33378 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices

NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: Telephone: (202)

314–6100.

Individuals requesting specific

accommodation should contact Mrs.

Barbara Bush at (202) 314–6220 by

Friday, May 26, 2000.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhonda

Underwood (202) 314–6065.

Dated: May 19, 2000.

Rhonda Underwood,

Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–13091 Filed 5–19–00; 2:58 pm]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–311]

Public Service Electric and Gas

Company; 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–

75 issued to Public Service Electric and

Gas Company (the licensee), for

operation of the Salem Nuclear

Generating Station, Unit No. 2 (Salem

Unit No. 2), located in Salem County,

New Jersey.

The proposed amendment would

modify the requirements contained in

the Salem Unit No. 2 Technical

Specifications regarding the operation of

the movable incore detector system. The

proposed change would be a one-time

change to allow use of the movable

incore detector system for measurement

of core peaking factors with less than

75% and greater than or equal to 50%

of the detector thimbles available. The

licensee has submitted this request in

response to degradation of the Salem

Unit No. 2 movable incore detector

system. There are currently 75.8% of the

detector thimble locations available for

use. The proposed changes would allow

continued operation of Salem Unit No.

2 through the remainder of Cycle 11.

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:

1. The proposed changes do not involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

The movable incore detector system is

used only to provide confirmatory

information on the neutron flux distribution

of the core. This system does not provide any

automatic control functions or protective

functions for the operation of the plant. The

only accident that the movable incore

detector system could be involved in is the

breaching of the detector thimbles which is

bounded by the small break loss of coolant

accident (LOCA) analysis. As the proposed

changes do not involve any changes to the

physical equipment or operation of the

system, there is no increase in the probability

of an accident previously evaluated.

The movable incore detector system

provides a monitoring function that is not

used for accident mitigation. The small break

LOCA analysis continues to bound potential

breaching of the system’s detector thimbles.

With less than 75% but greater than or equal

to 50% of the detector thimbles available,

core peaking factor measurement

uncertainties will be increased. This can

impact core peaking factors and as a result

could affect the consequences of certain

accidents. However, any changes in the core

peaking factors resulting from increased

measurement uncertainties will be

compensated for by conservative

measurement uncertainty adjustments in the

Technical Specifications to ensure that

pertinent core design parameters are

maintained. Sufficient additional penalty is

added to the power distribution

measurements such that this change will not

impact the consequences of any accident

previously evaluated.

Therefore, the proposed changes will not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

2. The proposed changes do not create the

possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

analyzed.

There are no changes to the physical plant

or operation of the movable incore systems

as a result of the proposed changes. Since no

changes are being made to the way the

system is operated and no changes are being

made to the system equipment, no new

accidents or different accidents than

previously analyzed are introduced by the

proposed changes.

Therefore, the proposed changes will not

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously analyzed.

3. The proposed changes do not involve a

significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The reduction in the minimum

complement of equipment necessary for the

operability of the movable incore detector

system only impacts the monitoring and

calibration functions of the system.

Reduction of the number of available

moveable incore detector thimbles to the

50% level does not significantly degrade the

ability of the system to measure core power

distributions. With less than 75% but greater

than or equal to 50% of the detector thimbles

available, core peaking factor measurement

uncertainties will be increased but will be

compensated for by conservative

measurement uncertainty adjustments in the

Technical Specifications to ensure that

pertinent core design parameters are

maintained. Sufficient additional penalty is

added to the power distribution

measurements such that this change does not

impact the safety margins that currently

exist. Also, the reduction of available

detector thimbles has negligible impact on

the quadrant power tilt and core average

axial power shape measurements and will

not adversely affect excore detector

calibration. Sufficient detector thimbles will

be available to ensure that no quadrant will

be unmonitored.

Based on the above, the proposed changes

will not result in a 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.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices 33379

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 June 22, 2000, 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 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

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

Jeffrie J. Keenan, Esquire, Nuclear

Business Unit—N21, P.O. Box 236,

Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038.

Non-timely 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 April 10, 2000, which

is available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, 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 17th day

of May.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert J. Fretz,

Project Manager, Section 2, Project

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–12963 Filed 5–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Actuarial Advisory Committee With

Respect to the Railroad Retirement

Account; Notice of Public Meeting

Notice is hereby given in accordance

with Public Law 92–463 that the

Actuarial Advisory Committee will hold