[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 24 (Monday, February 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6466-6468]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2242]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301]


Nuclear Management Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance 
of Amendments 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 Nos. 
DPR-24 and DPR-27 issued to Nuclear Management Company (the licensee) 
for operation of the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located 
in Two Rivers, Wisconsin.
    The proposed amendment would revise the Point Beach Nuclear Plant 
(PBNP), Units 1 and 2, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report to reflect 
the Commission staff's approval of the WCAP-14439-P, Revision 2 
analysis entitled, ``Technical Justification for Eliminating Large 
Primary Loop Pipe Rupture as the Structural Design Basis for the Point 
Beach Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 for the Power Uprate and License 
Renewal Program.''
    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 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Section 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 PBNP in accordance with the proposed amendments 
does not result in a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change revises the analysis supporting the PBNP 
dynamic effects design basis for primary loop piping. The proposed 
change does not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors 
nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, or the manner in which 
the plant is operated and maintained. The proposed change does not 
alter or prevent the ability of structures, systems, and components 
from performing their intended function to mitigate the consequences 
of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The 
proposed change does not affect the source term, containment 
isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating 
the radiological consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 
Further, the proposed change does not increase the types or amounts 
of radioactive effluent that may be released offsite, nor 
significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational/public 
radiation exposures. The proposed change is consistent with safety 
analysis assumptions and resultant consequences. Therefore, it is 
concluded that this change does not significantly increase the 
probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. Operation of PBNP in accordance with the proposed amendments 
does not result in a new or different kind of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change revises the analysis supporting the PBNP 
dynamic effects design basis for primary loop piping. The changes do 
not impose any new or different requirements or eliminate any 
existing requirements. The changes do not alter assumptions made in 
the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the 
safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice. 
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Operation of PBNP in accordance with the proposed amendments 
does not result in a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The proposed change revises the analysis supporting the PBNP 
dynamic effects design basis for primary loop piping. All the 
recommended margins regarding leak-before-break conditions (margin 
on leak rate, margin on flaw size, and margin on loads) are 
satisfied for the primary loop piping. The proposed change does not 
alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system 
settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined. The 
setpoints at which protective actions are initiated are not altered 
by the proposed changes. Sufficient equipment remains available to 
actuate upon demand for the purpose of mitigating an analyzed event.

    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.

[[Page 6467]]

    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment 
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the 
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day 
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, 
for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the 
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment 
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a 
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place 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. Documents may 
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, 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 2.309, which is available at the 
Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 
01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ 
reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition 
for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a 
presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the 
Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, 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 general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone 
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the 
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the 
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's 
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the 
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the 
proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest.
    The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the 
petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue 
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the 
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for 
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/requestor 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. 
The petition must include 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/requestor 
who fails to satisfy 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.
    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.
    Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding 
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, 
request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing 
of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(I)-(viii).
    A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must 
be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the 
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications 
Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: 
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail addressed to the Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#80c8c5c1d2c9cec7c4cfc3cbc5d4c0ced2c3aec7cfd6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="652d2024372c2b22212a262e2031252b37264b222a33">[email protected]</span></a>; 
or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: 
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification 
number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and 
petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of 
the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be

[[Page 6468]]

transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 
or by email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#276860646a464e4b6442495342556749554409404851"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8cc3cbcfc1ede5e0cfe9e2f8e9fecce2feefa2ebe3fa">[email protected]</span></a>. A copy of the request for hearing 
and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to Jonathan 
Rogoff, Esquire, Vice President, Counsel & Secretary, Nuclear 
Management Company, LLC, 700 First Street, Hudson, WI 54016, attorney 
for the licensee.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated November 5, 2003, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White 
Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be 
accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's 
(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents 
located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by 
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b9c9ddcbf9d7cbda97ded6cf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4a3a2e380a243829642d253c">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of January 2005.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Deirdre W. Spaulding,
Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05-2242 Filed 2-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>