94-25158. Commonwealth Edison Company; Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Proposed no Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 59, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 12, 1994)]
    [Unknown Section]
    [Page 0]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 94-25158]
    
    
    [[Page Unknown]]
    
    [Federal Register: October 12, 1994]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
     
    
    Commonwealth Edison Company; 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 an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
    NPF-37, NPF-66, NPF-72, and NPF-77, issued to Commonwealth Edison 
    Company (ComEd, the licensee), for operation of the Byron Station, 
    Units 1 and 2, located in Ogle County, Illinois and Braidwood Station, 
    Units 1 and 2, located in Will County, Illinois.
        In a letter of August 13, 1993, and as supplemented on September 
    15, 1993, September 16, 1993, December 17, 1993, January 19, 1994, 
    February 11, 1994, and February 24, 1994, ComEd submitted requests for 
    amendments for steam generator (SG) tube sleeving in accordance with 
    (1) Westinghouse and (2) Babcock & Wilcox processes. By letter dated 
    March 4, 1994, the NRC granted the proposed sleeving methods contingent 
    upon four conditions which the licensee accepted in their letter of 
    February 24, 1994.
        Three of the four changes will be reflected in the plants' 
    Technical Specifications (TS). By letter dated June 3, 1994, the 
    licensee requested changes to TS 3.4.5 and 3.4.6.2 to include the three 
    conditions, which are:
        1. Amend the Byron and Braidwood licenses to reflect a primary-to-
    secondary leakage rate limit of 150 gallons per day (gpd) through any 
    one SG.
        2. Amend the Byron and Braidwood licenses to reflect an inservice 
    inspection of a minimum of 20 percent of a random sample of the sleeves 
    for axial and circumferential indication at the end-of-cycle. In the 
    event that an imperfection of 40 percent or greater depth is detected, 
    an additional 20 percent (minimum) of the unsampled sleeves should be 
    inspected, and if an imperfection of 40 percent or greater depth is 
    detected in the second sample, all remaining sleeves should be 
    inspected.
        3. Add a condition to the Byron and Braidwood licenses to conduct 
    additional corrosion testing to establish the design life for the 
    kinetically or laser welded sleeved tubes in the presence of a crevice.
        Collectively, these conditions will enable the licensee to have:
        1. Further assurance that the integrity of the SGs will be 
    maintained in the event of a main steam line break or under loss-of-
    coolant accident (LOCA) conditions;
        2. Increased monitoring of the SG tube sleeves for any degradation; 
    and
        3. Increased confidence that SG sleeve integrity will be maintained 
    for extended operations.
        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:
    
