97-7507. Pennsylvania Power & Light Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 14167-14169]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-7507]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket No. 50-388]
    
    
    Pennsylvania Power & Light 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-22, issued to Pennsylvania Power & Light Company (PP&L), (the 
    licensee), for operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station 
    (SSES), Unit 2, located in Luzerne County, PA.
        The proposed amendment would modify the Design Features Section 
    5.3.1 of the Technical Specifications to reflect the Atrium-10 design 
    and would include a Siemens Power Corporation (SPC) topical report 
    reference in Section 6.9.3.2 to reflect mechanical design criteria for 
    this fuel. This change would allow this fuel to be loaded and 
    maintained in the core only under Condition 5, (refueling).
        PP&L has indicated that exigent circumstances exist which are a 
    result of the following. PP&L submitted its proposal for amendment for 
    the staff to approve the use of SPC Atrium-10 fuel in SSES, Unit 2 on 
    December 18, 1996 and as supplemented on March 12, 1997. The staff 
    approval has been predicated on the completion of an audit at SPC. 
    Issues raised during the SPC audit have caused an unanticipated delay 
    in completing the staff's review. In its letter, the licensee stated 
    that this delay causes a threat to PP&L's ability to complete the Unit 
    2 8th refueling and inspection outage as planned and the return to Unit 
    2 operation. This outage has already begun. During the original Unit 2 
    outage scoping process PP&L stated that it did not anticipate the need 
    for a specific NRC inspection of SPC to support the NRC review and 
    approval of the December 18, 1996 amendment. Further, PP&L reasonably 
    expected that all audit results would be satisfactory and would not 
    impact the current Unit 2 outage schedule. The resultant consequences 
    required the supplemental submittal on March 12, 1997, and requires 
    additional unavoidable NRC staff review which is ongoing. The March 17, 
    1997 application is only to approve those changes that are applicable 
    to allow fuel to be loaded and maintained in the reactor core only 
    during Operational Condition 5 on an interim basis during the outage 
    and prior to the NRC's approval of the December 18, 1996 and March 12, 
    1997, requested TS changes, to minimize the delay in startup based on 
    the NRC review of the two submittals discussed above. The staff agrees 
    that exigent conditions exist that were not anticipated by the 
    licensee.
        This notice is related to the amendment requested by the December 
    18, 1996 and March 12, 1997 submittals by Pennsylvania Power and Light 
    Company, but does not affect the previous notice dated March 12, 1997, 
    which was published in the Federal Register on March 18, 1997 (62 FR 
    12859).
        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 description of a fuel assembly (Section 5.3.1) is revised to 
    reflect the fact that ATRIUMTM-10 contains a central water 
    channel. Since the active fuel length of ATRIUMTM-10 is 
    different from that of 9 x 9-2, reference to an active fuel length 
    of 150 inches is no longer appropriate and was deleted. There is no 
    safety significance to these changes.
        Due to the limitation of this proposed change to Operational 
    Condition 5, only a subset of the accident events analyzed in the 
    FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report] needed to be addressed. All 
    other events were considered and the addition of ATRIUMTM-10 
    fuel to the reactor core in Operational Condition 5 did not increase 
    the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 
    The events considered are described below.
        The maximum allowed enrichment (Section 5.3.1) is increased from 
    4.0 to 4.5 weight percent U235. Criticality calculations were 
    performed with a KENO Monte Carlo code to ensure that ATRIUMTM-
    10 fuel with a lattice average enrichment of 4.5 weight percent U235 
    can be safely stored in both the new fuel vault and the spent fuel 
    storage pool at Susquehanna. These calculations demonstrated, 
    consistent with current Technical Specifications, that the maximum 
    k-effective of both the new fuel vault and spent fuel storage pool 
    will not exceed 0.95 under the worst credible storage array or 
    accident conditions.
        The ATRIUMTM-10 fuel assembly is unirradiated and its 
    weight is nearly identical to the current SPC 9 x 9-2 fuel assembly 
    weight as well as being less than the fuel assembly weight used in 
    the 9 x 9-2 analyses (680 lbs.). The dose consequences of the 
    current 9 x 9-2 licensing analyses of the Fuel and Equipment 
    Handling Accidents bound the dose consequences of a Fuel Handling 
    Accident involving ATRIUMTM-10 fuel.
        The grappling of the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel is similar to the 
    9 x 9-2, due to the similar bail handle dimensions and assembly 
    weights. Therefore, ATRIUMTM-10 fuel is completely compatible 
    with the refueling platform main grapple. Because the assembly 
    weights of the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel and the 9 x 9-2 fuel are 
    essentially the same, the capacity of the refueling platform main 
    hoist will be sufficient to handle the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel. Also, 
    the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel uses the identical fuel channel design as 
    the 9 x 9-2 fuel and the lower tie plate has very similar outside 
    dimensions. Therefore, the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel is compatible with, 
    and can be safely inserted/placed into the reactor core.
        Storage of channelled ATRIUMTM-10 fuel in the Reactor Core 
    was evaluated. Core shutdown margin calculations were performed 
    using NRC approved methodology for the beginning of cycle core 
    configuration. Validation of the shutdown margin methodology as it 
    applies to ATRIUMTM-10 was done through comparisons to Siemens' 
    Power Corporation analyses and higher-order Monte Carlo 
    calculations. Calculated core shutdown margin for the beginning of 
    cycle core loading is greater than 1.00%[delta]k/k which far exceeds 
    the Technical Specification value of 0.38%[delta]k/k. Therefore, 
    ATRIUMTM-10 fuel can be placed into the U2C9 final core 
    configuration with assurance that the core will remain subcritical 
    with the strongest worth rod withdrawn. A positive core shutdown 
    margin assures protection against the control rod removal error 
    during refueling (FSAR Section 15.4.1.1) because subcriticality is 
    maintained.
    
