[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 126 (Friday, June 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33779-33781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16556]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-397]
Washington Public Power Supply System; 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.
NPF-21 issued to Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS, also the
licensee) for operation of the WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2 located on
Hanford Reservation in Benton County, Washington.
The proposed amendment would reflect licensee organizational title
changes in Section 6.0 of the Technical Specifications (TS), delete TS
6.2.1.e and revise TS 6.2.1.d to incorporate the quality assurance
function per the line item improvement identified in Generic Letter 88-
06 dated March 22, 1988, modify TS 6.5.1.2 to specify the composition
of the Plant Operations Committee (POC) based on plant functional areas
rather than organizational titles, remove the Plant General Manager as
Chairman of the POC, and require the Plant General Manager to appoint,
in writing, the POC Chairman, Vice-Chairman, members and alternates.
The April 22, 1996, application differs from the licensee's previous
application dated June 6, 1995, which was noticed in the Federal
Register on July 19, 1995 (60 FR 37102), in that the previous
application did not propose changes to TS 6.2.1.d and e, and additional
organizational changes are included in the more recent proposed TS
changes.
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 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
[[Page 33780]]
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 change involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
The title change for the Assistant Managing Director, Operations
[AMDO] to Chief Executive Officer [CEO] is considered a necessary
administrative change due to the restructuring of the organization
and the elimination of the AMDO position. The TS responsibilities
presently associated with the AMDO position will be the
responsibility of the CEO position. This change maintains a single
corporate executive responsible for overall plant nuclear safety per
TS 6.2.1.c. The deletion of the QA organizational reporting
requirement in TS 6.2.1.e and the inclusion of the QA organization
in TS 6.2.1.d does not diminish the capability of the QA
organization to maintain its independent audit and oversight role.
These functions are assured through various controls and
requirements in the QA program description.
The consolidation of the Technical Services POC position with
the Engineering POC position does not impact the ability of the POC
to perform their required functions. The consolidation of plant
Engineering functions under one organization provides for an
improved Engineering focus for plant activities. The addition of
Chemistry and Planning/Scheduling/Outage functional areas to the POC
membership, in the original amendment request, broadened and
strengthened the POC, thus ensuring that the POC will continue to be
comprised of experienced personnel, with varied expertise, who are
involved in daily plant activities.
The proposed changes do not involve any physical changes to
plant systems, structures or components (SSC) or the manner in which
the SSC are operated, maintained, modified, tested, or inspected.
The changes therefore do not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any previously evaluated?
Because the proposed changes are organizational in nature and
implementation does not involve physical changes to the plant SSC or
the manner in which the SSC are operated and maintained, the
proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident. The proposed changes do not introduce any new
modes of operation or alter system setpoints which could create a
new or different kind of accident. Therefore, the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated is not created.
3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin
of safety?
The senior management title change does not impact the
management responsibilities or functions associated with ensuring
plant safety. Changes proposed in the POC composition will allow the
scope of available expertise to be expanded without changing the POC
function or responsibilities. Maintaining the current level of
personnel qualifications and experience ensures the POC will
continue to meet its TS review and advisory responsibilities. The
proposed changes will not impact the basis for any Technical
Specification related to the establishment of, or maintenance of,
nuclear safety margins. Therefore, operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed amendment 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 the 30-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 30-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 and provide for opportunity for a hearing
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, Rules
Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and
Publications 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 6D22, Two White Flint
North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to
4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of written comments received may be
examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L
Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By July 29, 1996, 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 2.714 which is
available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public
document room located at the Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate
Street, Richland, Washington 99352. If a request for a hearing or
petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the
Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the
Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or
the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of
hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, 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 factors: (1) the nature of the petitioner's right under the
Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy
the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the
[[Page 33781]]
proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the petition to
intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are sought
to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or
controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a brief
explanation of the bases of 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 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.
Petitioner 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 to relief. A petitioner who fails
to file such a supplement which satisfies 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, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-
examine witnesses.
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 a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Docketing and
Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,
by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of
the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so
inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at
1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union
operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the
following message addressed to William H. Bateman, Director, Project
Directorate IV-2: petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition
was mailed, plant name, and publication date and page number of this
Federal Register notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to
the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to M. H. Phillips Jr., Esq., Winston &
Strawn, 1400 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20005-3512, attorney for the
licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended
petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not
be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the
petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the
factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated June 6, 1995, as supplemented by letter
dated April 22, 1996, which is available for public inspection at the
Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,
NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at
the Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate Street, Richland, Washington
99352.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of June 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy G. Colburn,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-16556 Filed 6-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P