[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 98 (Friday, May 21, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27824-27826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-13023]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-249]
Commonwealth 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.
DPR-25, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the licensee),
for operation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, located in
Grundy County, Illinois.
The proposed amendment would reduce the number of safety valves
required for overpressure protection at Dresden, Unit 3, by excluding
from Technical Specifications (TS) section 3.6.E the safety valve
function of the Target Rock safety/relief valve (SRV). The proposed
amendment would also move the safety valve lift pressure setpoints from
TS section 3.6.E to TS section 4.6.E.
This request for amendment was submitted under exigent
circumstances to prevent undue shutdown or derate of the unit due to
the safety valve function of the Target Rock safety/relief valve
becoming inoperable on May 3, 1999. The time necessary for ComEd to
develop this TS request would not allow the normal 30-day period for
public comment since ComEd had no prior knowledge of this
inoperability.
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. Does the change involve a significant increase in the
probability of occurrence or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
The probability of an evaluated accident is derived from the
probabilities of the individual precursors to that accident. The
consequences of an evaluated accident are determined by the operability
of plant systems designed to mitigate those consequences. Limits have
been established consistent with NRC-approved methods to ensure that
fuel performance during normal, transient, and accident conditions is
acceptable. The proposed change to permit operation with the Target
Rock valve safety function OOS (out of service) does not affect the
ability of plant systems to adequately mitigate the consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
This conclusion was derived by evaluating all applicable analyses
including thermal limit, ASME (American Society of Mechanical
Engineers) pressurization events, margin to unpiped safety valve,
anticipated transient analysis without scram, LOCA (loss of coolant
accident), station blackout, and Appendix R analyses. Therefore, there
is no increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated because the analyses support operation with the
Target Rock SRV safety function OOS.
2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Since the requested change has been previously evaluated, no new
precursors of an accident are created and no new or different kinds of
accidents are created. Therefore, the proposed change does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated.
This conclusion was derived by evaluating all applicable analyses
including thermal limit, ASME pressurization events, margin to unpiped
safety valve, anticipated transient analysis without scram events,
station blackout, and Appendix R analyses. Therefore, the proposed
change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated because the analyses
support operation with the Target Rock SRV safety function OOS.
3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety?
Allowing Dresden operation with the Target Rock SRV safety function
out of service will not involve any reduction in margin of safety. This
conclusion was derived by evaluating all existing analyses including
thermal limit, ASME pressurization events, margin to unpiped safety
valve, anticipated transient analysis without scram events, station
blackout, and Appendix R analyses. The analyses previously evaluated
remain valid and conservative. Thus there is no reduction in the margin
of safety.
Therefore, based upon the above evaluation, ComEd has concluded
that these changes do not constitute a significant hazards
consideration.
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 by close of business (4:15 p.m.
EDST) 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
[[Page 27825]]
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 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 June 21, 1999, 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 Morris Area Public Library District, 604
Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450. 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, US 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 Ms. Pamela B. Stroebel, Senior Vice President and
General Counsel, Commonwealth Edison Company, P.O. Box 767, Chicago,
Illinois 60690-0767, 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 May 5, 1999, 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 Morris Area Public Library District, 604
Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of May 1999.
[[Page 27826]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lawrence W. Rossbach,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate III, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-13023 Filed 5-20-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
