Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 1997 / Notices 60921

can be used to administratively offset

any delinquent debts reported to the

Treasury by other government agencies.

In addition, the TIN will be used to

collect and report to the Department of

the Treasury any delinquent

indebtedness arising out of the

licensee’s or applicant’s relationship

with the NRC.

A copy of the final supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW (lower level),

Washington, DC. OMB clearance

requests are available at the NRC

worldwide web site (http://

www.nrc.gov) under the FedWorld

collection link on the home page tool

bar. The document will be available on

the NRC home page site for 60 days after

the signature date of this notice.

Comments and questions should be

directed to the OMB reviewer by

December 15, 1997. Norma Gonzales,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs (3150- ), NEOB–10202, Office

of Management and Budget,

Washington, DC 20503. Comments can

also be submitted by telephone at (202)

395–3084. The NRC Clearance Officer is

Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301–415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day

of November 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brenda Jo. Shelton,

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–29888 Filed 11–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–302]

Florida Power Corporation; 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 (NRC or the Commission)

is considering issuance of an

amendment to Facility Operating

License No. DPR 72, issued to the

Florida Power Corporation, (FPC or the

licensee), for operation of the Crystal

River Nuclear Generating Unit 3 (CR3)

located in Citrus County, Florida.

The proposed amendment involves

modifications to the electrical controls

of the Reactor Building (RB)

Recirculation System Fan/Cooler, AHF–

1C. FPC has determined that the

modification involves an Unreviewed

Safety Question, in that modification

will install additional components that

could increase the probability of

occurrence of a malfunction of

equipment important to safety

previously evaluated in the Final Safety

Analysis Report (FSAR). Therefore, this

action requires NRC approval. The

proposed modification to the fan logic

will enable utilization of AHF–1C, in

place of either AHF–1A or AHF–1B (the

normally running RB Recirculation

System fans), by providing engineered

safeguards (ES) auto-start permissive

interlocks from its MCC–3AB transfer

switch. This modification will

automatically prevent inadvertent

loading of two RB Recirculation System

fans on a single emergency diesel

generator when the ES–MCC–3AB

source is transferred. The AHF–1C

Engineered Safeguards ‘‘A’’ train auto

start signal will be enabled only when

AHF–1C is ES-selected as the ‘‘A’’ train

fan with ES–MCC–3AB supplied from

the ‘‘A’’ train source. Conversely, the

AHF–1C ES ‘‘B’’ train auto-start signal

will be enabled only when AHF–1C is

ES-selected as the ‘‘B’’ train fan with

ES–MCC–3AB supplied from the ‘‘B’’

train source.

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. Does not involve a significant increase

in the probability or consequences of an

accident previously evaluated.

This license amendment involves the

addition of electrical circuits to preclude the

loading of two Reactor Building

Recirculation System fans onto the same

Emergency Diesel Generator when AHF–1C

is in service. This equipment will enable use

of Reactor Building Recirculation System

fan/cooler unit AHF–1C in place of either

AHF–1A or AHF–1B by providing ES autostart permissive interlocks from the source

transfer switch for Motor Control Center ES–

MCC–3AB. The AHF–1C ES-select control

circuitry and ES–MCC–3AB do not initiate

any accidents previously evaluated. Accident

mitigation strategies assume that one train of

the Reactor Building Recirculation System is

available. This license amendment does not

restrict the availability of one train. One

Reactor Building Recirculation System fan/

cooler unit will always be in operation even

if AHF–1C is not available because of a

malfunction in this control circuitry.

A failure to open or close a manual Nuclear

Services Closed Cycle Cooling (SW) System

valve at a Reactor Building Recirculation

System cooling coil is a remote possibility.

Adequate procedural controls are in place to

ensure that proper steps are taken when a

fan/cooler unit is being placed in service or

removed from service. These procedures are

not required during an accident, but are part

of the normal operation of CR–3. However,

should a failure occur, the other aligned

Reactor Building Recirculation fan/cooler

unit is available. In addition, both trains of

the Reactor Building Spray System will be

available to perform the post accident

containment heat removal function.

