29760 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Notices

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 York

County Library, 138 East Black Street,

Rock Hill, South Carolina 29730. 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.

If the amendment is issued before the

expiration of the 30-day hearing period,

the Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no

significant hazards consideration. If a

hearing is requested, 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 Mr.

Paul R. Newton, Legal Department

(PB05E), Duke Energy Corporation, 422

South Church Street, Charlotte, North

Carolina, 28242, 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

amendments dated May 22, 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

York County Library, 138 East Black

Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina 29730.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day

of May 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Peter S. Tam,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

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

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–14386 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–302]

In the Matter of Florida Power

Corporation Crystal River Unit 3;

Confirmatory Order Modifying License

Effective Immediately

I

Florida Power Corporation, (FPC or

the Licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License No. DPR–72, which

authorizes operation of Crystal River

Unit 3 located in Citrus County, Florida.

II

The staff of the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC) has been

concerned that Thermo-Lag 330–1 fire

barrier systems installed by licensees

may not provide the level of fire

endurance intended and that licensees

that use Thermo-Lag 330–1 fire barriers

may not be meeting regulatory

requirements. During the 1992 to 1994

timeframe, the NRC staff issued Generic

Letter (GL) 92–08, ‘‘Thermo-Lag 330–1

Fire Barriers’’ and subsequent requests

for additional information that

requested licensees to submit plans and

schedules for resolving the Thermo-Lag

issue. The NRC staff has obtained and

reviewed all licensees’ corrective plans

and schedules. The staff is concerned

that some licensees may not be making

adequate progress toward resolving the

plant-specific issues, and that some

implementation schedules may be either

too tenuous or too protracted. For
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Notices 29761

example, several licensees informed the

NRC staff that their completion dates

had slipped by 6 months to as much as

3 years. For plants that have completion

action scheduled beyond 1997, the NRC

staff has met with these licensees to

discuss the progress of the licensees’

corrective actions and the extent of

licensee management attention

regarding completion of Thermo-Lag

corrective actions. In addition, the NRC

staff discussed with licensees the

possibility of accelerating their

completion schedules.

Crystal River Unit 3 was one of the

plants that have completion action

scheduled beyond 1997. Based on the

information submitted by FPC in its

April 10, 1998 submittal, the NRC staff

has concluded that the schedule

presented by FPC is reasonable. This

conclusion is based on (1) the amount

of installed Thermo-Lag, (2) the

complexity of the plant-specific fire

barrier configurations and issues, (3) the

need to perform certain plant

modifications during outages as

opposed to those that can be performed

while the plant is at power, and (4)

integration with other significant, but

unrelated issues that FPC is addressing

at its plant. In order to remove

compensatory measures such as fire

watches, it has been determined that

resolution of the Thermo-Lag corrective

actions by FPC must be completed in

accordance with the current FPC

schedule. By letter dated April 23, 1998,

the NRC staff notified FPC of its plan to

incorporate FPC’s schedule commitment

into a requirement by issuance of an

order and requested consent from the

Licensee. By letter dated May 6, 1998,

the Licensee provided its consent to

issuance of a Confirmatory Order.

III

The Licensee’s commitment as set

forth in its letter of May 6, 1998, is

acceptable and is necessary for the NRC

to conclude that public health and

safety are reasonably assured. To

preclude any schedule slippage and to

assure public health and safety, the NRC

staff has determined that the Licensee’s

commitment in its May 6, 1998, letter be

confirmed by this Order. The Licensee

has agreed to this action. Based on the

above, and the Licensee’s consent, this

Order is immediately effective upon

issuance.

IV

Accordingly, pursuant to sections

103, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as

amended, and the Commission’s

regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR

Part 50, it is hereby ordered, effective

immediately, that:

Florida Power Corporation shall complete

final implementation of Thermo-Lag 330–1

fire barrier corrective actions at Crystal River

Unit 3 described in the Florida Power

Corporation submittal to the NRC dated April

10, 1998, by June 30, 2000.

The Director, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation, may relax or

rescind, in writing, any provisions of

this Confirmatory Order upon a showing

by the Licensee of good cause.

V

Any person adversely affected by this

Confirmatory Order, other than the

Licensee, may request a hearing within

20 days of its issuance. 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 Nuclear Reactor Regulation,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, and include a

statement of good cause for the

extension. Any request for a hearing

shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Attention: Chief, Rulemakings and

Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC

20555. Copies of the hearing request

shall also be sent to the Director, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, to the Deputy

Assistant General Counsel for

Enforcement at the same address, to the

Regional Administrator, NRC Region II,

Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth

Street, SW, Suite 23T85, Atlanta, GA

30303, and to the Licensee. If such a

person requests a hearing, that person

shall set forth with particularity the

manner in which his/her interest is

adversely affected by this Order and

shall address criteria set forth in 10 CFR

2.714(d).

If a hearing is requested by a person

whose interest is adversely affected, the

Commission will issue an Order

designating the time and place of any

such hearing. If a hearing is held, the

issue to be considered at such hearing

shall be whether this Confirmatory

Order should be sustained.

In the absence of any request for

hearing, or written approval of an

extension of time in which to request a

hearing, the provisions specified in

Section IV above shall be final 20 days

from the date of this Order without

further order or proceedings. If an

extension of time for requesting a

hearing has been approved, the

provisions specified in Section IV shall

be final when the extension expires if a

hearing request has not been received.

An answer or a request for hearing shall

not stay the immediate effectiveness of

this Order.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 21st day

of May 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Samuel J. Collins,

Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–14389 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–331]

IES Utilities Inc.; Notice of Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (Commission) has issued

Amendment No. 223 to Facility

Operating License No. DPR–49 issued to

IES Utilities Inc.,(the licensee), which

revised the operating license and the

Technical Specifications for operation

of the Duane Arnold Energy Center

(DAEC), located in Linn County, Iowa.

The amendment is effective as of the

date of issuance and shall be

implemented prior to October 1, 1998.

The amendment modified the

Technical Specifications by replacing

the existing Technical Specifications in

their entirety with a new set of

Improved Technical Specifications

based on NUREG–1433, ‘‘Standard

Technical Specifications, General

Electric Plants BWR/4,’’ Revision 1,

dated April 1995, and on guidance

provided in the Commission’s ‘‘Final

Policy Statement on Technical

Specifications Improvements for

Nuclear Power Reactors,’’ published on

July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132). The

amendment also modified the license by

adding a new license condition which

established an Appendix B to the

license for additional license

conditions. For this amendment, a

condition was added to Appendix B

describing the relocation of certain

Technical Specification requirements to

licensee controlled documents. In

addition to replacing the Technical

Specifications with the Improved

Technical Specifications, the

amendment revised the combinations of

emergency core cooling systems/

subsystems that may be out of service

and relaxed the required flowrates for

the core spray, the low pressure coolant

injection, and the high pressure coolant

injection systems.

The application for the amendment

complies with the standards and