12818 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2001 / Notices

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of

information collection and solicitation

of public comment.

SUMMARY: The NRC has recently

submitted to OMB for review the

following proposal for the collection of

information under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby

informs potential respondents that an

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and

that a person is not required to respond

to, a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number.

1. Type of submission, new, revision,

or extension: Revision.

2. The title of the information

collection: State Agreements Program, as

authorized by Section 274(b) of the

Atomic Energy Act.

3. The form number if applicable: Not

applicable.

4. How often the collection is

required: One time or as-needed.

5. Who will be required or asked to

report: 32 Agreement States who have

signed Section 274(b) Agreements with

NRC.

6. An estimate of the number of

responses: 134.

7. The estimated number of annual

respondents: 32 Agreement States.

8. An estimate of the total number of

hours needed annually to complete the

requirement or request: 1005 (7.5 hours

per response).

9. An indication of whether Section

3507(d), Public Law 104–13 applies: Not

applicable.

10. Abstract: Agreement States are

asked on a one-time or as-needed basis,

e.g., to respond to a specific incident, to

gather information on licensing and

inspection practices and other technical

statistical information. The results of

such information requests, which are

authorized under Section 274(b) of the

Atomic Energy Act, are utilized in part

by NRC in preparing responses to

Congressional inquiries. Agreement

State comments are also solicited in the

areas of proposed procedure and policy

development.

A copy of the final supporting

statement may be viewed free of charge

at the NRC Public Document Room, One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville

Pike, Room O–1 F23, Rockville,

Maryland 20852. OMB clearance

requests are available at the NRC

worldwide web site: http://

www.nrc.gov/NRC/PUBLIC/OMB/

index.html. The document will be

available on the NRC home page site for

60 days after the signature date of this

notice.

Comments and questions should be

directed to the OMB reviewer listed

below by March 30, 2001. Comments

received after this date will be

considered if it is practical to do so, but

assurance of consideration cannot be

given to comments received after this

date. Amy Farrell, Office of Information

and Regulatory Affairs (3150–0029),

NEOB–10202, Office of Management

and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

Comments can also be submitted by

telephone at (202) 395–7318.

The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda

Jo Shelton, 301–415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day

of February, 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brenda Jo. Shelton,

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 01–4859 Filed 2–27–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–260]

Tennessee Valley Authority; 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 Licenses No. DPR–

52, issued to the Tennessee Valley

Authority (the licensee), for operation of

the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 2,

located in Limestone County, Alabama.

The proposed amendment would

approve a change to the licensee’s

schedule for withdrawal of the reactor

pressure vessel material surveillance

capsules. The change would permit the

second capsule to remain in the vessel

for an operating additional cycle.

The licensee’s request cites exigent

circumstances for this request.

BWRVIP–86, BWR Integrated

Surveillance Program Implementation

Plan, Final Report was submitted to

NRC on December 22, 2000. The

December 2000 issuance of BWRVIP–86

revised the Integrated Surveillance

Program test program to designate the

second Browns Ferry Unit 2 RPV

surveillance capsule as a representative

capsule. The revised test schedule

proposed withdrawal in 2007 to allow

for increased fluence which is expected

to provide better shift data. Approval of

this request prior to March 18, 2001, the

beginning of the Unit 2, Cycle 11

refueling outage, is needed to prevent

the withdrawal and analysis of the

second capsule at an accumulated

fluence which is not expected to yield

useful results.

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:

A. The proposed amendment does not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

Pressure-temperature (P/T) limits are

imposed on the reactor coolant system to

ensure that adequate safety margins against

nonductile or rapidly propagating failure

exist during normal operation, anticipated

operational occurrences, and system

hydrostatic tests. The P/T limits are related

to the nil-ductility reference temperature,

RTndt. Changes in the fracture toughness

properties of Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV)

beltline materials, resulting from the neutron

irradiation and the thermal environment, are

monitored by a surveillance program in

compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR

Part 50, Appendix H. The effect of neutron

fluence on the shift in the nil-ductility

reference temperature of pressure vessel steel

is predicted by methods given in Regulatory

Guide (RG) 1.99, Revision 2. The Browns

Ferry Unit 2 current P/T limits were

established based on adjusted reference

temperatures developed in accordance with

the procedures prescribed in RG 1.99,

Revision 2. Calculation of adjusted reference

temperature by these procedures includes a

margin term to ensure upper-bound values

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2001 / Notices 12819

are used for the calculation of the P/T limits.

Revision of the second capsule withdrawal

schedule will not affect the P/T limits,

because they will continue to be established

in accordance with RG 1.99, Revision 2. This

change is not related to any accidents

previously evaluated. The proposed change

will not affect reactor pressure vessel

performance because no physical changes are

involved and the RPV vessel P/T limits will

remain in accordance with RG 1.99, Revision

2 requirements. The proposed change will

not cause the reactor pressure vessel or

interfacing safety systems to be operated

outside of their design or testing limits. Also,

the proposed change will not alter any

assumptions previously made in evaluating

the radiological consequences of accidents.

Therefore, the probability or consequences of

accidents previously evaluated will not be

increased by the proposed change.

B. The proposed amendment does not

create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed change defers the second

RPV material surveillance capsule

withdrawal for one fuel cycle. This proposed

change does not involve a modification of the

design of plant structures, systems, or

components. The proposed change will not

impact the manner in which the plant is

operated as plant operating and testing

procedures will not be affected by the

change. The proposed change will not

degrade the reliability of structures, systems,

or components important-to-safety because

equipment protection features will not be

deleted or modified, equipment redundancy

or independence will not be reduced,

supporting system performance will not be

downgraded, the frequency of operation of

equipment important-to-safety will not be

increased, and more severe testing of

equipment important-to-safety will not be

imposed. No new accident types or failure

modes will be introduced as a result of the

proposed change. Therefore, the proposed

change does not create the possibility of a

new or different kind of accident from that

previously evaluated.

C. The proposed amendment does not

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety.

Appendices G to 10 CFR 50 describes the

conditions that require P/T limits and

provide the general bases for these limits.

Until the results from the reactor vessel

surveillance program become available, RG

1.99, Revision 2 is used to predict the

amount of neutron irradiation damage. The

use of operating limits based on these

criteria, as defined by applicable regulations,

codes, and standards, provide reasonable

assurance that nonductile or rapidly

propagating failure will not occur. The P/T

limits are not derived from Design Basis

Accident (DBA) analyses. They are

prescribed during normal operation to avoid

encountering pressure, temperature, and

temperature rate of change conditions that

might cause undetected flaws to propagate

and cause nonductile failure of the reactor

coolant pressure boundary (RCPB). Since the

P/T limits are not derived from any DBA,

there are no acceptance limits related to the

P/T limits. Rather, the P/T limits are

acceptance limits themselves since they

preclude operation in an unanalyzed

condition. The proposed change will not

affect any safety limits, limiting safety system

settings, or limiting conditions of operation.

The proposed change does not represent a

change in initial conditions, or in a system

response time, or in any other parameter

affecting the course of an accident analysis

supporting the Bases of any Technical

Specification. The proposed change does not

involve revision of the P/T limits, but rather

a revision of the withdrawal time for the

second surveillance capsule. The current P/

T limits were established based on adjusted

reference temperatures for vessel beltline

materials calculated in accordance with RG

1.99, Revision 2. P/T limits will continue to

be revised, as necessary, for changes in

adjusted reference temperature due to

changes in fluence when two or more

credible surveillance data sets become

available. When two or more credible

surveillance data sets become available, P/T

limits will be revised as prescribed by RG

1.99, Revision 2, or other NRC-approved

guidance. Therefore, the proposed changes

do not involve a significant reduction in any

margins 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

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 March 30, 2001, 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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and

accessible electronically through the

ADAMS Public Electronic Reading

Room link at the NRC Web site

(http://www.nrc.gov). 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

12820 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2001 / Notices

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, located at One

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 General

Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,

400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET IOH,

Knoxville, Tennessee 3790, 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 February 5, 2001,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and

accessible electronically through the

ADAMS Public Electronic Reading

Room link at the NRC Web site

(http://www.nrc.gov).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd

day of February 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

William O. Long,

Project Manager, Section 2, Project

Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–4858 Filed 2–27–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Draft Regulatory Guide; Issuance,

Availability

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission

has issued for public comment a

proposed revision of a guide in its

Regulatory Guide Series. This series has

been developed to describe and make

available to the public such information

as methods acceptable to the NRC staff

for implementing specific parts of the

NRC’s regulations, techniques used by

the staff in evaluating specific problems

or postulated accidents, and data

needed by the staff in its review of

applications for permits and licenses.

The draft guide, temporarily

identified by its task number, DG–1101

(which should be mentioned in all

correspondence concerning this draft

guide), is titled ‘‘Site Investigations for

Foundations of Nuclear Power Plants.’’

This draft guide is a proposed Revision

2 of Regulatory Guide 1.132, and it is

being revised to describe methods

acceptable to the NRC staff for

conducting field investigations to

acquire the data on geological and

engineering characteristics of a site

proposed for a nuclear power plant. The

guide also includes recommendations

for developing site-specific investigation

programs and guidance for conducting

subsurface investigations.

This draft guide has not received

complete staff approval and does not

represent an official NRC staff position.

Comments may be accompanied by

relevant information or supporting data.

Written comments may be submitted to

the Rules and Directives Branch, Office

of Administration, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555. Copies of comments received

may be examined at the NRC Public

Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, MD. Comments will be most

helpful if received by May 10, 2001.

You may also provide comments via

the NRC’s interactive rulemaking web

site through the NRC home page (http:/

/www.nrc.gov). This site provides the

availability to upload comments as files

(any format) if your web browser

supports that function. For information

about the interactive rulemaking web

site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301)

415–5905; e-mail CAG@NRC.GOV. For

information about the draft guide and

the related documents, contact Mr. E.

Zurflueh at (301) 415–6002; e-mail

EGZ@NRC.GOV.

Although a time limit is given for

comments on this draft guide,

comments and suggestions in

connection with items for inclusion in

guides currently being developed or

improvements in all published guides

are encouraged at any time.

Regulatory guides are available for

inspection at the NRC’s Public

Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, MD; the PDR’s mailing

address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC

20555; telephone (301) 415–4737 or