Failure to properly ES-select a fan/cooler

unit could result in a failure of the ES start

function. However, an alignment error in the

ES-selection of AHF–1C is annunciated and

printed out by the events recorder to

minimize the effect of this type of failure.

Also procedural controls are in place to align

the ES-selection for the fan/cooler unit being

placed in service. The other train of the

Reactor Building Recirculation System would

be available, as well as, both trains of the

Reactor Building Spray System. Therefore,

this license amendment does not involve a

significant increase in the probability of an

accident previously evaluated.

Because of CR–3 single failure design bases

considerations, a failure of one-half of the

Reactor Building Recirculation System

during accident mitigation would mean that

both trains of the Reactor Building Spray

System are available for mitigating any

accident previously evaluated. Accident

analyses for CR–3 assume only one train of

the Reactor Building Recirculation System.

Either train of the Reactor Building Spray

System has the capability to maintain the

accident dose consequences well below the

requirements of 10 CFR 100 (25 rem whole

body, 300 rem thyroid) and General Design

Criteria 19 (5 rem whole body, or its

equivalent to any part of the body).

Installation of the ES auto-start permissive

interlocks from the transfer switch for Motor

Control Center ES-MCC–3AB will not alter

any assumptions made in evaluating the

radiological consequences of any accident

described in the FSAR nor will it affect any

fission product barriers since the postaccident containment heat removal functions

will still meet design requirements. Therefore

installation of ES auto-start permissive

interlocks from Motor Control Center ESMCC–3AB transfer switch does not involve a

significant increase in the consequences of an

accident previously evaluated.

2. Does not create the possibility of a new

or different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

The accident mitigation strategies for CR–

3 assume two different types of post-accident
60922 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 1997 / Notices

containment heat removal functions—

Reactor Building Recirculation System and

Reactor Building Spray System. This license

amendment will allow the use of Reactor

Building Recirculation System fan/cooler

unit AHF–1C, which is presently

administratively out of service, to control the

Reactor Building temperature during normal

operations and to mitigate any postulated

accidents. The use of AHF–1C in place of

either AHF–1A or AHF–1B does not alter the

success path for post-accident mitigation.

The addition of the ES auto-start permissive

interlocks from the ES-MCC–3AB transfer

switch will not introduce failure modes and

effects that create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

3. Does not involve a significant reduction

in the margin of safety.

This license amendment will allow the use

of Reactor Building Recirculation System

fan/cooler unit AHF–1C that is presently

administratively out of service. AHF–1C is

identical in design function to the other two

fan/cooler units that are presently in service.

During normal operation, two operating

Reactor Building Recirculation System fan/

cooler units maintain the Reactor Building

temperature below the Improved Technical

Specification limit of 130°F. Installation of

this modification will allow the use of AHF–

1C in place of either AHF–1A or AHF–1B,

and maintain the licensing and design bases

that assume two trains are operable for

accident mitigation. The use of AHF–1C in

place of the other fan/cooler units will

preserve the margin of safety, pre-accident

and post-accident, because the assumptions

used in FSAR analyses remain valid. Peak

Reactor Building pressures and temperatures

will not be exceeded and the margin

provided by this fission product barrier will

not be reduced. Therefore, this license

amendment does not involve a significant

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. 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 Review 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 December 15, 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 Coastal

Region Library, 8619 W. Crystal Street,

Crystal River, Florida.

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 a 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.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 1997 / Notices 60923

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

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 R.

Alexander Glenn, General Counsel,

Florida Power Corporation, MAC–A5A,

P.O. Box 14042, St. Petersburg, Florida

33733–4042, 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 4, 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 Coastal Region Library, 8619 W.

