[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 29 (Thursday, February 12, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7023-7025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E4-264]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (NPPD or the licensee)
for operation of the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) located in Nemaha
County, NE.
The proposed amendment would revise the CNS Technical
Specifications (TSs) by adding a temporary note to allow a one-time
extension of a limited number of TS Surveillance Requirements (SRs).
The temporary note states that the next required performance of the SR
may be delayed until the current cycle refueling outage, but no later
than February 2, 2005, and it expires upon startup from the refueling
outage. With the exception of one SR, the period of additional time
requested occurs during the next planned refueling outage.
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 title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), Sec. 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. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
The requested action is a one-time extension of the performance
of a limited number of TS SRs. The performance of these
surveillances, or the failure to perform these surveillances, is not
a precursor to an accident. Performing these surveillances or
failing to perform these surveillances does not affect the
probability of an accident. Therefore, the proposed delay in
performance of the SRs in this amendment request does not increase
the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
In general a delay in performing these surveillances does not
result in a system being unable to perform its required function. In
the case of this one-time extension request the relatively short
period of additional time that the systems and components will be in
service prior to the next performance of the SRs associated with
this amendment request will not impact the ability of those systems
to operate. Therefore, the systems required to mitigate accidents
will remain capable of performing their required function.
Additionally, the more frequent TS channel functional tests and
surveillances performed on the systems associated with the requested
surveillance extensions provide assurance that these systems are
capable of performing their functions. No new failures are
introduced as a result of this action and the consequences remain
consistent with previously evaluated accidents. Therefore, the
proposed delay in performance of the SRs in this amendment request
does not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an
accident.
Based on the above NPPD concludes that the proposed changes do
not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
[[Page 7024]]
The requested action is a one-time extension of the performance
of a limited number of TS SRs. This action does not involve the
addition of any new plant structure, system, or component (SSC), a
modification in any existing SSC, nor a change in how any existing
SSC is operated.
Based on the above NPPD concludes that the proposed changes do
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
The proposed change is a one-time extension of the performance
of a limited number of TS SRs. Extending these SRs does not involve
a modification of any TS Limiting Conditions for Operation.
Extending these SRs does not involve a change to any limit on
accident consequences specified in the license or regulations.
Extending these SRs does not involve a change to how accidents are
mitigated or a significant increase in the consequences of an
accident. Extending these SRs does not involve a change in a
methodology used to evaluate consequences of an accident. Extending
these SRs does not involve a change in any operating procedure or
process.
The instrumentation and components exhibit reliable operation
based on the three most recent performances of the 18-month SRs
being successful, and the successful performance of related SRs with
a shorter surveillance interval.
Based on the minimal additional period of time that the systems
and components will be in service before the surveillances are next
performed, as well as the fact that surveillances are typically
successful when performed, it is reasonable to conclude that the
margins of safety associated with these SRs are not affected by the
requested extension.
Based on the above NPPD concludes that the proposed changes do
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 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, 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.
By March 15, 2004, 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, or electronically on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If there are problems in
accessing the document, contact the Public Document Room Reference
staff at 1-800-397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].
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.
[[Page 7025]]
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 (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area
O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, by the
above date. Because of the continuing disruptions in delivery of mail
to United States Government offices, it is requested that petitions for
leave to intervene and requests for hearing be transmitted to the
Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission
to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to [email protected]. A copy of the
petition for leave to intervene and request for hearing should also be
sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and because of continuing
disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it
is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile
transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to [email protected]. A
copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene
should also be sent 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 January 30, 2004, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's 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 from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's
(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.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, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of February, 2004.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michelle C. Honcharik,
Project Manager, Section I, Project Directorate IV, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E4-264 Filed 2-11-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P