Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 1997 / Notices 16201

[Docket No. 50–348]

Southern Nuclear Operating Company,

Inc.; 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. NPF–

2 issued to the Southern Nuclear

Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee),

for operation of the Joseph M. Farley

Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1, located in

Houston County, Alabama.

The proposed amendment would

modify Technical Specification 3/4.4.9,

‘‘Specific Activity,’’ and the associated

Bases to reduce the limit associated

with dose equivalent iodine-131. The

steady-state dose equivalent iodine-131

limit would be reduced by 40 percent

from .5 [micro]Curie/gram to .3

[micro]Curie/gram.

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. Operation of Farley Unit 1 in

accordance with the proposed license

amendment does not involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

The reduction in the dose equivalent

iodine limits, both steady-state and

transient, will not increase the

probability of any accident evaluated

since no physical changes to the plant

are being made. The consequences of

any accident previously evaluated will

not be increased since the activity of the

primary coolant is being decreased.

2. The proposed license amendment

[does] not create the possibility of a new

or different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

The reduction in the dose equivalent

iodine limits, both steady-state and

transient, will not create the possibility

of a new or different kind of accident

from any accident previously evaluated

since no physical changes to the plant

are being made. The accidents of

concern continue to be those that have

previously been analyzed.

3. The proposed license amendment

does not involve a significant reduction

in a margin of safety.

The calculated potential radiological

consequences from the main steam line

break accident remain within the

regulatory exposure guidelines.

Consequently, there is no reduction in

any 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 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 May 5, 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 HoustonLove Memorial Library, 212 W.

Burdeshaw Street, Post Office Box 1369,

Dothan, Alabama. 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
16202 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 1997 / Notices

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:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1-(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1-(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to Herbert

N. Berkow: petitioner’s name and

telephone number, date petition was

mailed, plant name, and publication

date and page number of this Federal

Register notice. 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 M. Stanford

Blanton, Esq., Balch and Bingham, Post

Office Box 306, 1710 Sixth Avenue

North, Birmingham, Alabama 35201,

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 March 23, 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 Houston-Love Memorial Library,

212 W. Burdeshaw Street, Post Office

Box 1369, Dothan, Alabama.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of March 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Jacob I. Zimmerman,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II–2,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–8650 Filed 4–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 72–16 (50–338, –339]

Virginia Electric and Power Company,

Notice of Issuance of Environmental

Assessment and Finding of No

Significant Impact for the Independent

Spent Fuel Storage Installation at the

North Anna Nuclear Power Station

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of a materials

license under the requirements of Title

10 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

Part 72 (10 CFR Part 72), to Virginia

Electric and Power Company (the

applicant), authorizing the construction

and operation of an independent spent

fuel storage installation (ISFSI) located

at its North Anna Nuclear Power Station

in Louisa County, Virginia. The

Commission’s Spent Fuel Project Office

in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety

and Safeguards has completed its

environmental review in support of the

issuance of a materials license. The

‘‘Environmental Assessment (EA)

Related to Construction and Operation

of the North Anna Independent Spent

Fuel Storage Installation’’ has been

issued in accordance with 10 CFR Part

51.

Summary of Environmental Assessment

Description of the Proposed

Action: The proposed licensing action

would authorize the applicant to

construct and operate a dry storage

ISFSI. The ISFSI is to provide additional

interim storage of spent nuclear fuel

generated from the continued operation

of the North Anna Nuclear Power

Station Units 1 and 2. The proposed

ISFSI spent fuel cask is designed by

Transnuclear, Inc. The spent fuel cask,

referred to as TN–32, is a smooth rightcircular cylinder of multi-wall

construction that holds a fuel basket

designed to accommodate 32

pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuel

assemblies. The license for an ISFSI

under 10 CFR Part 72 is issued for 20

years, but the applicant may apply to

the Commission to renew the license, if

necessary, prior to its expiration.

Need for the Proposed Action

The spent fuel assemblies generated

from the operation of the North Anna

Nuclear Power Station Units 1 and 2 are

currently stored onsite in a spent fuel

pool. Under the current refueling

schedule for the North Anna Units 1

and 2, the capability to discharge an

entire core (157 assemblies) will be lost

in early 1999, and the spent fuel pool

will be at its capacity by late 2000.

Therefore, additional spent fuel storage

capacity is needed in 1998. Delay in the