[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 4 (Thursday, January 7, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1032-1034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-280]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 and 50-265]
Commonwealth Edison Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance
of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, 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 Licenses Nos.
DPR-19 and DPR-25, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the
licensee) for operation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2
and 3, located in Grundy County, Illinois and Facility Operating
Licenses Nos. DPR-29 and DPR-30, issued to ComEd for operation of Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Rock Island
County, Illinois.
The proposed amendments would relocate, to a licensee-controlled
document, the requirement for removal of the Reactor Protection System
(RPS) shorting links. Removal of the shorting links enables a non-
coincident scram on high neutron flux as detected by any Neutron
Instrumentation. The staff's proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination for the requested changes was published on
December 30, 1998 (63 FR 71964).
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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
amendments requested involve 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 amendments
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:
Does the change involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
The RPS shorting links are not precursors to any previously
evaluated accident. The Source Range Monitors (SRMs), and the
ability of the SRMs to provide a RPS trip, are also not precursors
to any previously evaluated accident. Therefore, relocating the RPS
shorting link requirement to administrative controls [the Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report, (UFSAR)] will not increase the
probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The RPS shorting links are not assumed to be removed in any
accident analysis, and the SRMs are not assumed to provide a RPS
trip in any accident analysis. The refueling interlocks and SHUTDOWN
MARGIN calculations will continue to provide assurance of reactivity
control. Therefore, relocating the RPS shorting link requirements to
administrative controls [the UFSAR] will not increase the
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The RPS shorting link requirements will be relocated to
administrative controls that are administered pursuant to the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, thereby reducing the level of
regulatory control. The level of regulatory control has no impact on
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Consequently, this proposed amendment does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
Does the change create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
[[Page 1033]]
Relocating the RPS shorting link requirements to administrative
controls [the UFSAR] does not create any new failure mechanisms. No
new equipment will be installed or utilized, and no new operating
conditions will be initiated as a result of this change. Therefore,
the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety?
The refuel interlocks and SHUTDOWN MARGIN calculations will
continue to ensure that the reactor stays subcritical in the Refuel
Mode. The margin to safety as represented by the SHUTDOWN MARGIN
designed into the core and verified in the SHUTDOWN MARGIN
calculations will be unaffected by relocation of the RPS shorting
link requirements to administrative controls [the UFSAR]. The margin
to safety as represented by the fuel bundle drop assumptions
protected by the refuel interlocks will be unaffected. In addition,
no accident analysis assumes that the RPS shorting links are
removed. In addition, the RPS shorting link requirements will be
relocated to administrative controls [the UFSAR] for which future
change will be evaluated pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR
50.59. Therefore, there will be no change in the types or
significant increase in the amounts of any effluents released
offsite, and, thus, these changes do not involve a significant
reduction in the 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 requested 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 amendments 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 amendments before the expiration
of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is
that the amendments involve 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 February 8, 1999, the licensee may file a request for a hearing
with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility
operating licenses 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: for Dresden, Morris Area Public Library
District, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450; for Quad Cities,
Dixon Public Library, 221 Hennepin Avenue, Dixon, Illinois 61021. 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 amendments 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.
[[Page 1034]]
If the final determination is that the amendments requested involve
no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendments and make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendments.
If the final determination is that the amendments requested involve
a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place
before the issuance of any amendments.
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 Pamela B. Stroebel, Senior Vice
President and General Counsel, ComEd, P.O. Box 767, Chicago, Illinois,
60690, 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 amendments dated November 30, 1998, 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: for Dresden, Morris Area Public
Library District, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450; for Quad
Cities, Dixon Public Library, 221 Hennepin Avenue, Dixon, Illinois
61021.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of December 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert M. Pulsifer,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-280 Filed 1-6-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