    [[Page 14168]]
    
        In addition, the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel assembly dimensions 
    critical to interface with the Spent Fuel Storage Pool and Reactor 
    Vessel are essentially the same as the 9 x 9-2 design. Therefore, 
    the ATRIUMTM-10 can be properly stored.
        Included in the revised Technical Specifications via reference 
    (Section 6.9.3.2) is one NRC approved topical report containing the 
    criteria for the design of Siemens Power Corporation fuel. SPC 
    analyses have demonstrated that ATRIUMTM-10 fuel complies with 
    the NRC approved criteria thus assuring the structural integrity of 
    the fuel. Compliance with the criteria applicable to Operational 
    Condition 5 assures that ATRIUMTM-10 fuel can be safely stored 
    in the spent fuel pool and loaded in the Unit 2 reactor core during 
    Operational Condition 5.
        Based on the foregoing, the proposed action does not involve a 
    significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
    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 changes to the Unit 2 Technical Specifications (Design 
    Features and inclusion of the methodology reference) to allow 
    Operational Condition 5 loading of ATRIUM-10 fuel do not require any 
    physical plant modifications (other than loading of the 
    ATRIUMTM-10 assemblies), physically affect any plant 
    components, or entail changes in plant operation. ATRIUMTM-10 
    fuel assemblies have approximately the same weight, outer 
    dimensions, and the same basic bail handle design as 9 x 9-2 fuel 
    assemblies and are handled in the same manner as 9 x 9-2 fuel 
    assemblies. Thus, the proposed change does not create the 
    possibility of a previously unevaluated operator error.
        The topical report reference added to Section 6.9.3.2 contains 
    NRC approved acceptance criteria. SPC analyses have been performed 
    according to their Quality Assurance Program which demonstrate 
    compliance with these NRC approved fuel design criteria. Thus, the 
    ATRIUMTM-10 fuel will maintain its structural integrity during 
    core loading.
        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 changes to the Unit 2 Technical Specifications discussed in 
    Item 1 above (Design Features and inclusion of the mechanical design 
    methodology reference) will allow loading of ATRIUM-10 fuel in 
    Operational Condition 5. The proposed change does not require any 
    physical plant modifications (other than the loading of the 
    ATRIUMTM-10 fuel), physically affect any plant components, or 
    entail changes in plant operation. Therefore, the proposed change 
    will not jeopardize or degrade the function or operation of any 
    plant system or component governed by Technical Specifications. The 
    analyses performed provide assurance that the ATRIUMTM-10 fuel 
    will remain subcritical during storage and core loading and meets 
    the requirements of Technical Specification 5.6 and, thus, an 
    equivalent margin of safety is maintained.
        ATRIUMTM-10 fuel assemblies have approximately the same 
    weight, outer dimensions, and the same basic bail handle design as 
    9 x 9-2 fuel assemblies and are handled in the same manner as 9 x 9-
    2 fuel assemblies. The dose consequences of the Fuel and Equipment 
    Handling Accidents are not increased and, thus, an equivalent margin 
    of safety is maintained.
        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 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, 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 April 24, 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 Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
    Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 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 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.
    
    [[Page 14169]]
    
        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 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, Director, Project 
    Directorate I-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 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)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
        For further details with respect to this action, see the 
    application for amendment dated March 17, 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 Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
    Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of March 1997.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Chester Poslusny,
    Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 97-7507 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
03/25/1997
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
97-7507
Pages:
14167-14169 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 50-388
PDF File:
97-7507.pdf