[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30026-30029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14516]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410]
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation; 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 amendments to Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-63 and NPF-69 issued to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the
licensee or NMPC) for operation of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station,
Unit 1 (NMP1) and Unit 2 (NMP2), respectively, located in the town of
Scriba, Oswego County, New York.
The proposed amendments would change administrative sections of the
Technical Specifications (TS) (Sections 6.1, ``Responsibility''; 6.2,
``Organization''; 6.5, ``Review and Audit''; 6.6, ``Reportable
Occurrence Action''; and 6.7, ``Safety Limit Violation'') to reflect a
restructuring of
[[Page 30027]]
the licensee's upper management organization for the Nuclear Division.
The Nuclear Division organizational restructuring would involve the
elimination of the Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear position
and the establishment of the Vice President--Nuclear Generation
position. The Chief Nuclear Officer (CNO) would assume corporate and TS
responsibility for overall plant nuclear safety (a responsibility
currently assigned to the Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear).
The TS responsibility for plant operation (also currently assigned to
the Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear) would be assumed by
the Vice President--Nuclear Generation. The new Vice President--Nuclear
Generation position would report directly to the CNO. In addition to
existing responsibilities delineated by TS 6.5.3.1, 6.5.3.9, and
6.5.3.10, the CNO would have overall responsibility for oversight of
the Nuclear Division, including corporate and TS responsibility for
overall plant nuclear safety, with authority to take such measures as
may be needed to ensure acceptable performance of his staff in
operating, maintaining, and providing technical support to the plant.
The CNO would be responsible for periodically issuing management
direction emphasizing the primary responsibilities of the Shift
Supervisor. The changes for NMP1 would also correct a clerical error in
which a previous Amendment No. (No. 144) was omitted when designating
superseded amendments during preparation of prior Amendment No. 157.
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, which is presented
below:
11. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 [or Unit 2], in
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
The proposed amendment updates the * * * TS to reflect the
revised NMPC Nuclear Division upper management organizational
structure and associated reassignments of responsibilities. The
proposed organizational structure provides more direct lines of
authority by re-establishing the position and responsibilities of
Vice President--Nuclear Generation and eliminating the position of
Vice President and General Manager--Nuclear. The Vice President--
Nuclear Generation will assume TS responsibility for plant
operation. The Chief Nuclear Officer is reassigned corporate and TS
responsibility for overall plant nuclear safety with direct
reporting from the Vice Presidents responsible for Nuclear
Generation, Engineering, and Safety Assessment and Support. The
Chief Nuclear Officer is also assigned the responsibility for
periodically issuing management direction emphasizing the primary
responsibilities of the Shift Supervisor. The proposed
organizational structure and associated reassignments of
responsibilities provide for the integrated management of activities
necessary to support the safe operation of the * * * nuclear
facility * * *.
The proposed changes are limited to the administrative sections
of the TS and the changes do not alter the technical content or
intent of the affected administrative requirements and
responsibilities. The revised organizational structure will not
affect the design, function, or operation of any plant structure,
system, or component (SSC), nor will it affect any maintenance,
modification, or testing activities. Thus, there will be no impact
on the capability of any SSC to perform its credited safety function
to prevent an accident or mitigate the consequences of an accident
as previously evaluated. Since the proposed changes are limited to
administrative requirements and responsibilities, the changes do not
involve accident precursors or initiators previously evaluated. It
is, therefore, concluded that the probability of accident initiation
will remain as previously evaluated and there will be no adverse
effect on the conditions and assumptions of any previously evaluated
accident. Hence, there will be no degradation of any fission product
barrier which could increase the radiological consequences of any
accident. Accordingly, operation in accordance with the proposed
amendment will not involve a significant increase in the probability
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 [or Unit 2], in
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
The revised Nuclear Division organizational structure will not
affect the design, function, or operation of any plant SSC, nor will
it affect any maintenance, modification, or testing activities. The
proposed changes are limited to the administrative sections of the
TS and the changes do not alter the technical content or intent of
the affected administrative requirements and responsibilities. As a
result, the proposed changes will not impact the process variables,
characteristics, or functional performance of any SSC in a manner
that could create a new failure mode, nor will the changes introduce
any new modes of plant operation or eliminate any requirements or
impose any new requirements which could affect plant operation such
that new credible accidents are introduced. Accordingly, operation
in accordance with the proposed amendment will not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 [or Unit 2], in
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed amendment updates the TS to reflect the revised
NMPC Nuclear Division upper management organizational structure and
associated reassignments of responsibilities. The proposed changes
are limited to the administrative sections of the TS and the changes
do not alter the technical content or intent of the affected
administrative requirements and responsibilities. As such, the
proposed changes do not involve any hardware changes or physical
alteration of the plant and the changes will have no impact on the
design or function of any SCC. Implementation of the proposed
changes will promote clear management control and effective lines of
authority and communication between the organizational units to
assure necessary attention to nuclear safety matters. It is,
therefore, concluded that the proposed changes do not eliminate any
requirements or responsibilities, impose any new requirements or
responsibilities, or alter any physical parameters which could
reduce the margin to an acceptance limit. Accordingly, operation in
accordance with the proposed amendment will 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
amendments requests involve 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
[[Page 30028]]
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 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 July 2, 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 Reference and Documents Department,
Penfield Library, State University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126.
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 20555-0001, 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 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston
& Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005-3502, 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
applications for amendment dated May 15, 1998 (two letters, one for
each unit), 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 Reference and Documents Department, Penfield Library, State
University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of May 1998.
[[Page 30029]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Darl S. Hood,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-1, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-14516 Filed 6-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