        1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase 
    in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
    evaluated.
        The original amendment requested [approval] of tubesheet sleeves 
    and tube support plate sleeves as an alternate tube repair method 
    for Byron and Braidwood Units 1 and 2. The steam generator sleeves 
    approved for installation use the Westinghouse process (laser welded 
    joints) and the Babcock and Wilcox (B&W) process of kinetically 
    welded joints. The sleeve configuration was designed and analyzed in 
    accordance with the criteria of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121 and the 
    design requirements of Section III of the American Society of 
    Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code. Fatigue and stress analyses of the 
    sleeved tube assemblies for both processes produced acceptable 
    results as documented in the Westinghouse and the B&W topical 
    reports submitted in the original sleeving package. Mechanical 
    testing has shown that the structural strength of the sleeves under 
    normal, faulted, and upset conditions is within acceptable limits. 
    Leakage rate testing for the tube sleeves has demonstrated that 
    primary-to-secondary leakage is not expected during all plant 
    conditions.
        Any leakage through the sleeved region of the tube is fully 
    bounded by the leak-before-break considerations and, ultimately, the 
    existing steam generator tube rupture analysis included in the Byron 
    and Braidwood Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The 
    reduction in TS leakage rate requirements from 500 gpd allowable per 
    SG to 150 gpd further ensures that SG tube integrity is maintained 
    in the event of a main steam line break (MSLB) or under Loss Of 
    Coolant Accident (LOCA) conditions. The RG 1.121 criteria for 
    establishing operational leakage rate limits require a plant 
    shutdown based upon a leak-before-break consideration to detect a 
    free span crack before a potential tube rupture. The 150 gpd limit 
    will continue to allow for early leakage detection and require a 
    plant shutdown in the event of the occurrence of an unexpected crack 
    resulting in leakage that exceeds the revised Technical 
    Specification limit.
        The sleeve sample size has been increased to a minimum of twenty 
    (20) percent of the inservice sleeves. Increasing the sample size of 
    the sleeves to be inspected will increase the monitoring of tubes 
    using sleeves for any further degradation while they remain 
    inservice. If the sample identifies a sleeve with an imperfection of 
    greater [than] 40 percent depth, an additional 20 percent of the 
    sleeves shall be inspected. The sleeves that have identified 
    imperfections of greater than 40 percent shall be evaluated and 
    removed from service. The inservice inspections and additional 
    corrosion testing for the sleeves and welded joints will continue 
    until the corrosion resistance is demonstrated acceptable to the 
    NRC. If conformance with the acceptance criteria of section 4.4.5.4 
    for tube structural integrity is not confirmed, the tubes containing 
    the sleeves in question shall be removed from service. Increasing 
    the monitoring of the sleeved tubes will decrease the probability of 
    occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the UFSAR.
        Implementation of a corrosion testing program should determine 
    the effects that material microstructure, chemistry, and joint 
    crevices will have on primary water stress corrosion cracking 
    initiation and growth. This program will not cause an increase in 
    the probability or consequence of an accident previously evaluated 
    because the testing program is conducted in laboratory conditions. 
    If the results of the testing program do not confirm the structural 
    integrity of the tubes, the tubes containing the sleeves in question 
    shall be removed from service. These changes do not involve a 
    significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
    accident previously evaluated.
        2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
    or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
    evaluated.
        The implementation of the proposed amendment will not introduce 
    significant or adverse changes to the plant design basis. The 
    proposed changes do not involve plant modification or changes to 
    equipment, and consist of: reduction in allowable steam generator 
    leakage limits, increase in the sample size of the steam generator 
    tube sleeved and the addition of a commitment to perform a corrosion 
    testing program on the sleeved tubes.
        The reduction in TS leakage rate requirements from 500 gpd 
    allowable per SG to 150 gpd further ensures that SG tube integrity 
    is maintained in the event of a MSLB or under LOCA conditions. The 
    150 gpd limit is designed to provide for leakage detection and a 
    plant shutdown in the event of the occurrence of an unexpected 
    single crack resulting in excessive tube leakage. The limit provides 
    for early detection and a plant shutdown prior to a postulated crack 
    reaching critical crack lengths for Main Steam Line Break 
    conditions.
        Increasing the sample size of tubes sleeved during each 
    scheduled inservice inspection will increase the monitoring of these 
    tubes for any further degradation. The improved monitoring and 
    evaluation of the tube and the sleeves assures tube structural 
    integrity is maintained or the tube is removed for service.
        Additionally, corrosion testing to establish sleeve design life 
    and corrosion resistance to confirm tube structural integrity will 
    be performed. If the tube structural integrity is not confirmed, the 
    tubes containing the sleeves in question shall be removed from 
    service.
        With these actions the possibility of a new or different type of 
    accident from any accident previously evaluated is not created.
        3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
    in a margin of safety.
        Implementation of the proposed changes will not reduce the 
    margin of safety. This amendment involves the reduction of steam 
    generator leakage limit, and increase in the amount of sleeved tubes 
    inspected and the incorporation of a corrosion testing program for 
    sleeved tubes. All of these actions will help ensure steam generator 
    tube integrity.
        Reduction of the leakage rate requirement from 500 to 150 
    gallons per day (gpd) per steam generator will continue to ensure 
    steam generator tube integrity is maintained in the event of main 
    steam line break or under LOCA conditions. The reduction to 150 gpd 
    also limits the allowable primary-to-secondary leakage from 1 gallon 
    per minute to 600 gpd for all steam generators not isolated from the 
    Reactor Coolant System (RCS). This previous leakage limit, used in 
    UFSAR accident analysis, ensured the dosage contribution from tube 
    leakage would be limited to a small fraction of the 10 CFR Part 100 
    dose guideline values in the event of either a steam generator tube 
    rupture or steam line break. Reducing these limits will not result 
    [in] a reduction in the margin of safety.
        The portions of the installed sleeve assembly which represent 
    the reactor coolant pressure boundary can be monitored for the 
    initiation and progression of sleeve/tube wall degradation, thus 
    satisfying the requirement of Regulatory Guide 1.83. The portion of 
    the tube bridged by the sleeve joints is effectively removed from 
    the pressure boundary, and the sleeve then forms the new pressure 
    boundary. The sleeve enhances the safety of the plant by increasing 
    the protective boundaries of the steam generator. Keeping the tube 
    in service with the use of a sleeve instead of plugging the tube and 
    removing it from service increases the heat transfer efficiency of 
    the steam generator. Monitoring for any increased degradation of a 
    repaired steam generator tube shall be implemented at Byron and 
    Braidwood by increasing the sampling size of inservice sleeves to 
    include an additional twenty (20) percent of the sleeves inservice. 
    During each scheduled in service inspection, each sampled sleeve 
    evaluated and found to have unacceptable degradation shall be 
    removed from service.
        Implementation of a corrosion testing program should determine 
    the effects that material microstructure, chemistry, and joint 
    crevices will have on primary water stress corrosion cracking 
    initiation and growth. This program is conducted in laboratory 
    setting; therefore, [it] will not involve a significant reduction in 
    a margin of safety. In addition, the corrosion testing program will 
    be performed to establish sleeve design life and corrosion 
    resistance to confirm tube structural integrity. If the tube 
    structural integrity is not confirmed, the tubes containing the 
    sleeves in question shall be removed from service. These actions 
    [do] not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    
        Based on the preceding analysis it is concluded that operation of 
    Byron and Braidwood Units 1 and 2, in accordance with the proposed 
    amendment does not increase the probability of an accident previously 
    evaluated, does not create the possibility of a new or different kind 
    of accident previously evaluated, nor reduce any margins to plant 
    safety. Therefore, the license amendment does not involve a Significant 
    Hazards Consideration as defined in 10 CFR 50.92.
        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 Rules Review and 
    Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications 
    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 
    20555.
        The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
    intervene is discussed below.
        By November 14, 1994, 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 20555 and at the local 
    public document rooms which for Byron is located at the Byron Public 
    Library, 109 N. Franklin, Byron, Illinois 61010; and for Braidwood is 
    located at the Wilmington Township Public Library, 201 S. Kankakee 
    Street, Wilmington, Illinois 60481. 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 20555, 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 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 Mr. Robert A. Capra: 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 Michael I. 
    Miller, Esquire; Sidney and Austin, One First National Plaza, 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 amendment dated June 3, 1994, which is available for 
    public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
    Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local 
    public document rooms, which for Byron is located at the Byron Public 
    Library, 109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; and for 
    Braidwood is located at the Wilmington Township Public Library, 201 S. 
    Kankakee Street, Wilmington, Illinois 60481.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of October 1994.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Ramin R. Assa,
    Acting Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 94-25158 Filed 10-11-94; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
10/12/1994
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Uncategorized Document
Document Number:
94-25158
Pages:
0-0 (1 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Federal Register: October 12, 1994