[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55311-55313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26488]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362]
Southern California Edison Company, San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 2 and 3; 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.
NPF-10 and NPF-15 issued to Southern California Edison Company (SCE,
the licensee) for operation of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station (SONGS), Units 2 and 3, located in San Diego County,
California.
The proposed amendments would revise the SONGS Units 2 and 3
technical specifications (TSs) Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.3.9 to
include a response time testing requirement for the control room
isolation signal (CRIS).
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 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 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:
Do the proposed amendments--
1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change will maintain the Control Room Isolation
Signal (CRIS) operability and surveillance requirements in the
Technical Specification. The proposed change only adds response time
testing. The probability of an accident and the consequences of an
accident are unaffected by this proposed change since the Safety
Analysis remains unaffected. Therefore, operation of the facility in
accordance with
[[Page 55312]]
this change will not involve an increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Addition of response time testing will not alter the design and
operational interface between the CRIS instrumentation and existing
plant equipment. The monitors will continue to operate and perform
their intended safety function to isolate the control room following
a design basis accident as before. Therefore, operation of the
facility in accordance with this proposed change will not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
This proposed change will not affect the margin of safety since
this is an addition to the Technical Specifications with the purpose
of verifying compliance with 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A General
Design Criterion 19. Addition of response time testing will verify
this specific 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 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 November 12, 1999, the licensee may file a request for a hearing
with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facilities
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 Main Library, University of California,
Irvine, California 92713. 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 amendments.
[[Page 55313]]
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 close of business of 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 Douglas K.
Porter, Esquire, Southern California Edison Company, 2244 Walnut Grove
Avenue, Rosemead, California 91770, 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 October 20, 1998 (PCN 485), as
supplemented August 13, 1999, which are 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 Main Library, University of California, Irvine,
California 92713.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of October, 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Raghavan,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV &
Decommissioning, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-26488 Filed 10-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
