[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7477-7479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4055]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-362]
Southern California 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 No.
NPF-15, issued to Southern California Edison Company (the licensee),
for operation of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS),
Unit No. 3 located in San Diego County, California.
The proposed amendment would defer implementation of Surveillance
Requirement (SR) 3.1.5.4 of Technical Specification 3.1.5, ``CEA
Alignment'' until no later than the next SONGS Unit 3 refueling outage
(currently scheduled to begin on April 12, 1997).
The exigent circumstances for this amendment request exist due to
the recent discovery of the inappropriate crediting of previous test
results to this post-Technical Specification Improvement Program SR.
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.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine 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 change does not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change would defer the implementation of
Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.1.5.4 of Technical Specification
(TS) 3.1.5 until the Unit 3, Cycle 9 refueling outage.
Operation of the facility would remain unchanged as a result of
the proposed changes and no assumptions or results of any accident
analyses are affected. Based on testing, operating experience, and
the inherent reliability of the system, Edison concludes the Reed
Switch Position Transmitters have demonstrated their capability to
perform their specified safety function and are operable. Therefore,
the proposed change will not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change would defer the implementation of
Surveillance Requirement (SR) SR 3.1.5.4 of Technical Specification
(TS) 3.1.5 until the Unit 3, Cycle 9 refueling outage.
Operation of the facility would remain unchanged as a result of
the proposed change. The Reed Switch Position Transmitters cannot
initiate an accident.
[[Page 7478]]
Therefore, the proposed change will 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 proposed change would defer the implementation of
Surveillance Requirement (SR) SR 3.1.5.4 of Technical Specification
(TS) 3.1.5 until the Unit 3, Cycle 9 refueling outage. The Reed
Switch Position Transmitters are concluded to be able to perform
their safety function and are operable. Therefore, the proposed
change will 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 14 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 14-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 14-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. 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
Review 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, MD, 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 March 21, 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 Main Library, University of California,
P.O. Box 19557, Irvine, CA 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 a 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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is
requested, 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: Docketing and
Services Branch, or may
[[Page 7479]]
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 William H. Bateman, Director, Project Directorate IV-2:
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
20555-0001, and to T.E. Oubre, Esquire, Southern California Edison
Company, P.O. Box 800, Rosemead, CA 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 amendment dated February 7, 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 Main Library, University of
California, P.O. Box 19557, Irvine, CA 92713.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of February 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mel B. Fields,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-4055 Filed 2-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
