[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 243 (Thursday, December 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66394-66396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33055]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456 and STN 50-457]
Commonwealth Edison 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 Nos.
NPF-37, NPF-66, NPF-72, and NPF-77 issued to Commonwealth Edison
Company (the licensee) for operation of Byron Station, Units 1 and 2,
located in Ogle County, Illinois and Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2,
located in Will County, Illinois.
The proposed amendment would allow licensee control of the reactor
coolant system pressure and temperature limits for heatup, cooldown,
low temperature operation and hydrostatic testing. ComEd also proposed
to relocate the reactor vessel capsule withdrawal schedule in
accordance with Generic Letter 91-01.
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
[[Page 66395]]
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. Does the change involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
The proposed changes relocate RCS [reactor coolant system] P/T
[pressure and temperature] limits, LTOP [low temperature
overpressure protection] system setpoints, hydrostatic testing
requirements, and the reactor vessel capsule withdrawal schedule,
along with supporting information, from the Technical Specifications
to a PTLR [pressure temperature limits report]. Compliance with
these limits will continue to be required by the Technical
Specifications. However, the limits themselves will be maintained in
a Licensee-controlled document. Changes to the limits will be
controlled by Section 6.9.1.11 of the Technical Specifications.
Changes to the RCS P/T limits can only be made in accordance with
the NRC-approved methodologies listed in the Technical
Specifications. The limits and the Technical Specifications will
continue to assure the function of the reactor vessel as a pressure
boundary. Revision to the LTOP limits can only be made in accordance
with the approved methodologies listed in the Technical
Specifications, and any resulting setpoint changes are made through
the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59. Changes to the specimen withdrawal
requirements are governed by Appendix H to 10 CFR 50.
The proposed changes do not impact any accident initiators or
analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or transient
events. They do not involve the addition or removal of any
equipment, or any design changes to the facility. Therefore this
proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
The proposed changes do not involve a modification to the
physical configuration of the plant (i.e., no new equipment will be
installed) or change in the methods governing normal plant
operation. The proposed changes will not impose any new or different
requirements or introduce a new accident or malfunction mechanism.
There is no significant change in the types or significant increase
in the amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite, and
there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative
occupational radiation exposure. In addition, the Byron and
Braidwood Technical Specifications will continue to require that the
reactor is maintained within acceptable operational limits and
ensure that the LTOP system meets operability requirements.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin
of safety?
The proposed changes do not result in any reduction in the
margin of safety because they have no impact on safety analysis
assumptions. The proposed changes have been shown to ensure that the
P/T and LTOP limits in the PTLR continue to meet all necessary
requirements for reactor vessel integrity. Any future changes to the
RCS P/T, LTOP limits, or supporting information must be performed in
accordance with NRC-approved methodologies. Technical Specifications
continue to require compliance with the limits in the PTLR.
Additionally, any revision to the LTOP limits which result in
setpoint changes will be evaluated under the provisions of 10 CFR
50.59. The reactor vessel capsule withdrawal schedule will continue
to meet the requirements of Appendix H to 10 CFR 50. Therefore,
these changes do not involve a significant reduction in the margin
of safety.
ComEd has concluded that the RCS P/T and LTOP limits are no
longer required to be located in the Technical Specifications under
10 CFR 50.36 or Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act, and are not
required to obviate the possibility of an abnormal situation or
event giving rise to an immediate threat to the public health and
safety. Additionally, they do not fall within any of the four
criteria set forth in 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) for defining Technical
Specification Limiting Condition for Operations.
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 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 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 January 20, 1998, 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: for Byron, located at the Byron Public Library District,
109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; for Braidwood,
the Wilmington 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
[[Page 66396]]
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 Michael I. Miller, Esquire; Sidley
and Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60603, 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 May 21, 1997, as supplemented on
November 18, 1997, and December 3, 1997, 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 rooms: for Byron, located at the Byron Public Library
District, 109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; for
Braidwood, the Wilmington Public Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street,
Wilmington, Illinois 60481.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of December, 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George F. Dick, Jr.,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-33055 Filed 12-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
