must file a motion, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with
their initial paper filing requesting
authorization to continue to submit
documents in paper format. Such filings
must be submitted 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; or
(2) courier, express mail, or expedited
delivery service to the Office of the
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this
manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants.
Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service upon
depositing the document with the
provider of the service.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in NRC’s
electronic hearing docket which is
available to the public at https://
ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp,
unless excluded pursuant to an order of
the Commission, an Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board, or a Presiding Officer.
Participants are requested not to include
personal privacy information, such as
social security numbers, home
addresses, or home phone numbers in
their filings. With respect to copyrighted
works, except for limited excerpts that
serve the purpose of the adjudicatory
filings and would constitute a Fair Use
application, Participants are requested
not to include copyrighted materials in
their submissions.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Apr 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
Non-timely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
Commission, the presiding officer, or
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the petition and/or request should
be granted and/or the contentions
should be admitted, based on a
balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). To be timely,
filings must be submitted no later than
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due
date.
For further details with respect to this
exigent license application, see the
application for amendment dated April
10, 2008, from Arizona Public Service
Company which is available for public
inspection at the Commission’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area O1
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available
records will be accessible electronically
from the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System’s
(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading
Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS should contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone
at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737,
or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day
of April, 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Markley,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch LPL4, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8–8271 Filed 4–16–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Conduct of New Reactor Licensing
Proceedings; Final Policy Statement
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final policy statement.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the Commission)
is adopting a statement of policy
concerning the conduct of new reactor
licensing proceedings.
DATES: This policy statement becomes
effective April 17, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert M. Weisman, Senior Attorney,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, telephone
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20963
301–415–1696, e-mail
Robert.Weisman@nrc.gov.
On June
11, 2007 (72 FR 32139), the Commission
published in the Federal Register a
request for public comment on the draft
statement of policy on Conduct of New
Reactor Licensing Proceedings (draft
Policy Statement). The Commission
received eight letters transmitting
comments on the draft Policy Statement
by the deadline set in the June 11, 2007,
notice for receipt of comments.
Commenters included a law firm
(Morgan Lewis on behalf of five energy
companies), a lawyer (Diane Curran),
two advocacy groups, (Beyond Nuclear/
Nuclear Policy Research Institute (BN/
NPRI) and the Union of Concerned
Scientists (UCS)), an industry
organization (the Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI)), a vendor (GE–Hitachi
Nuclear Energy), and one individual
energy company (UniStar Nuclear)(two
letters). BN/NPRI endorsed Ms. Curran’s
comments, and UCS incorporated them
by reference in the UCS comments.
Similarly, GE–Hitachi and UniStar
endorsed the NEI comments.
The comments fell primarily in the
following three categories. First, many
comments related to 10 CFR 2.101(a)(5),
which permits an applicant to submit its
application in two parts filed no more
than eighteen months apart. The
comments were primarily concerned
with whether the NRC should issue a
Notice of Hearing (required by 10 CFR
2.104) for each part of the application or
just one Notice of Hearing when the
application is complete. Second, many
comments related to the NRC’s
consideration of applications that
propose to build and operate reactors of
identical design (except for site-specific
elements). The comments addressed the
implementation of the ‘‘design-centered
review approach’’ in the NRC Staff’s
(Staff) review of the applications and
the adjudicatory proceedings on the
applications before the Atomic Safety
and Licensing Board (Licensing Board).
Third, many comments requested
rulemaking to implement a variety of
measures that the commenters believe
desirable or necessary for the
effectiveness or efficiency of the review
or adjudicatory processes. Below, the
Commission summarizes and responds
to the comments beginning with these
three categories of comments.
Discussion of additional comments
follows. In response to the comments,
the Commission has revised the policy
statement in several respects, as noted
below. The Commission has also
corrected the Policy Statement or added
explanatory text in a few instances.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 75 (Thursday, April 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20961-20963]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-8271]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-529]
Arizona Public Service 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 (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
STN 50-529 to Arizona Public Service Company (APS or the licensee) for
operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (Palo Verde),
Unit 2, located in Maricopa County, Arizona.
