Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Notices 55433

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

Government Documents Department,

Louisiana State University, Baton

Rouge, LA 70803. 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

Mary A. Murphy, LeBoeuf, Lamb,

Green, & MacRae, L.L.P., 1875

Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1200,

Washington, D.C. 20009, attorney for

Cajun.

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 15, 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 Government Documents

Department, Louisiana State University,

Baton Rouge, LA 70803.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st,

day of October 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David L. Wigginton,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

IV–1, Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–28264 Filed 10–23–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–255]

Consumers Energy Company

Palisades Plant; Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an exemption

from certain requirements of its

regulations for Facility Operating

License No. DPR–20, issued to

Consumers Energy Company, (the

licensee), for operation of the Palisades

Plant located in Van Buren County,

Michigan.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

Consumers Energy from the

requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a), which

requires a monitoring system that will

energize clear audible alarms if

accidental criticality occurs in each area

in which special nuclear material is

handled, used, or stored. The proposed

action would also exempt the licensee

from the requirements to maintain

emergency procedures for each area in

which this licensed special nuclear

material is handled, used, or stored to

ensure that all personnel withdraw to an

area of safety upon the sounding of the

alarm, to familiarize personnel with the

evacuation plan, and to designate
55434 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Notices

responsible individuals for determining

the cause of the alarm, and to place

radiation survey instruments in

accessible locations for use in such an

emergency.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated July 2, 1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The purpose of 10 CFR 70.24(a) is to

ensure that if a criticality were to occur

during the handling of special nuclear

material, personnel would be alerted to

that fact and would take appropriate

action. At a commercial nuclear power

plant the inadvertent criticality with

which 10 CFR 70.24(a) is concerned

could occur during fuel handling

operations. The special nuclear material

that could be assembled into a critical

mass at a commercial nuclear power

plant is in the form of nuclear fuel; the

quantity of other forms of special

nuclear material that is stored on site in

any given location is small enough to

preclude achieving a critical mass.

Because the fuel is not enriched beyond

5.0 weight percent Uranium-235 and

because commercial nuclear plant

licensees have procedures and design

features that prevent inadvertent

criticality, the staff has determined that

it is unlikely that an inadvertent

criticality could occur due to the

handling of special nuclear material at

a commercial power reactor. The

requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a),

therefore, are not necessary to ensure

the safety of personnel during the

handling of special nuclear materials at

commercial power reactors.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed action and

concludes that there is no significant

environmental impact if the exemption

is granted. Inadvertent or accidental

criticality will be precluded through

compliance with the Palisades

Technical Specifications (TS), the

design of the fuel storage racks

providing geometric spacing of fuel

assemblies in their storage locations,

and administrative controls imposed on

fuel handling procedures. TS

requirements specify reactivity limits

for the fuel storage racks and minimum

spacing between the fuel assemblies in

the storage racks.

Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 50,

‘‘General Design Criteria for Nuclear

Power Plants,’’ Criterion 62, requires

that criticality in the fuel storage and

handling system shall be prevented by

physical systems or processes,

preferably by use of geometrically safe

configurations. This is met at Palisades,

as identified in the TS and the Final

Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).

Palisades TS section 5.4.1, ‘‘New Fuel

Storage,’’ states that the center-to-center

spacing in the new fuel storage array is

sufficient so that Keff will not exceed

0.95 where fuel rods of the maximum

allowable enrichment are in place and

optimum moderation is assumed.

The proposed exemption would not

result in any significant radiological

impacts. The proposed exemption

would not affect radiological plant

effluents nor cause any significant

occupational exposures since the TS,

design controls (including geometric

spacing of fuel assembly storage spaces),

and administrative controls preclude

inadvertent criticality. The amount of

radioactive waste would not be changed

by the proposed exemption.

The proposed exemption does not

result in any significant nonradiological

environmental impacts. The proposed

exemption involves features located

entirely within the restricted area as

defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not

affect nonradiological plant effluents

and has no other environmental impact.

Accordingly, the Commission concludes

that there are no significant

nonradiological environmental impacts

associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

that there is no measurable

environmental impact associated with

the proposed action, any alternatives

with equal or greater environmental

impact need not be evaluated. As an

alternative to the proposed action, the

staff considered denial of the requested

exemption. Denial of the request would

result in no change in current

environmental impacts. The

environmental impacts of the proposed

action and the alternative action are

similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the ‘‘Final Environmental

Statement Related to the Operation of

Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant’’

dated June 1972.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on September 18, 1997, the staff

consulted with the Michigan State

official, Dennis Hahn, of the Michigan

Department of Environmental Quality,

Drinking Water and Radiological

Protection Division, regarding the

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon the environmental

assessment, the Commission concludes

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed action.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated July 2, 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

Van Wylen Library, Hope College,

Holland, Michigan 49423.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of

October 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert G. Schaaf,

Project Manager, Project Directorate III–1,

Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–28263 Filed 10–23–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Integrated Review of the NRC

Assessment Processes for Operating

Commercial Nuclear Reactors; Meeting

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission staff is holding a meeting

to provide brief overviews of their

planned Integrated Review of the NRC

Assessment Process for Operating

Commercial Nuclear Reactors, planned

improvements to the current Senior

Management Meeting (SMM) process,

and to provide members of the public,

including Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

and Union of Concerned Scientists

(UCS) representatives, an opportunity to

provide early input and comments on

these efforts. The meeting is open to the

public and all interested parties may

attend and provide comments.

DATES: November 6, 1997, from 9:30

a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, One White Flint North,

Room 6–B11, 11555 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, MD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Louis Gamberoni, Mail Stop O–

12–E4, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory