19326 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 1, 1996 / Notices

—Election of NSB Officers

—Election of Executive Committee Members

—March NSB Meeting Follow-On

Thursday, May 9, 1996

Open Session (10:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m.)

—Long Range Planning Environment

Friday, May 10, 1996

Closed Session (8:00 a.m.–9:10 a.m.)

—Awards and Agreements

—Long Range Planning and Budget

Friday, May 10, 1996

Open Session (9:10 a.m.–11:00 a.m.)

—Minutes, March 1996 Meeting

—Closed Session Agenda Items—June 1996

Meeting

—Chairman’s Report

—Director’s Report

—Program Approval

—Executive Committee Annual Report

—Calendar of NSB Meetings 1997

—Reports from Committees

—Other Business

—Presentation: Human Capital Initiative

—Adjourn

Marta Cehelsky,

Executive Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–10882 Filed 4–26–96; 5:04 pm]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–397]

Washington Public Power Supply

System; 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. NPF–

21 issued to the Washington Public

Power Supply System (the licensee) for

operation of WNP–2 located in Benton

County, Washington.

The proposed amendment would

modify the Technical Specifications

(TS) to reflect use of new fuel obtained

from ABB/Combustion Engineering, and

to incorporate staff-approved core

reload analysis computer programs

(codes). The proposed amendment

removes reference to specific fuel

configurations, replacing the reference

with a requirement that only fuel that

has been analyzed with applicable NRC

staff approved codes and methods, and

that have been shown by tests or

analyses to comply with all safety

design bases, may be placed in the core.

The allowance for use of lead fuel

assemblies remains in the TS.

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. The NRC staff has

reviewed the licensee’s analysis against

the standards of 50.92(c). The NRC

staff’s review is presented below:

(1) Does the proposed amendment

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an

accident previously evaluated?

The proposed change to the design of

fuel specified for use in the WNP–2 core

does not affect the requirements for fuel

integrity, power generation and thermal

limits, and core stability specified in the

design basis for the facility and in the

limiting conditions for operation (LCOs)

specified in the TS. The update of the

codes used to analyze the fuel ensures

that the current NRC staff approved

computer models and methodologies are

used to analyze the fuel to ensure the

fuel meets the requirements for

integrity, power generation and thermal

limits, and core stability. Since the

proposed change will not change the

factors that assure core design is

maintained within the design basis, and

since the design basis for the fuel

assures that the analysis assumptions

for accidents previously evaluated are

maintained, the proposed change does

not appear to increase the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

(2) Does the proposed amendment

create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any

accident previously evaluated?

The proposed amendment does not

introduce new or different equipment

into the plant. The proposed change

would allow different design of fuel pin

internals, and different configurations

for the fuel bundles. The fuel design

would not change the nuclear and

thermal hydraulic considerations,

subject to physical laws, that must be

met to assure fuel integrity. Thus the

proposed change does not create the

possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated.

(3) Does the proposed amendment

involve a significant reduction in the

margin of safety?

The margins of safety for fuel design

are established by current TS and the

core operating limits report (COLR). The

proposed change does not affect the

limits in the TS, which contain the

regulatory safety limits that must be met

to assure fuel integrity. Additional

limits to assure that reactivity and

power distribution assumptions for

design analyses are included in the

COLR. Use of codes approved for

analyzing the specific fuel designs used

in the core assures that the analyzed

limits in the COLR will assure that the

reactor will remain within the bounds of

the plant safety analysis. Since the

proposed change does not change the

bounds of the plant safety analysis

itself, the proposed change does not

affect the margins of safety.

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 Rules Review and

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom

of Information and Publications
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 1, 1996 / Notices 19327

Services, Office of Administration, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, and should cite

the publication date and page number of

this Federal Register notice. Written

comments may also be delivered to

Room 6D22, 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 May 31, 1996, 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 Richland

Public Library, 955 Northgate Street,

Richland, Washington 99352. 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.

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, Attention:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to William

H. Bateman, Director, Project Directorate

IV–2: petitioner’s name and telephone

number, date petition was mailed, plant

name, and publication date and page

number of this Federal Register notice.

A copy of the petition should also be

sent to the Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555,

and to M.H. Phillips, Jr., Esq., Winston

& Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20005–3512, 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 April 24, 1996, 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

Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate

Street, Richland, Washington 99352.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day

of April 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

William H. Bateman,

Director, Project Directorate IV–2, Division

of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–10900 Filed 4–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P