Crystal Street, Crystal River, Florida.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day

of November 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

L. Raghavan,

Sr. Project Manager, Project Directorate II–

3, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–29889 Filed 11–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 030–31373; License No. 12–

16559–01; EA 97–207]

In the Matter of Conam Inspection, Inc.

Itasca, IL; Order Imposing Civil

Monetary Penalty

I

Conam Inspection, Inc. (Conam or

Licensee) is the holder of Byproduct

Materials License No. 12–16559–01

issued by the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or Commission) on

January 2, 1990. The license authorizes

the Licensee to possess and use certain

byproduct materials in accordance with

the conditions specified therein at the

Licensee’s facilities in Columbus, Ohio;

Gary, Indiana; Reading, Pennsylvania;

Gallipolis, Ohio; and at temporary job

sites anywhere in the United States

where the NRC maintains jurisdiction

for regulating the use of licensed

material.

II

An inspection and investigation of the

Licensee’s activities were conducted

between March 28, 1996 and November

12, 1996. The results of the inspection

and investigation indicated that the

Licensee had not conducted its

activities in full compliance with NRC

requirements. A written Notice of

Violation and Proposed Imposition of

Civil Penalty (Notice) was served upon

the Licensee by letter dated June 9,

1997. The Notice states the nature of the

violations, the provisions of the NRC’s

requirements that the Licensee had

violated, and the amount of the civil

penalty proposed for three of the

violations in the aggregate (Violations

I.A, I.B, and I.C).

The Licensee responded to the Notice

in a letter dated July 7, 1997. In its

response, the Licensee denied

Violations I.B and I.C, and requested

remission or full mitigation of the civil

penalty.

III

After consideration of the Licensee’s

response and arguments for mitigation

contained therein, the NRC staff has

determined, as set forth in the Appendix

to this Order, that the Licensee did not

provide an adequate basis for

withdrawing Violations I.B and I.C, or

mitigating the severity level of

Violations I.A, I.B, and I.C in the

aggregate, or mitigating the civil penalty

associated with Violations I.A, I.B, and

I.C. Therefore, a civil penalty in the

amount of $16,000 should be imposed.

IV

In view of the foregoing and pursuant

to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act

of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C.

2282, and 10 CFR 2.205, it is hereby

ordered that:

The Licensee pay a civil penalty in the

amount of $16,000 within 30 days of the date

of this Order, by check, draft, money order,

or electronic transfer, payable to the

Treasurer of the United States and mailed to

James Lieberman, Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, One White Flint North, 11555

Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852–2738.

V

The Licensee may request a hearing

within 30 days of the date of this Order.

Where good cause is shown,

consideration will be given to extending

the time to request a hearing. A request

for extension of time must be made in

writing to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission Washington, D.C. 20555,

and include a statement of good cause

for the extension. A request for a

hearing should be clearly marked as a

‘‘Request for an Enforcement Hearing’’

and shall be addressed to the Director,

Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission Washington,

D.C. 20555, with a copy to the

Commission’s Document Control Desk,

Washington, D.C. 20555. Copies also

shall be sent to the Assistant General

Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement

at the same address and to the Regional

Administrator, NRC Region III, 801

Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532.

If a hearing is requested, the

Commission will issue an Order

designating the time and place of the

hearing. If the Licensee fails to request

a hearing within 30 days of the date of

this Order (or if written approval of an

extension of time in which to request a

hearing has not been granted), the

provisions of this Order shall be

effective without further proceedings. If

payment has not been made by that

time, the matter may be referred to the

Attorney General for collection.

In the event the Licensee requests a

hearing as provided above, the issues to

be considered at such hearing shall be:

(a) Whether the Licensee was in

violation of the Commission’s

requirements as set forth in Violations

I.B and I.C of the Notice referenced in

Section II above, and

(b) Whether, on the basis of such

violations and the additional violations

set forth in the Notice of Violation that

the Licensee admitted, this Order

should be sustained.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.