53660 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 199 / Wednesday, October 15, 1997 / Notices

hours. With an estimated 60% of the

institutions expected to respond

through this method in 1998, which will

make possible a substantial reduction in

response burden over 1996 (when 40%

responded electronically). However,

with the addition of 50 institutions the

overall response time is expected to

remain 24 hours.

Throughout the years as the survey

instrument and data collection

techniques have improved the response

rate has improved and the average

burden on the institutions declined.

The Burden estimates are as follows:

Fiscal year

Number

of institutions

Hours

to respond

1992 ................................ 303 30.

1994 ................................ 309 24.

1996 ................................ 307 23.

1998 ................................ 357 24 est.

Dated: October 7, 1997.

Gail A. McHenry,

NSF Reports Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–27203 Filed 10–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket NO. 50–382]

Entergy Operations, Inc.; 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. NPF–

38 issued to Entergy Operations Inc.,

(the licensee) for operation of the

Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit

3, located in St. Charles Parish,

Louisiana.

The proposed amendment would

change Waterford 3 Technical

Specifications 3.3.3.7.3 (TSs) and

Surveillance Requirement 4.3.3.7.3 for

the broad range gas detection system. A

change to the TS Basis 3/4.3.3.7 has

been included to support this change.

This change to the TSs is necessary due

to a potential unreviewed safety

question identified during final review

prior to installation of a new broad

range gas detection system approved by

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Staff on August 19, 1997 (Amendment

133). In effect, Entergy Operations is

requesting that the TSs and associated

Basis for the broad range gas detection

system that were in effect prior to

Amendment 133 be retained instead of

implementing the approved

Amendment 133.

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. Will operation of the facility in

accordance with this proposed change

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated?

Response: No.

The broad range gas detection system has

no effect on the accidents analyzed in

Chapter 15 of the Final Safety Analysis

Report. The habitability of the control room

will be unchanged by use of the currently

installed monitoring system and this change

to the Technical Specifications. Since this

proposed change will make operation of the

facility the same as before Amendment 133,

the probability and consequences of an

accident associated with this change have

been previously evaluated.

Therefore, the proposed change will not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of any accident

previously evaluated.

2. Will operation of the facility in

accordance with this proposed change create

the possibility of a new or different type of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated?

Response: No.

The proposed Technical Specification

change in itself does not change the design

or configuration of the plant. Since this

proposed change will make operation of the

facility the same as it was before Amendment

133, no new or different type of accident

from any accident previously evaluated will

be created.

Therefore, the proposed change will not

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

3. Will operation of the facility in

accordance with this proposed change

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety?

Response: No.

The broad range gas detection system has

no effect on a margin of safety as defined by

Section 2 of the Technical Specifications.

The habitability of the control room will be

unchanged from the configuration of the

currently installed detection system and this

change to the Technical Specifications. The

margin of safety remains unchanged from the

original licensing basis of the plant.

Therefore, the proposed change 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

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 Freedom

of Information and Publications

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 6D22, 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.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 199 / Wednesday, October 15, 1997 / Notices 53661

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By November 14, 1997, 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

University of New Orleans Library,

Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New

Orleans, LA 70122. 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

N.S. Reynolds, Esq., Winston & Strawn,

1400 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC,

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 7, 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 University of New Orleans Library,

Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New

Orleans, LA 70122.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of October 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Chandu P. Patel,

Project Manager, Project Directorate, Division

of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–27237 Filed 10–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–309]

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation;

Maine Yankee Atomic Power

Company; Maine Yankee Atomic

Power Station; Notice of Public

Meeting to Receive Comment on PostShutdown Decommissioning Activities

Report

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission has scheduled a public

meeting to receive comments on the

Post-Shutdown Decommissioning

Activities Report (PSDAR) for the Maine

Yankee Atomic Power Station (Maine

Yankee) located in Lincoln County,

Maine. The meeting will be held on

November 6, 1997, beginning at 7:00

p.m. at the Wiscasset Senior High

School in Wiscasset, Maine. The

purpose of this informational meeting is