[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16501-16502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-7353]



[[Page 16501]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-29]


Yankee Atomic Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment to Facility Possession-Only 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 Possession-Only 
License No. DPR-3 issued to Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC) for 
possession of the Yankee Nuclear Power Station (YNPS) located in Rowe, 
Massachusetts.
    The proposed amendment would allow changes to the security plan to 
include the new Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).
    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:

    The proposed amendment to the security plan provides the basis 
for establishing security functions necessary to implement 
appropriate security/safeguards measures for the YNPS ISFSI. As 
such, the changes will not:
    1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Based on the 
details presented in the safety analysis, the proposed amendment to 
the security plan, which incorporates ISFSI security functions, does 
not reduce the ability of the security organization to prevent 
radiological sabotage and therefore does not increase the 
probability or consequences of a radiological release previously 
evaluated. The proposed security plan changes will not affect any 
important to safety systems or components, their mode of operation 
or operating strategies. The proposed security plan changes have no 
affect on accident initiators or mitigation. The physical protection 
systems described in the ISFSI security plan are designed to protect 
against the loss of control of the facility that could be sufficient 
to cause a radiation exposure exceeding the dose as described in 10 
CFR 72.106. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the security plan 
will not involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. Create the possibility of a new or different accident from 
any previously evaluated. Based on the details presented in the 
safety analysis, the proposed amendment to the security plan 
incorporating ISFSI security functions does not affect the operation 
of systems important to safety. The security plan amendment does not 
affect any of the parameters or conditions that could contribute to 
the initiation of any accident. No new accident scenarios are 
created as a result of security plan changes requested to 
incorporate the ISFSI security functions. In addition, the design 
functions of equipment important to safety are not altered as a 
result of the proposed security plan changes. The physical 
protection systems described in the ISFSI security plan are 
described to protect against the loss of control of the facility 
that could be sufficient to cause a radiation exposure exceeding the 
dose as described in 10 CFR 72.106. Therefore, the proposed security 
plan changes will not create the possibility of a new or different 
accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. 
Based on the details presented in the safety analysis, 
implementation of the proposed amendment to the security plan 
incorporating ISFSI security functions will not reduce a margin of 
safety as detailed in the Technical Specifications as there are no 
Technical Specification requirements associated with the physical 
security system. Specifically, the proposed changes to the security 
plan do not represent a change in initial conditions, system 
response time, or in any other parameter affecting the course of an 
accident analysis supporting the Bases of any Technical 
Specification. The proposed amendment to the security plan does not 
reduce the effectiveness of any security or safeguards measures 
currently in place at YNPS. The physical protection systems 
described in the ISFSI security plan are designed to protect against 
the loss of control of the facility that could be sufficient to 
cause a radiation exposure exceeding the dose as described in 10 CFR 
72.106.
    Therefore, the proposed security plan changes will not involve a 
significant reduction in the 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.
    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. Documents may 
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By April 25, 2001, 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, located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland, and accessible electronically through the ADAMS Public 
Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov). 
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

[[Page 16502]]

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, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 Robert 
K. Gad, III, Esq., Ropes and Gray, One International Place, Boston, MA 
02110-2624, 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 October 12, 2000, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, located 
at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 
Rockville, Maryland, and accessible electronically through the ADAMS 
Public Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of March 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John B. Hickman,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 01-7353 Filed 3-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P