28010 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 98 /Thursday, May 21, 1998 / Notices

proposed change by a letter dated May

15, 1998.

By June 22, 1998, the licensee may

demand a hearing with respect to the

denial described above. Any person

whose interest may be affected by this

proceeding may file a written petition

for leave to intervene.

A request for hearing or petition for

leave to intervene must be filed with the

Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, 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 any petitions should also be

sent to the Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555,

and to Judd L. Bacon, Esquire,

Consumers Energy Company, 212 West

Michigan Avenue, Jackson, Michigan

49201, attorney for the licensee.

For further details with respect to this

action, see (1) the application for

amendment dated January 18, 1996, as

supplemented by letters dated October

1, 1997, and January 29, and April 27,

1998, and (2) the Commission’s letter to

the licensee dated May 15, 1998.

These documents are 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 Van

Wylen Library, Hope College, Holland,

Michigan 49423.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day

of May 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert G. Schaaf,

Project Manager, Project Directorate III–1,

Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–13557 Filed 5–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–387 and 50–388]

Pennsylvania Power and Light

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. NPF–14

and NPF–22 issued to Pennsylvania

Power and Light Company for operation

of the Susquehanna Steam Electric

Station (SSES), Units 1 and 2 located in

Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.

The proposed amendment would

change the Technical Specifications

(TS) for SSES, Units 1 and 2 to

implement the provisions of Generic

Letter 86–10 related to the relocation of

SSES, Units 1 and 2 Fire Protection

Program from the TS to a licensee

controlled document, the SSES

Technical Requirements Manual. This

notice supersedes the previous notice

published in the Federal Register on

October 25, 1995 (60 FR 54724), in its

entirety.

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. Involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed change relocates the

provisions of the Fire Protection Program that

are contained in the Technical Specifications

and places them in the Technical

Requirements Manual. No requirements are

being added or deleted. A requirement is

proposed to require written procedures for

the implementation of the Technical

Requirements Program. Review and approval

of those portions of the Fire Protection

Program contained in the Technical

Requirements Manual and revisions thereto

will be the responsibility of the Plant

Operations Review Committee just as it was

their responsibility to review changes to the

fire protection Limiting Condition for

Operation and Surveillance Requirements

when they were part of the Technical

Specifications. Requiring review by the Plant

Operations Review Committee reinforces the

importance of the Technical Requirements

Manual and the requirements controlled by

it and assures a multidisciplined review.

Approved Technical Requirements or

changes thereto are provided to the

Susquehanna Review Committee for

information. No design basis accidents are

affected by the change, nor are safety systems

adversely affected by the change. Therefore,

there is no impact on the probability of

[oc]currence or the consequences of any

design basis accidents.

Approval, as defined in Technical

Specification 6.8.2, of procedures listed in

Technical Specification 6.8.1 is proposed to

be changed from the ‘‘Superintendent of

Plant-Susquehanna’’ to General ManagerSusquehanna SES. This change is

administrative in nature and as such is no

impact on the probability of [oc]currence or

the consequences of any design basis

accidents.

The proposed changes to the license

conditions for Units 1 and 2 are

administrative in nature in that these changes

only update the listing of NRC approved

safety evaluations and as such are no impact

on the probability of [oc]currence or the

consequences of any design basis accidents.

2. Create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed changes relocate the

provisions of the Fire Protection Program that

are contained in the Technical Specifications

and places them in the Technical

Requirements Manual. The proposed change

requires written procedures to cover the

implementation of the Technical

Requirements Program No requirements are

being added or deleted by the Technical

Requirements Manual. There are no new

failure modes associated with the proposed

changes. Therefore, since the plant will

continue to operate as designed, the

proposed changes will not modify the plant

response to an accident.

Approval, as defined in Technical

Specification 6.8.2, of procedures listed in

Technical Specification 6.8.1 has been

change[d] from the ‘‘Superintendent of Plant

Susquehanna’’ to General ManagerSusquehanna SES. This change is

administrative in nature and as such creates

no new failure modes and will not modify

the plant response to an accident.

The proposed changes to the license

conditions for Units 1 and 2 are

administrative in nature in that these changes

only update the listing of NRC approved

safety evaluations and as such create no new

failure modes and will not modify the plant

response to an accident.

3. Involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety.

No change is being proposed for the Fire

Protection Program requirements themselves.