The proposed amendment in the licensee's application dated April
10, 2008, would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.5.5, Refueling
Water Tank (RWT), to increase the minimum required RWT level
indications and the corresponding borated water volumes in TS Figure
3.5.5-1, ``Minimum Required RWT Volume,'' by 3 percent. This change
will ensure that there is adequate water volume available in the RWT to
ensure that the engineered safety feature (ESF) pumps and the new
containment recirculation sump strainers will meet their design
functions during loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs).
This condition is exigent for Unit 2, as it entered into a
refueling outage on March 29, 2008, and during that outage the new
containment sump strainers will be installed as part of the licensee's
commitments related to NRC Generic Letter 2004-02, ``Potential Impact
of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation during Design Basis
Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors.'' Without this amendment, the
necessary modifications cannot be completed before startup from the
refueling outage. Palo Verde is scheduled to restart on or about May
11, 2008.
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. Pursuant to 10
CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under exigent
circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment request
involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's
regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility
in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required
by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change would raise the RWT minimum level by 3% to
ensure that there is adequate water volume available at the
containment recirculation sumps for the limiting small break LOCA
scenario for submergence of the new strainer designs that are being
installed in Unit 2 in the spring 2008 outage. The new strainers are
designed and tested to operate submerged at the start of
recirculation actuation post-LOCA. This change ensures that the
level of water at the strainers supports this assumption of the
design.
The RWT water volume is not an initiator of any accident
previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of an accident
previously evaluated is not affected. The proposed change does not
alter or prevent the ability of structures, systems, and components
from performing their intended function to mitigate the consequences
of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits.
The effect on containment flood level, equipment qualification,
and containment sump pH [potential of hydrogen] remains within the
limits assumed in the design and accident analyses. The calculated
maximum containment flood level is based on the RWT water level
associated with the bottom of the RWT overflow nozzle. This change
does not revise the location of the RWT overflow nozzle and there is
no change in the calculated maximum flood level. As a result, the
proposed change has no impact on the qualification of equipment
above the maximum containment flood level. For the same reason the
impact of the proposed change on post-LOCA sump pH is bounded by the
current analysis for post-LOCA sump pH. In that analysis, the
calculated minimum post-LOCA sump pH is based on the maximum RWT
water level associated with the bottom of the RWT overflow nozzle.
The maximum flood level is not affected by this change. In addition,
the change is conservative with respect to the calculated maximum
post-LOCA sump pH since it is increasing the minimum required RWT
volume.
The proposed change does 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 change does 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 change is consistent with the
safety analysis assumptions and resultant consequences.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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 change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant
(i.e., no new or different components or physical changes are
involved with this change) or a change in the methods governing
normal plant operation. The change does not alter any assumptions
made in the safety analysis.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to raise the required RWT minimum water
volume does not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting
safety system settings or limiting conditions for operation are
determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected
by this change. The proposed change will not result in plant
operation in a configuration outside of the design basis.
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 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
[[Page 20962]]
expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to
take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services,
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and
page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also
be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public
Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, a
person(s) may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of
the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who
wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written
request via electronic submission through the NRC E-filing system 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 person(s) 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.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts
or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor must provide sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to
matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The
contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/
requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these
requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be
filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC
promulgated on August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing process
requires participants to submit and serve documents over the Internet
or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media.
Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they
seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least
five (5) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor
must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at
hearingdocket@nrc.gov, or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a
digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2)
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances
in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative)
already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each petitioner/
requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\ to
access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-
Filing system. The Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\ is free and is available
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on
NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
apply-certificates.html. Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a
digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE
viewer, it can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave
to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF)
in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE system no
later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a
transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The
EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to
the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others
who have advised the Office of the Secretary
[[Page 20963]]
that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need
not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore,
applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative)
must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing
request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access
to the document via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the
``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line,
which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or
locally, (301) 415-4737. Participants who believe that they have a good
cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion,
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted 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; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
https://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant
to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or
a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal
privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses,
or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted
works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the
adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application,
Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in
their submissions.
Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition
and/or request should be granted and/or the contentions should be
admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, filings must be submitted no later
than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
For further details with respect to this exigent license
application, see the application for amendment dated April 10, 2008,
from Arizona Public Service Company which is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at
One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at the NRC Web site https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html.
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of April, 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Markley,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch LPL4, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-8271 Filed 4-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P