98-11120. Pennsylvania Power and Light Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 63, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 1998)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 20665-20667]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 98-11120]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    [Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388]
    
    
    Pennsylvania Power and Light Company; Notice of Consideration of 
    Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No 
    Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a 
    Hearing
    
        The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
    
    [[Page 20666]]
    
    considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
    NPF-14 and NPF-22 issued to Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (the 
    licensee) for operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 
    Units 1 and 2, located in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.
        (3.p.) The proposed amendment would revise the frequency of 
    Technical Specifications (TSs) surveillance requirement (SR) for rod 
    worth minimizer (RWM) channel functional test.
        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. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
    probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
        The proposed changes eliminate the requirement that SRs be 
    completed at an interval shorter than the normal Surveillance Frequency 
    just prior to the start of a special activity in Modes 4 or 5 such as 
    fuel handling, control rod withdrawal or removal, or control rod drive 
    removal. These changes will not result in a significant increase in the 
    probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because 
    there is no change to the requirement that the conditions verified by 
    the SR be met throughout the special activity. Additionally, the 
    Surveillance continues to be performed at the normal Frequency and the 
    normal Surveillance Frequency has been shown, based on operating 
    experience, to be adequate for assuring that required conditions are 
    established and maintained. This change is consistent with both SSES 
    CTS 4.0.4 and SSES ITS SR 3.0.4 which requires that a surveillance be 
    performed within the required frequency prior to entering the 
    applicable Mode or Condition. SSES ITS [Improved TS] still requires 
    that if any Surveillance has not been performed within this interval or 
    is determined not to meet the Surveillance Requirement during the 
    activity, the special activity may not be performed or must be stopped 
    if in progress. This ensures the Surveillance Requirements are 
    adequately checked prior to and during these activities.
        2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different 
    kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
        This proposed change will not involve any physical changes to plant 
    systems, structures, or components (SSC). The changes in normal plant 
    operation are consistent with the current safety analysis assumptions. 
    Therefore, this change will not create the possibility of a new or 
    different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
        3. Does this change involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
    safety?
        This change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
    safety because there is no change to the requirement that the 
    conditions verified by the SR be met throughout the special activity. 
    Additionally, the Surveillance continues to be performed at its normal 
    Frequency and the normal Surveillance Frequency has been shown, based 
    on operating experience, to be adequate for assuring that conditions 
    are established or that equipment is available and capable of 
    performing its intended safety function. SSES ITS still requires that 
    if any Surveillance has not been performed within this interval or is 
    determined not to meet the Surveillance Requirement during the 
    activity, the special activity may not be performed or must be stopped 
    if in progress. This ensures the Surveillance Requirements are 
    adequately checked prior to and during these activities.
        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 6D59, 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 May 27, 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 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
    
    [[Page 20667]]
    
    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 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 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 August 1, 1996, 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 21st day of February 1998.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Bartholomew C. Buckley,
    Acting Director, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 98-11120 Filed 4-24-98; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
04/27/1998
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
98-11120
Pages:
20665-20667 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388
PDF File:
98-11120.pdf