The relevant Technical Specifications are

being relocated, and the requirements

contained therein are being incorporated into

the Technical Requirements Manual. Plant

procedures will continue to provide the

specific instructions necessary for the

implementation of the requirements, just as

when the requirements resided in the

Technical Specifications. A written

procedure will be in place for the

implementation of the Technical

Requirements Program. Fire Protection

Program changes will be subject to the

provisions of 10C FR 50.59 and the current
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 98 /Thursday, May 21, 1998 / Notices 28011

fire protection license condition. As such, the

changes do not directly affect any protective

boundaries nor [do they] impact the safety

limits for the boundary. Review and approval

of those portions of the Fire Protection

Program contained in the Technical

Requirements Manual and the revisions

thereto will be the responsibility of the Plant

Operations Review Committee just as it was

their responsibility to review changes to the

fire protection Limiting Condition for

Operation and Surveillance Requirements

when they were part of the Technical

Specification[s]. Approved Technical

Requirements or changes thereto are

provided to the Susquehanna Review

Committee for information. Thus, there are

no adverse impacts on the protective

boundaries, safety limits, or margin of safety.

Since operability and surveillance

requirements will remain in a controlled

document, the changes do not reduce the

effectiveness of Technical Specification

requirements. Any changes to the Fire

Protection Program requirements will be

made in accordance with the provisions of 10

CFR 50.59 and the fire protection license

condition.

Approval, as defined in Technical

Specification 6.8.2, of procedures listed in

Technical Specification 6.8.1 has been

change[d] from the ‘‘Superintendent of Plant

Susquehanna’’ to General ManagerSusquehanna SES. This change is

administrative in nature and as such there is

no adverse impact[ ] on the protective

boundaries, safety limits, or margin of safety.

The proposed changes to the license

conditions for Units 1 and 2 are

administrative in nature in that these changes

only update the listing of NRC approved

safety evaluations and as such there is no

adverse impacts on the protective

boundaries, safety limits, or 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 June 22, 1998, 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 Osterhout

Free Library, Reference Department, 71

South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA

18701. 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.
28012 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 98 /Thursday, May 21, 1998 / Notices

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 Jay

Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts

and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20037, 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 May 12, 1998, 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

Osterhout Free Library, Reference

Department, 71 South Franklin Street,

Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day

of May 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Victor Nerses,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

I–2, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–13561 Filed 5–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–352]

Philadelphia Electric Company,

Limerick Generation Station, Unit 1;

Notice of Issuance of Amendment To

Facility Operating License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

issued Amendment No. 128 to Facility

Operating License No. NPF–39, issued

to Philadelphia Electric Company (the

licensee), which approves installation of

replacement suction strainers for

operation of the Limerick Generating

Station (LGS), Unit 1, located in

Montgomery and Chester Counties,

Pennsylvania. The amendment is

effective as of the date of issuance and

shall be implemented within 30 days.

The amendment documents the NRC

staff’s approval of the implementation of

a plant modification to support the

installation of replacement suction

strainers for the emergency core cooling

systems at the LGS, Unit 1.

The application for the amendment

complies with the standards and

requirements of the Atomic Energy Act

of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the

Commission’s rules and regulations.

The Commission has made appropriate

findings as required by the Act and the

Commission’s rules and regulations in

10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in

the license amendment.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License and Opportunity for a Hearing

in connection with this action was

published in the Federal Register on

January 29, 1998 (63 FR 4496). No

request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene was filed following

this notice.

The Commission has prepared an

Environmental Assessment related to

the action and has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement. Based upon the

environmental assessment, the

Commission has concluded that the

issuance of the amendment will not

have a significant effect on the quality

of the human environment (63 FR

25526).

For further details with respect to the

action, see (1) the application for

amendment dated October 6, 1997, as

supplemented by submittals dated

February 2 and May 13, 1998, (2)

Amendment No. 128 to License No.

NPF–39, (3) the Commission’s related

Safety Evaluation, and (4) the

Commission’s Environmental

Assessment. All of these items are

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

Pottstown Public Library, 500 High

Street, Pottstown, PA.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th of

May 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Bartholomew C. Buckley,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

I–2, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–13555 Filed 5–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–298]

Nebraska Public Power District,

Cooper Nuclear Station; 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. DRP–46 issued to Nebraska

Public Power District (the licensee), for

operation of Cooper Nuclear Station

located in Nemaha County, Nebraska.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

The proposed action would exempt

Nebraska Public Power District from the

requirements of 10 CFR 70.24, which

require 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

responsible individuals for determining

the cause of the alarm, and to place

radiation survey instruments in

accessible locations for use in such an

emergency.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application for

exemption dated February 23, 1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The purpose of 10 CFR 70.24 is to

ensure that if a criticality were to occur

during the handling of special nuclear