[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58688-58690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-28976]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-213]
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company; 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.
61 issued to Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (the licensee) for
operation of the Haddam Neck Plant located in Middlesex County,
Connecticut.
The proposed amendment would be a one-time exception to the
technical specifcation 3.9.12, ``Fuel Building Storage Air Cleanup
System,'' to allow the fuel storage building air cleanup system to be
inoperable during intervals in which new fuel rack modules will be
moved into and old fuel modules will
[[Page 58689]]
be moved out of the fuel storage building (FSB).
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:
In accordance with 10CFR50.92, CYAPCO has reviewed the proposed
change and has concluded that it does not involve a significant
hazards consideration (SHC). The basis for this conclusion is that
the three criteria of 10CFR50.92(c) are not compromised. The
proposed change does not involve an SHC because the change would
not:
1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The requirements of technical specification 3/4.9.7 will be
maintained at all times. Any heavy load (rack or rig) with a
potential to drop on a rack will have no less than a 3 feet lateral
free zone clearance from active fuel. Safe load paths will be
developed for moving the rack modules in the FSB. The old or new
rack modules will not be carried over any region of the pool
containing fuel. In addition, there will be no fuel movement in the
spent fuel pool when the modules are being relocated with the hatch
open. Therefore, there is no possibility of a drop of a fuel
assembly which would necessitate the use of the FSB air cleanup
system when the hatch is open. There is no impact to the probability
or consequences of any previously evaluated accidents due to this
proposed modification.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
There is no potential for a new or different kind of accident
from any previously analyzed. All failure modes that can cause an
accident have been identified and evaluated. When the movements of a
rack module are completed, and the roof hatch is closed, operation
of the FSB air cleanup system will be verified. The system will be
aligned and operated to verify the system maintains the spent fuel
pool storage area at a negative pressure greater than 0 inch water
gage differential, relative to the outside atmosphere as requirement
[SIC] by the technical specifications. CYAPCO will assure that the
plant is maintained in a safe condition by limiting rack movement
with the yard crane only in the cask pit area; no rack movement will
be allowed over stored fuel; any heavy loads will have no less than
3 feet lateral free zone clearance from active fuel and; no fuel
assemblies will be moved while the roof hatch is open. Verification
of system operation combined with the use of the safe load paths
ensure that there is no potential for a new or unanalyzed accident.
3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
There is no significant reduction in the margin of safety. The
function of the FSB air cleanup system is to ensure that all
radioactive material released from an irradiated fuel assembly will
be filtered through the HEPA filters and charcoal adsorber prior to
discharge to the atmosphere. The FSB air cleanup system shall be
operable during operations involving the movement of fuel within the
FSB or crane operation with loads over the storage pool. This
requirement is to reduce radioactive iodine release in the event of
a crane handling event involving spent fuel. Due to the safe load
paths which will be utilized in the movements of the rack modules
and the precluding of fuel movement with the hatch open, there is no
postulated accident that can cause a fuel failure. The operation of
the yard crane inside the SFB is physically limited to traverse
between the crane bay and the spent fuel pool cask area due to the
size of the roof hatch opening. All phases of the reracking activity
will be conducted in accordance with procedures reviewed and
approved by CYAPCO. Therefore, this change does not involve a
significant reduction to 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
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.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By December 28, 1995, 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 Russell Library, 123 Broad Street,
Middletown, CT 06457. 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
[[Page 58690]]
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, 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 at 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 Phillip F. McKee: 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 Lillian M. Cuoco,
Esq., Senior Nuclear Counsel, Northeast Utilities Service Company, P.O.
Box 270, Hartford, CT 06141-0270, 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 November 14, 1995, 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 Russell Library, 123 Broad Street,
Middletown, CT 06457.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of November 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan Wang,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-28976 Filed 11-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
