[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 193 (Monday, October 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52161-52162]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26402]
[[Page 52161]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-354]
Public Service Electric & Gas Company (Atlantic City Electric
Company, Hope Creek Generating Station); 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 License No.
NPF-57 issued to Public Service Electric & Gas Company for operation of
the Hope Creek (HC) Generating Station located at the licensee's site
in Salem County, New Jersey.
The proposed amendment would change Technical Specification 3/
4.11.1, ``Liquid Effluents--Concentration.'' The proposed change adds a
requirement to perform weekly sampling and monthly and quarterly
composite analyses of the station service water system (SSWS) when the
reactor auxiliaries cooling system (RACS) is contaminated.
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 changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The fact that the RACS operating pressure can be greater than
the SSWS fluid pressures at a[n] RACS heat exchanger does not
increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated in the
UFSAR [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report]. Upon receipt of a LOCA
[loss-of-coolant accident] signal, the RACS heat exchangers are
automatically isolated from the balance of the SSWS and the RACS
supply and return header containment isolation valves automatically
close. The change only affects the consequences of a malfunction of
passive components, such as seals and heat exchanger tubing, cooled
by the RACS system. Since the plant systems associated with these
proposed changes will still be capable of: (1) Meeting all
applicable design basis requirements; and (2) retain the capability
to mitigate the consequences of accidents described in the HC UFSAR,
the proposed changes were determined to be justified. While the
consequences of contaminated leakage from the RACS to SSWS are
increased slightly, these changes will not involve a significant
increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The resulting estimated total effective dose equivalent in
UNRESTRICTED AREAS is well within the limits of 10 CFR 20.1301(a)(1)
and Hope Creek LCO [limiting condition for operation] 3.11.1.2.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
Plant response to contaminated leakage from the RACS to SSWS is
the same as the response to leakage from the safety auxiliaries
cooling system (SACS) to SSWS which is already evaluated. Therefore
the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety.
The estimated total effective dose equivalent in UNRESTRICTED
AREAS resulting from this proposed change is less than 1 millirem
and so is well within the limits of 10 CFR 20.1301(a)(1) and LCO
3.11.1.2.
Effluent concentration levels will remain within the limits of
LCO 3.11.1.1. Therefore the proposed change does 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
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 Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications
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 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.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By November 5, 1997, 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 Pennsville Public Library, 190 S.
Broadway, Pennsville, New Jersey 08070. 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
[[Page 52162]]
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 Jeffrie J. Keenan, Esquire, Nuclear
Business Unit--N21, P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038, 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 September 29, 1997, 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 Pennsville Public Library, 190 S.
Broadway, Pennsville, New Jersey 08070.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of September 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David H. Jaffe,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
[FR Doc. 97-26402 Filed 10-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
