38194 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 135 /Wednesday, July 15, 1998 / Notices

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–298]

Nebraska Public Power District; 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. DPR–

46, issued to Nebraska Public Power

District (the licensee), for operation of

the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS)

located in Nemaha County, Nebraska.

The proposed amendment in the

licensee’s application of March 27,

1997, would increase the minimum

volume of diesel fuel oil in the fuel oil

storage tanks from 48,000 gallons to

49,500 gallons. This change is

Document of Change (DOC) 3.8.3–M.2 of

the conversion of the current Technical

Specifications (CTS) for the CNS to the

improved Technical Specifications (ITS)

that was noticed in the Federal Register

on March 17, 1998 (63 FR 13074). DOC

3.8.3–M.2 is the second more restrictive

change to ITS Section 3.8.3 for the CNS.

This proposed change would have a

value different from the CTS and the

Improved Standard Technical

Specifications (ISTS) provided in

NUREG–1433, ‘‘Standard Technical

Specifications, General Electric Plants,

BWR/4,’’ Revision 1, dated April 1995.

The conversion is based on NUREG–

1433 and the Commission’s ‘‘Final

Policy Statement on Technical

Specifications Improvements for

Nuclear Power Reactors,’’ published on

July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132).

The exigent circumstances for this

notice is that the staff has recently

determined that this change in the

minimum volume of diesel fuel oil in

the fuel oil storage tanks is beyond the

scope of the conversion to the ITS;

however, the change should be made to

the ITS because the proposed value

more properly accounts for the fuel oil

needed for the diesel generators during

all design basis accidents. The staff

expects to issue the ITS for the CNS by

July 29, 1998. To allow the staff to

include the higher value for the

minimum volume of fuel oil in the ITS,

it is necessary for the staff to issue of

this notice of proposed change to the

CTS before July 15, 1998, to meet the

requirements in 10 CFR 50.91 on notices

for public comment of license

amendments.

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.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for

amendments to be granted under

exigent circumstances, the NRC staff

must determine 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:

In accordance with the criteria set

forth in 10 CFR. 50.92, the Nebraska

Public Power District has evaluated this

proposed Technical Specifications

change and determined it does not

represent a significant hazards

consideration. The following is

provided in support of this conclusion.

1. Does the change involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated?

The proposed change provides more

stringent requirements for operation of

the facility. These more stringent

requirements do not result in operation

that will increase the probability of

initiating an analyzed event and do not

alter assumptions relative to the

mitigation of an accident or transient

event. The more restrictive requirements

continue to ensure process variables,

structures, systems, and components are

maintained consistent with safety

analyses and [CNS] licensing basis. [The

storage of fuel oil is not an initiator of

a design basis accident for the CNS and

the licensee has an approved fire

protection program.] Therefore, this

change does not involve a significant

increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

2. Does the change create the

possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated?

The proposed change does not

involve a physical alteration of the plant

(no new or different type of equipment

will be installed) or changes in the

methods governing normal plant

operation. The proposed change does

impose different requirements.

However, this change is consistent with

the assumptions in the safety analyses

and [CNS] licensing basis. [The licensee

has an approved fire protection program

for the hazard of having to store more

fuel oil.] Thus, this change does not

create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated.

3. Does this change involve a

significant reduction in a margin of

safety?

The imposition of more restrictive

requirements either has no impact on or

increases the margin of plant safety. As

provided in the discussion of the

change, each change in this category

[(more restrictive)] is by definition,

providing additional restrictions to

enhance plant safety. The change

maintains requirements within the

safety analyses and [CNS] licensing

basis. [The additional amount of diesel

fuel oil required will provide additional

assurance that there is sufficient fuel oil

to run the diesel generators through an

event.] Therefore, this 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 14 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 14-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

14-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. 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
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 135 /Wednesday, July 15, 1998 / Notices 38195

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 August 14, 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 Auburn Memorial Library,

1810 Courthouse Avenue, Auburn, NE

68305. 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.

John R. McPhail, Nebraska Public Power

District, Post Office Box 499, Columbus,

NE 68602–0499, 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 27, 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 Auburn Memorial Library, 1810

Courthouse Avenue, Auburn, NE 68305.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day

of July 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Jack N. Donohew,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

IV–1, Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–18831 Filed 7–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P