35294 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 124 / Monday, June 29, 1998 / Notices

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

amendments 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 amendments

and make them immediately effective,

notwithstanding the request for a

hearing. Any hearing held would take

place after issuance of the amendments.

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.

Albert Carr, Duke Energy Corporation,

422 South Church Street, Charlotte,

North Carolina, 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 March 3, 1998, as

supplemented by letters dated April 24

and May 7, 1998, which 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 J. Murrey

Atkins Library, University of North

Carolina at Charlotte, 9201 University

City Boulevard, Charlotte, North

Carolina.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day

of June 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Frank Rinaldi,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II–2,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–17217 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50–295 and 50–304]

Commonwealth Edison Company; Zion

Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2;

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 Nos. DRP–39 and DRP–48,

issued to Commonwealth Edison

Company (ComEd, the licensee), for

operation of the Zion Nuclear Power

Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Lake

County, Illinois.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

By letter dated March 12, 1998,

ComEd requested an exemption from

certain requirements of 10 CFR 50.71,

‘‘Maintenance of records, making of

reports,’’ for Zion Nuclear Power

Station, Units 1 and 2. The proposed

action would permit ComEd to extend

the time interval for the submittal of

Zion Station’s Updated Final Safety

Analysis Report (UFSAR). The next

Zion Nuclear Power Station Final Safety

Analysis Report (FSAR) update is due in

July 1998. The proposed exemption

would allow this date to be extended to

December 1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.34(b) each

application for a license to operate a

facility shall include an FSAR. This

report shall include information that

describes the facility, presents the

design bases and the limits on its

operation and presents a safety analysis

of the structure, systems and

components of the facility. This

information and description is needed

to permit understanding of the system

designs and their relationships to safety

evaluations.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.71(e) all light

water nuclear power reactors shall
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 124 / Monday, June 29, 1998 / Notices 35295

update their FSARs periodically.

According to 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), the

time interval for the subsequent FSAR

updates must not exceed 24 months.

The last full update of the Zion UFSAR

was submitted to the NRC on July 5,

1996. Consequently, the next update

would be required to be submitted no

later than July 1998. However, ComEd is

requesting an exemption from this

requirement to allow them to update the

FSAR to reflect the present condition of

the units.

By letters dated February 13, 1998,

and March 9, 1998, ComEd informed the

NRC that Zion Nuclear Power Station,

Units 1 and 2, have permanently ceased

operations and both units are

completely defueled and all fuel has

been placed in the spent fuel pool for

long-term storage. By letter dated May 4,

1998, the NRC acknowledged Zion’s

permanent cessation of power operation

and permanent removal of fuel from the

reactor vessels.

Many of the systems and components

previously required for safety are no

longer needed because the Zion units

are permanently shut down. Therefore,

updating the current FSAR will provide

a description of components and

systems that are no longer relevant to

safety. Instead ComEd has proposed and

committed to prepare and submit an

update to the FSAR reflecting the

permanently defueled condition of Zion

Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2,

by December 31, 1998. This update will

become Zion’s Defueled Safety Analysis

Report (DSAR).

Because ComEd’s board decision on

January 14, 1998, to shut down Zion

was unexpected, ComEd staff did not

have adequate time to develop the

DSAR. Therefore, ComEd is requesting

an extension of the update interval to

allow sufficient time to develop and

submit the DSAR. In their letter dated

March 12, 1998, ComEd stated that

many of the technical, administrative,

and management resources needed to

develop a DSAR are the same as those

that would be involved in updating the

FSAR. Consequently, updating the

current FSAR by July 1998 would result

either in a delay in developing a DSAR

or in the expenditure of significant

additional resources to develop a DSAR

while preparing an UFSAR submittal in

parallel.

Based on the information provided

above, the extension of time interval

from July 1998 to December 1998 for the

submittal of the UFSAR would have no

impact on the ability of systems,

structures and components to perform

the safety functions required with the

plant permanently shut down, nor

would it affect the safety of activities

conducted with the facility in this

condition. The proposed time

exemption will not affect the potential

for undesirable impacts to the

environment.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

The proposed action involves

administrative activities unrelated to

plant operation.

The proposed action will not result in

an increase in the probability or

consequences of accidents or result in a

change in occupational or offsite dose.

Therefore, there are no significant

radiological impacts associated with the

proposed action.

The proposed action will not result in

a change in nonradiological plant

effluents and will have no other

nonradiological environmental impact.

Accordingly, the Commission

concludes that there are no

environmental impacts associated with

this action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded

there are no significant environmental

impacts associated with the proposed

action, any alternatives with equal or

greater environmental impact need not

be evaluated. As an alternative to the

proposed action, the staff considered

denial of the proposed action. Denial of

the application would result in no

change in current environmental

impacts. The environmental impacts of

the proposed action and the alternative

action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement for the Zion Nuclear Power

Station.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

on June 18, 1998, the staff consulted

with the Illinois State official, Frank

Niziolek of the Illinois Department of

Nuclear Safety, regarding the

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon the environmental

assessment, the Commission concludes

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed action.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated March 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

Waukegan Public Library, 126 N.

County Street, Waukegan, Illinois

60085.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day

of June, 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Ramin R. Assa,

Project Manager, Project Directorate III–2,

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–17219 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–309]

Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company,

Maine Yankee Atomic Power 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 to Facility Operating License

No. DPR–36, a license held by the

Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company

(MYAPC or the licensee). The

exemption would apply to the Maine

Yankee Atomic Power Station, a

permanently shutdown plant located at

the MYAPC site in Lincoln County,

Maine.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed exemption would

modify security requirements to

eliminate certain equipment, to relocate

certain equipment, to modify certain

procedures, and reduce the number of

armed responders, due to the

permanently shutdown and defueled

status of the Maine Yankee facility.

The proposed action is in accordance

with the licensee’s application dated

November 25, 1997. The requested

action would grant an exemption from

certain requirements of 10 CFR 73.55,

‘‘Requirements for Physical Protection

of Licensed Activities in Nuclear Power

Plant Reactors against Radiological

Sabotage.’’

The Need for the Proposed Action

Maine Yankee was shut down in

December 1996. On August 7, 1997, the

licensee informed the Commission that

it had decided to permanently cease