57406 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Notices

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 March 21, 2000, as

supplemented on June 14, 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 18th day

of September 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Helen N. Pastis,

Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate I Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–24440 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–219]

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC;

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–

16 issued to AmerGen Energy Company,

LLC (the licensee) for operation of the

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

located in Ocean County, New Jersey.

The proposed amendment would

revise the Technical Specifications

(TSs) to establish that the existing Safety

Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio

(SLMCPR) contained in TS 2.1.A is

applicable for the next operating cycle

(Cycle 18).

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 TS change does not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated. 

The derivation of the Cycle 18 SLMCPR for

Oyster Creek for incorporation into the TS,

and its use to determine cycle-specific

thermal limits, has been performed using

NRC-approved methods. Additionally,

interim implementing procedures, which

incorporate cycle-specific parameters, have

been used. Based on the use of these

calculations, the Cycle 18 SLMCPR of 1.09

will not increase the probability or

consequences of an accident.

The basis of the MCPR Safety Limit

calculation is to ensure that greater than

99.9% of all fuel rods in the core avoid

transition boiling if the limit is not violated.

A SLMCPR of 1.09 preserves adequate

margin to transition boiling and fuel damage

in the event of a postulated accident. The

probability of fuel damage is not increased.

Therefore, the proposed TS change does

not involve an increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

2. The proposed TS change does not create

the possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated. 

The MCPR Safety Limit is a Technical

Specification numerical value designed to

ensure that fuel damage from transition

boiling does not occur as a result of the

limiting postulated accident. The limit

cannot create the possibility of any new type

of accident. The Cycle 18 SLMCPR has been

calculated using NRC-approved methods.

Additionally, interim procedures, which

incorporate cycle-specific parameters, have

been used. Therefore, the proposed TS

change does not create the possibility of a

new or different kind of accident, from any

accident previously evaluated.

3. The proposed TS change does not

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety. 

The margin of safety as defined in the TS

Bases will remain the same. The Cycle 18

SLMCPR is calculated using NRC-approved

methods, which are in accordance with the

current fuel design and licensing criteria.

Additionally, interim implementing

procedures, which incorporate cycle-specific

parameters, have been used. The MCPR

Safety Limit remains high enough to ensure

that greater that 99.9% of all fuel rods in the

core will avoid transition boiling if the limit

is not violated, thereby preserving fuel

cladding integrity. Therefore, the proposed

TS change does not involve a 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

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 October 23, 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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Notices 57407

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

Kevin P. Gallen, Esquire, Morgan, Lewis

& Bockius LLP, 1800 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20036–5869, 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 June 30, 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 18th day

of September 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Helen N. Pastis,

Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate 1, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–24441 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 72–2]

Virginia Electric and Power Company

Issuance of Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact Regarding the

Proposed Amendment to Revise

Technical Specifications of License

No. SNM–2501

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment,

pursuant to 10 CFR 72.56, to Special

Nuclear Material License No. 2501

(SNM–2501) held by Virginia Electric

and Power Company (Virginia Power)

for the Surry independent spent fuel

storage installation (ISFSI). The

requested amendment would revise the

Technical Specifications (TS) of SNM–

2501 to specifically permit the use of

the TN–32 storage cask to store spent

fuel with a higher initial enrichment

and burnup than currently specified in

the TS for the Surry ISFSI.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action: By

letter dated November 15, 1999, as

supplemented, Virginia Power

requested an amendment to revise the

TS of SNM–2501 for the Surry ISFSI.

The changes would specifically permit

the use of the TN–32 storage cask to

store spent fuel with a higher initial

enrichment and burnup than currently

specified in the TS. Currently the TS for

the Surry ISFSI limit the fuel to be

stored in the TN–32 to the following:

initial enrichment of ≤ 3.85 % (wt U235), assembly average burnup of ≤