[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 126 (Friday, June 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33779-33781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16556]


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

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 Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS, also the 
licensee) for operation of the WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2 located on 
Hanford Reservation in Benton County, Washington.
    The proposed amendment would reflect licensee organizational title 
changes in Section 6.0 of the Technical Specifications (TS), delete TS 
6.2.1.e and revise TS 6.2.1.d to incorporate the quality assurance 
function per the line item improvement identified in Generic Letter 88-
06 dated March 22, 1988, modify TS 6.5.1.2 to specify the composition 
of the Plant Operations Committee (POC) based on plant functional areas 
rather than organizational titles, remove the Plant General Manager as 
Chairman of the POC, and require the Plant General Manager to appoint, 
in writing, the POC Chairman, Vice-Chairman, members and alternates. 
The April 22, 1996, application differs from the licensee's previous 
application dated June 6, 1995, which was noticed in the Federal 
Register on July 19, 1995 (60 FR 37102), in that the previous 
application did not propose changes to TS 6.2.1.d and e, and additional 
organizational changes are included in the more recent proposed TS 
changes.
    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

[[Page 33780]]

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. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    The title change for the Assistant Managing Director, Operations 
[AMDO] to Chief Executive Officer [CEO] is considered a necessary 
administrative change due to the restructuring of the organization 
and the elimination of the AMDO position. The TS responsibilities 
presently associated with the AMDO position will be the 
responsibility of the CEO position. This change maintains a single 
corporate executive responsible for overall plant nuclear safety per 
TS 6.2.1.c. The deletion of the QA organizational reporting 
requirement in TS 6.2.1.e and the inclusion of the QA organization 
in TS 6.2.1.d does not diminish the capability of the QA 
organization to maintain its independent audit and oversight role. 
These functions are assured through various controls and 
requirements in the QA program description.
    The consolidation of the Technical Services POC position with 
the Engineering POC position does not impact the ability of the POC 
to perform their required functions. The consolidation of plant 
Engineering functions under one organization provides for an 
improved Engineering focus for plant activities. The addition of 
Chemistry and Planning/Scheduling/Outage functional areas to the POC 
membership, in the original amendment request, broadened and 
strengthened the POC, thus ensuring that the POC will continue to be 
comprised of experienced personnel, with varied expertise, who are 
involved in daily plant activities.
    The proposed changes do not involve any physical changes to 
plant systems, structures or components (SSC) or the manner in which 
the SSC are operated, maintained, modified, tested, or inspected. 
The changes therefore do 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 previously evaluated?
    Because the proposed changes are organizational in nature and 
implementation does not involve physical changes to the plant SSC or 
the manner in which the SSC are operated and maintained, the 
proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident. The proposed changes do not introduce any new 
modes of operation or alter system setpoints which could create a 
new or different kind of accident. Therefore, the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated is not created.
    3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin 
of safety?
    The senior management title change does not impact the 
management responsibilities or functions associated with ensuring 
plant safety. Changes proposed in the POC composition will allow the 
scope of available expertise to be expanded without changing the POC 
function or responsibilities. Maintaining the current level of 
personnel qualifications and experience ensures the POC will 
continue to meet its TS review and advisory responsibilities. The 
proposed changes will not impact the basis for any Technical 
Specification related to the establishment of, or maintenance of, 
nuclear safety margins. Therefore, operation of the facility in 
accordance with the proposed amendment 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 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 Chief, Rules 
Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and 
Publications 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 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 July 29, 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

[[Page 33781]]

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 20555-0001, 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 20555-0001, 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 June 6, 1995, as supplemented by letter 
dated April 22, 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 21st day of June 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy G. Colburn,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-16556 Filed 6-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P