[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30026-30029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14516]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410]


Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation; 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 amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
DPR-63 and NPF-69 issued to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the 
licensee or NMPC) for operation of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, 
Unit 1 (NMP1) and Unit 2 (NMP2), respectively, located in the town of 
Scriba, Oswego County, New York.
    The proposed amendments would change administrative sections of the 
Technical Specifications (TS) (Sections 6.1, ``Responsibility''; 6.2, 
``Organization''; 6.5, ``Review and Audit''; 6.6, ``Reportable 
Occurrence Action''; and 6.7, ``Safety Limit Violation'') to reflect a 
restructuring of

[[Page 30027]]

the licensee's upper management organization for the Nuclear Division. 
The Nuclear Division organizational restructuring would involve the 
elimination of the Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear position 
and the establishment of the Vice President--Nuclear Generation 
position. The Chief Nuclear Officer (CNO) would assume corporate and TS 
responsibility for overall plant nuclear safety (a responsibility 
currently assigned to the Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear). 
The TS responsibility for plant operation (also currently assigned to 
the Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear) would be assumed by 
the Vice President--Nuclear Generation. The new Vice President--Nuclear 
Generation position would report directly to the CNO. In addition to 
existing responsibilities delineated by TS 6.5.3.1, 6.5.3.9, and 
6.5.3.10, the CNO would have overall responsibility for oversight of 
the Nuclear Division, including corporate and TS responsibility for 
overall plant nuclear safety, with authority to take such measures as 
may be needed to ensure acceptable performance of his staff in 
operating, maintaining, and providing technical support to the plant. 
The CNO would be responsible for periodically issuing management 
direction emphasizing the primary responsibilities of the Shift 
Supervisor. The changes for NMP1 would also correct a clerical error in 
which a previous Amendment No. (No. 144) was omitted when designating 
superseded amendments during preparation of prior Amendment No. 157.
    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 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:

    11. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 [or Unit 2], in 
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed amendment updates the * * * TS to reflect the 
revised NMPC Nuclear Division upper management organizational 
structure and associated reassignments of responsibilities. The 
proposed organizational structure provides more direct lines of 
authority by re-establishing the position and responsibilities of 
Vice President--Nuclear Generation and eliminating the position of 
Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear. The Vice President--
Nuclear Generation will assume TS responsibility for plant 
operation. The Chief Nuclear Officer is reassigned corporate and TS 
responsibility for overall plant nuclear safety with direct 
reporting from the Vice Presidents responsible for Nuclear 
Generation, Engineering, and Safety Assessment and Support. The 
Chief Nuclear Officer is also assigned the responsibility for 
periodically issuing management direction emphasizing the primary 
responsibilities of the Shift Supervisor. The proposed 
organizational structure and associated reassignments of 
responsibilities provide for the integrated management of activities 
necessary to support the safe operation of the * * * nuclear 
facility * * *.
    The proposed changes are limited to the administrative sections 
of the TS and the changes do not alter the technical content or 
intent of the affected administrative requirements and 
responsibilities. The revised organizational structure will not 
affect the design, function, or operation of any plant structure, 
system, or component (SSC), nor will it affect any maintenance, 
modification, or testing activities. Thus, there will be no impact 
on the capability of any SSC to perform its credited safety function 
to prevent an accident or mitigate the consequences of an accident 
as previously evaluated. Since the proposed changes are limited to 
administrative requirements and responsibilities, the changes do not 
involve accident precursors or initiators previously evaluated. It 
is, therefore, concluded that the probability of accident initiation 
will remain as previously evaluated and there will be no adverse 
effect on the conditions and assumptions of any previously evaluated 
accident. Hence, there will be no degradation of any fission product 
barrier which could increase the radiological consequences of any 
accident. Accordingly, operation in accordance with the proposed 
amendment will not involve a significant increase in the probability 
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 [or Unit 2], in 
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    The revised Nuclear Division organizational structure will not 
affect the design, function, or operation of any plant SSC, nor will 
it affect any maintenance, modification, or testing activities. The 
proposed changes are limited to the administrative sections of the 
TS and the changes do not alter the technical content or intent of 
the affected administrative requirements and responsibilities. As a 
result, the proposed changes will not impact the process variables, 
characteristics, or functional performance of any SSC in a manner 
that could create a new failure mode, nor will the changes introduce 
any new modes of plant operation or eliminate any requirements or 
impose any new requirements which could affect plant operation such 
that new credible accidents are introduced. Accordingly, operation 
in accordance with the proposed amendment will not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 [or Unit 2], in 
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The proposed amendment updates the TS to reflect the revised 
NMPC Nuclear Division upper management organizational structure and 
associated reassignments of responsibilities. The proposed changes 
are limited to the administrative sections of the TS and the changes 
do not alter the technical content or intent of the affected 
administrative requirements and responsibilities. As such, the 
proposed changes do not involve any hardware changes or physical 
alteration of the plant and the changes will have no impact on the 
design or function of any SCC. Implementation of the proposed 
changes will promote clear management control and effective lines of 
authority and communication between the organizational units to 
assure necessary attention to nuclear safety matters. It is, 
therefore, concluded that the proposed changes do not eliminate any 
requirements or responsibilities, impose any new requirements or 
responsibilities, or alter any physical parameters which could 
reduce the margin to an acceptance limit. Accordingly, operation in 
accordance with the proposed amendment will 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 
amendments requests involve 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

[[Page 30028]]

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 and 
Directives 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. 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 2, 1998, 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 Reference and Documents Department, 
Penfield Library, State University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126. 
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 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: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
by the above date. 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 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston 
& Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005-3502, 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 
applications for amendment dated May 15, 1998 (two letters, one for 
each unit), 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 Reference and Documents Department, Penfield Library, State 
University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of May 1998.


[[Page 30029]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Darl S. Hood,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-14516 Filed 6-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P