Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices 63899

present oral comments at the meeting by

contacting Mr. Thomas J. Kenyon by

telephone at 1–800–368–5642,

extension 1120, or by Internet to the

NRC at anoeis@nrc.gov no later than

November 6, 2000. Members of the

public may also register to provide oral

comments within 15 minutes of the start

of each session. Individual oral

comments may be limited by the time

available, depending on the number of

persons who register. If special

equipment or accommodations are

needed to attend or present information

at the public meeting, the need should

be brought to Mr. Kenyon’s attention no

later than November 6, 2000, to provide

the NRC staff adequate notice to

determine whether the request can be

accommodated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Thomas J. Kenyon, Generic Issues,

Environmental, Financial, and

Rulemaking Branch, Division of

Regulatory Improvement Programs, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555. Mr. Kenyon

may be contacted at the aforementioned

telephone number or e-mail address.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day

of October, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David B. Matthews,

Director, Division of Regulatory Improvement

Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–27382 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316]

Indiana Michigan Power Company;

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 amendments to

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–58

and DPR–74 issued to Indiana Michigan

Power Company for operation of the

Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1

and 2 located in Berrien County,

Michigan.

The proposed amendments would

revise Technical Specification (TS) 3/

4.7.1.2, ‘‘Auxiliary Feedwater System

(AFW),’’ to change the description in

the TS surveillance requirement for the

position for each automatic valve in the

system from the ‘‘fully open’’ position to

the ‘‘correct’’ position.

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 the change involve a significant

increase in the probability of occurrence or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated?

The proposed change does not affect any

accident initiators or precursors. As such, the

proposed change does not increase the

probability of an accident. The proposed

change does not affect the ability of the AFW

system to mitigate the consequences of an

accident. By ensuring the required flowrates

are preserved, accident consequences are not

increased.

Therefore, the probability of occurrence or

consequences of accidents previously

evaluated are not significantly increased.

2. Does the change create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from any

accident previously analyzed?

The proposed change does not involve a

physical alteration in the AFW system or a

change to the way the system is operated;

however, such changes would be permitted

under 10 CFR 50.59, as described above.

Consequently, no new failure modes,

malfunctions, or system interactions are

created.

Therefore, the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously analyzed is not created.

3. Does the change involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety?

The AFW system is used after certain

accidents to remove decay heat and reduce

reactor coolant system temperature to less

than 350’F, when the residual heat removal

system may be placed into operation. This

function mitigates the consequences of an

accident that could result in

overpressurization of the reactor coolant

pressure boundary. The proposed change

does not affect the ability of the AFW system

to perform this function. Future changes

would be allowed via 10 CFR 50.59, as

described above. Changes to the position of

the automatic AFW system valves would

impact AFW system flow following an

accident. Requiring AFW system valves to be

in the correct position ensures flow is

provided in a manner consistent with the

accident analyses assumptions.

The proposed change does not impact the

ability of the AFW system to mitigate the

consequences of an accident. Therefore, the

proposed change does 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

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.

Documents may be examined, and/or

copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public

Document Room, located at One White

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first

floor), Rockville, MD.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By November 24, 2000, the licensee

may file a request for a hearing with

63900 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

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, located at One White

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first

floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 David W.

Jenkins, Esq., 500 Circle Drive,

Buchanan, MI 49107, 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 18, 2000,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, located at One White Flint North,

11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),

Rockville, Maryland, 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 19th day

of October 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John F. Stang,

Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project

Directorate III, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–27383 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–275]

Pacific Gas and Electric Co.; Diablo

Canyon Power Plant, Unit 1;

Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. DPR–

80, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric

Company (PG&E, or the licensee), for

operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear

Power Plant, Unit 1 (DCNPP), located in

San Luis Obispo County, California.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

The proposed action would allow

PG&E to increase the maximum reactor

core power level from 3338 megawatts

thermal (MWt) to 3411 MWt, which is

an increase of 2.2 percent of rated core

thermal power for DCNPP Unit 1.