[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 245 (Thursday, December 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-31446]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: December 22, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-387 & 50-388]
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 & 2; 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-14 & NPF-22 issued to Pennsylvania Power & Light Company for
operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2,
located in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.
The proposed amendment would add the Special Test Exception 3/
4.10.6, ``Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing,'' that allows the
performance of pressure testing at reactor coolant temperature up to
212 deg.F while remaining in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4. This special test
exception would also require that certain OPERATIONAL CONDITION 3
Specifications for Secondary Containment Isolation, Secondary
Containment Integrity and Standby Gas Treatment System operability be
met. This change would also revise the Index, Table 1.2, ``OPERATIONAL
CONDITIONS,'' and the Bases to incorporate the reference to the
proposed special test exception.
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. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes are requested to allow inservice leak and
hydrostatic testing, with the reactor in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 and
the average reactor coolant temperature up to 212 deg.F. The change to
allow inservice leak and hydrostatic testing in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4
will not increase the probability or the consequences of an accident.
The probability of a leak in the reactor coolant pressure boundary
during inservice leak and hydrostatic testing is not increased by
considering the reactor in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4. The hydrostatic or
inservice leak test is performed water solid or near water solid, and
temperatures less than or equal to 212 deg.F. The stored energy in the
reactor core will be very low and the potential for failed fuel and a
subsequent increase in coolant activity above Technical Specification
limits are minimal. In addition, secondary containment will be operable
and capable of handling airborne radioactivity from leaks that could
occur during the performance of hydrostatic or inservice leak testing.
Requiring the secondary containment to be operable will ensure that
potential airborne radiation from leaks will be filtered through the
Standby Gas Treatment System, thus limiting radiation releases to the
environment. Therefore, the change will not significantly increase the
consequences of an accident.
In the event of a large primary system leak, the reactor vessel
would rapidly depressurize allowing the low pressure ECCS systems to
operate. The capability of the systems that are required for
OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 would be adequate to keep the core flooded
under this condition. Small system leaks would be detected by leakage
inspections before significant inventory loss occurred. This is an
integral part of the hydrostatic testing program. Therefore, this
change will not involve a significant 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.
Allowing the reactor to be considered in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4
during hydrostatic or leak testing, with a reactor coolant temperature
of up to 212 deg.F, is an exception to certain OPERATIONAL CONDITION 3
requirements, including primary containment integrity and total
Emergency Core Cooling System operability. The hydrostatic or inservice
leakage test is performed water solid, or near water solid, and coolant
temperature less than or equal to 212 deg.F. The stored energy in the
reactor core will be very low and the potential for failed fuel and a
subsequent increase in coolant activity above Technical Specification
limits are minimal. In addition, the secondary containment will be
operable and capable of handling airborne radioactivity from leaks that
could occur during the performance of hydrostatic or inservice leakage
testing.
The inservice leak or hydrostatic test conditions remain unchanged.
The potential for a system leak remains unchanged since the reactor
coolant system is designed for temperatures exceeding 500 deg.F with
similar pressures. There are no alternations of any plant systems that
cope with the spectrum of accidents. The only difference is that a
different subset of systems would be utilized for accident mitigation
from those of OPERATIONAL CONDITION 3. Therefore, this change will not
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
previously evaluated.
3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed change allows inservice leak and hydrostatic testing
to be performed with a reactor coolant temperature up to 212 deg.F and
the reactor in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4. Since the reactor vessel head
will be in place, secondary containment integrity will be maintained
and all systems required in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 will be operable in
accordance with the Technical Specifications, the proposed change will
not have any significant impact on any design bases accident or safety
limit. The hydrostatic or inservice leak testing is performed water
solid, or near water solid, and temperature less than or equal to
212 deg.F. The stored energy in the core is very low and the potential
for failed fuel and a subsequent increase in coolant activity would be
minimal. The reactor pressure vessel would rapidly depressurize in the
event of a large primary system leak and the low pressure injection
systems required to be operable in OPERATION CONDITION 4 would be
adequate to keep the core flooded. This would ensure that the fuel
would not exceed the 2200 deg.F peak clad temperature limit.
Also requiring secondary containment integrity will assure that
potential airborne radiation can be filtered through the SGTS. This
will assure that offsite does remain well within the limits of 10 CFR
100 guidelines. Small system leaks would be detected by inspections
before significant inventory loss could occur. Therefore, this special
test exception will not involve a significant reduction in safety
margin.
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 data 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 23, 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 Osterhout Free Library, Reference
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania 18701.
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 basis 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 John F. Stolz: 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 Jay Silberg,
Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20037, 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)(l)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated October 21, 1994, 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 Osterhout Free Library, Reference
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania 18701.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of December 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chester Poslusny, Sr.,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor Projects-
I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-31446 Filed 12-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
