[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38194-38195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18831]



[[Page 38194]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-298]


Nebraska Public Power District; 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-46, issued to Nebraska Public Power District (the licensee), for 
operation of the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) located in Nemaha County, 
Nebraska.
    The proposed amendment in the licensee's application of March 27, 
1997, would increase the minimum volume of diesel fuel oil in the fuel 
oil storage tanks from 48,000 gallons to 49,500 gallons. This change is 
Document of Change (DOC) 3.8.3-M.2 of the conversion of the current 
Technical Specifications (CTS) for the CNS to the improved Technical 
Specifications (ITS) that was noticed in the Federal Register on March 
17, 1998 (63 FR 13074). DOC 3.8.3-M.2 is the second more restrictive 
change to ITS Section 3.8.3 for the CNS.
    This proposed change would have a value different from the CTS and 
the Improved Standard Technical Specifications (ISTS) provided in 
NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical Specifications, General Electric 
Plants, BWR/4,'' Revision 1, dated April 1995. The conversion is based 
on NUREG-1433 and the Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on 
Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors,'' 
published on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132).
    The exigent circumstances for this notice is that the staff has 
recently determined that this change in the minimum volume of diesel 
fuel oil in the fuel oil storage tanks is beyond the scope of the 
conversion to the ITS; however, the change should be made to the ITS 
because the proposed value more properly accounts for the fuel oil 
needed for the diesel generators during all design basis accidents. The 
staff expects to issue the ITS for the CNS by July 29, 1998. To allow 
the staff to include the higher value for the minimum volume of fuel 
oil in the ITS, it is necessary for the staff to issue of this notice 
of proposed change to the CTS before July 15, 1998, to meet the 
requirements in 10 CFR 50.91 on notices for public comment of license 
amendments.
    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.
    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:
    In accordance with the criteria set forth in 10 CFR. 50.92, the 
Nebraska Public Power District has evaluated this proposed Technical 
Specifications change and determined it does not represent a 
significant hazards consideration. The following is provided in support 
of this conclusion.
    1. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    The proposed change provides more stringent requirements for 
operation of the facility. These more stringent requirements do not 
result in operation that will increase the probability of initiating an 
analyzed event and do not alter assumptions relative to the mitigation 
of an accident or transient event. The more restrictive requirements 
continue to ensure process variables, structures, systems, and 
components are maintained consistent with safety analyses and [CNS] 
licensing basis. [The storage of fuel oil is not an initiator of a 
design basis accident for the CNS and the licensee has an approved fire 
protection program.] Therefore, this change does 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 accident previously evaluated?
    The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the 
plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or 
changes in the methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed 
change does impose different requirements. However, this change is 
consistent with the assumptions in the safety analyses and [CNS] 
licensing basis. [The licensee has an approved fire protection program 
for the hazard of having to store more fuel oil.] Thus, this change 
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does this change involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety?
    The imposition of more restrictive requirements either has no 
impact on or increases the margin of plant safety. As provided in the 
discussion of the change, each change in this category [(more 
restrictive)] is by definition, providing additional restrictions to 
enhance plant safety. The change maintains requirements within the 
safety analyses and [CNS] licensing basis. [The additional amount of 
diesel fuel oil required will provide additional assurance that there 
is sufficient fuel oil to run the diesel generators through an event.] 
Therefore, this 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 
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, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of

[[Page 38195]]

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 August 14, 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 Auburn Memorial Library, 
1810 Courthouse Avenue, Auburn, NE 68305. 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 a 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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day 
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the 
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is 
requested, 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 Mr. John R. McPhail, Nebraska Public 
Power District, Post Office Box 499, Columbus, NE 68602-0499, 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 March 27, 1997, 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 Auburn Memorial Library, 1810 Courthouse 
Avenue, Auburn, NE 68305.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of July 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack N. Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-18831 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P