[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26574-26576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12596]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311]
Public Service Electric and Gas 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.
DPR-70 and DPR-75 issued to Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the
licensee) for operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1
and 2, located in Salem County, New Jersey.
The proposed amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS)
3.5.2 to eliminate the flow path from the residual heat removal (RHR)
system to the reactor coolant system (RCS) hot legs that is specified
in Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.5.2.c.2.
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. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change involves removing the RHR hot leg injection
flow path (RH26 valve) during the hot leg recirculation phase of
accident mitigation. There are no physical plant modifications being
made as a result of the proposed changes and no new accident
initiators are created by the proposed changes. This change only
involves a system used for ECCS [emergency core cooling system]
accident mitigation and is consistent with the flow requirement
assumptions made in the safety analysis for hot leg recirculation.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
Removal of the RHR hot leg injection flow path does not impact
the ability of the ECCS to mitigate the consequences of an accident
but clarifies the flow paths in the ECCS that are required to meet
the accident analysis. Operation of one Intermediate Head Safety
Injection (IHSI) pump during hot leg recirculation continues to
provide adequate core cooling flow such that the hot leg flow
directly from the RHR system is not required. Therefore, the
proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the
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 proposed change to LCO 3.5.2.c.2 does not involve any
physical changes to the plant components, systems, or structures.
This change does not affect the ability of the Emergency Core
Cooling System to meet the flow required in the accident analysis to
remove core decay heat without creating superheated steam during hot
leg recirculation. There are no new failure modes introduced as a
result of the proposed change
[[Page 26575]]
since the RH26 valve will remain in the closed position with power
to the valve removed during operation in Modes 1--3 as required by
TS surveillance requirement 4.5.2.a.1.e and will remain in the
closed position following a LOCA [loss-of-coolant accident] in Modes
1--3. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety.
Hot leg recirculation occurs approximately 14 hours into the
accident. At this time, the RCS pressure is at equilibrium with the
containment pressure, which is conservatively assumed to be at 25.0
psig. At this pressure, the enthalpy of saturated steam is 1160.1
BTU/lbm, and of saturated liquid is 208.52 BTU/lbm. Decay heat
generation at this time is 24,540 BTU/sec. Therefore, the required
hot leg injection flowrate to prevent superheat is 24,540/(1160.1-
208.52)--25.77 lbm/sec. The flow delivered by one Intermediate Head
Safety Injection (IHSI) pump to two hot legs is 76.03 lbm/sec at a
backpressure of 25.0 psig. For the break locations considered for
long-term transients, nearly all of this flow will enter the vessel
and will be available to cool the core. Additional cooling will be
provided by simultaneous cold leg injection flow. Therefore,
sufficient injection flow exists to prevent superheat and the change
to the hot leg recirculation does not affect the LOCA mass and
energy of containment integrity calculation.
With the elimination of the RCS hot leg flow path, the ECCS
system will continue to meet the limiting design basis hot leg flow
requirement assuming a single failure which can result in operation
of a single IHSI pump aligned for hot leg recirculation.
Therefore, the proposed change does not reduce the margin of
safety since the accident analysis flow requirements and design
basis single failure requirements continue to be met for hot leg
recirculation.
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 20555-0001, 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 June 13, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West
Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. 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 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
[[Page 26576]]
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: 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 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston
and Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005-3502, 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 April 25, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West
Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of May, 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Leonard N. Olshan,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-12596 Filed 5-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
