55432 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Notices

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–458]

Entergy Gulf States and Cajun Electric

Power Cooperative; Notice of

Consideration of Approval of Transfer

of License and Issuance of

Conforming License 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 order

approving, under 10 CFR 50.80, the

transfer of Facility Operating License

No. NPF–47 to the extent now held by

Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.

(Cajun) to Entergy Gulf States, Inc.

(EGSI, the licensee) with respect to

River Bend Station, Unit 1 (RBS),

located in West Feliciana Parish,

Louisiana, and issuance of conforming

amendments under 10 CFR 50.90.

RBS presently is jointly owned by

EGSI (70%) and Cajun (30%) with EGSI

authorized to act as agent for Cajun.

Entergy Operations, Inc. (EOI), a nonowner of the facility, is licensed to have

exclusive responsibility and control

over the operation and maintenance of

the facility. Cajun is proposing to

transfer its 30% minority ownership

interest to EGSI, resulting in EGSI

becoming the sole owner of RBS. The

license would be amended to reflect the

transfer of ownership.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, the

Commission may approve the transfer of

a license, or any right thereunder, after

notice to interested persons. Such

approval is contingent upon the

Commission’s determination that the

proposed transferee is qualified to hold

the license and that the transfer is

otherwise consistent with applicable

provisions of law, regulations, and

orders of the Commission. If the

Commission determines that approval

should be given, it will issue an order

setting forth its consent to the transfer.

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), Cajun, with the consent and

endorsement of EGSI, has provided their

analysis of the issue of no significant

hazards consideration, which is

presented below:

Applying the three standards set forth in

10 CFR [Section] 50.92, the proposed change

to the Operating License involves no

significant hazards consideration:

1. The proposed change will not involve an

increase in the probability or consequences

of any accident previously evaluated. As a

result of the proposed license amendment,

there will be no physical change to the River

Bend facility, and all Limiting Conditions for

Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings

and Safety Limits specified in the Technical

Specifications will remain unchanged. Also,

the River Bend Quality Assurance Program,

Emergency Plan, Security Plan, and Operator

Training and Requalification Program will be

unaffected. The employees of EOI presently

engaged in operation of River Bend and

organization structure of EOI and EGSI will

be unaffected by the proposed amendment.

Therefore, personnel qualifications will

remain unchanged.

2. The proposed amendment will not

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated. The proposed

amendment will have no effect on the

physical configuration of River Bend or the

manner in which it will operate. The plant

design and design basis will remain the

same. The current plant safety analyses will

therefore remain complete and accurate in

addressing the design basis events and in

analyzing plant response and consequences.

The Limiting Conditions for Operations,

Limiting Safety System Settings and Safety

Limits specified in the Technical

Specifications for River Bend are not affected

by the proposed license amendment. As

such, the plant conditions for which the

design basis accident analyses have been

performed will remain valid. Therefore, the

proposed license amendment cannot create

the possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated.

3. The proposed amendment will not

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety. Plant safety margins are established

through Limiting Conditions for Operation,

Limiting Safety System Settings and Safety

Limits specified in the Technical

Specifications. Since there will be no change

to the physical design or operation of the

plant, there will be no change to any of these

margins. Thus, the proposed license

amendment will not involve a significant

reduction in any margin of safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed the

foregoing 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.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By November 24, 1997, Cajun may file

a request for a hearing with respect to

issuance of an order regarding the

proposed transfer of the license to the

extent now held by Cajun to EGSI and

issuance of the conforming 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
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