[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27798-27800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12850]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-295]
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-39, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the licensee),
for operation of the Zion Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, located in
Lake County, Illinois.
The proposed amendment would add a provision to the Technical
Specifications (TS) to permit continued operation of Zion, Unit 1, with
154 steam generator tubes in service which potentially exceed the 40
percent through-wall repair or plugging criteria. The 154 tubes were
identified as possibly exceeding the repair or plugging criteria as a
result of the application of a revised flaw disposition guideline for
test results retained from previous Zion, Unit 1, steam generator
inspections. The proposed change consists of a footnote added to the TS
which states that the 154 affected steam generator tubes may remain in
service until initial entry into Mode 5, Cold Shutdown, for the
refueling outage that is currently scheduled to begin in September
1995.
In 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6), it specifies that the Commission may, where
exigent circumstances exist, allow less than 30 days for public
comment. Exigent circumstances have been found to exist for this
proposed amendment. The licensee identified concerns in late 1994
associated with the methodology for the disposition of some detected
indications from eddy current testing performed on Zion steam generator
tubes. Revised flaw disposition guidelines were developed and applied
to test results retained from previous Zion, Unit 1, steam generator
inspections. The application of the revised guidelines resulted in the
identification of 154 steam generator tubes which could potentially
exceed the plugging or repair criteria specified in TS 4.3.1.B.4.A.6
(imperfection depth of greater than or equal to 40 percent of the
nominal tube wall thickness). On May 16, 1995, the licensee determined
that the uncertainty regarding compliance with TS 3.4.3.1.B required a
unit shutdown in accordance with TS 3.0.3. The licensee requested and
was granted a Notice of Enforcement Discretion (NOED) verbally on May
16, 1995. The written request for the NOED and a request for a license
amendment was submitted on May 17, 1995. In order to restore licensee
compliance with TS as quickly as possible and maintain public
participation in the license amendment process as much as practical,
the staff is exercising the exigent provisions of 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6).
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 changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of occurrence of any accident
previously evaluated.
The Main Steamline Break is the bounding event for secondary
system depressurization. The sequence of events which are necessary
precursors to the catastrophic steam line failure are external to
the Steam Generators and is unaffected by the fact that Steam
Generator tubes with known indications located deep within the tube
sheet crevice were allowed to remain in service. There is no
credible manner in which the condition of the tubes deep within the
tube sheet crevice of the Steam Generator can influence the
integrity of the Main Steamline.
The probability that a tube rupture will occur is not increased
because the indications of interest are constrained deep within the
tube sheet crevice. Due to the fact that the degradation mechanism
has been characterized as inner diameter (I.D.) PWSCC and that they
are located deep within the tube sheet crevice, the failure
probability (i.e. tube rupture) is not increased. Thus, the
probability of tube rupture for these indications is taken to the
zero. With no possibility of the tubes of interest rupturing due to
the indications constrained within the tube sheet area, there is no
increase in the probability of occurrence that a tube rupture event
will occur.
No significant increase in offsite dose consequences have been
postulated for the Steamline Break transient. In order to
characterize the impact of an event which would involve a limiting
Main Steamline Break coincident with the maximum credible leakage
from all affected tubes, a dose evaluation has been performed and
compared to the typical acceptance criteria of a small fraction
(10%) of the guidelines set forth in 10 CFR 100. The
evaluation performed is described in detail in Enclosure 6 [Letter
from T. Simpkin (ComEd) to Document Control Desk (NRC) dated May 17,
1995] of this request and assumed the following occurrences:
--Failure of a main streamline outside of containment,
--Bounding leakage of 0.5 GPM per tube for 154 tubes, and
--The calculation assumes a 2 hour release.
When the RCS iodine limit is administratively constrained to
0.06 uCi/cc, the thyroid dose is calculated to be just under 30 Rem
thyroid, which is still a small percentage of 10 CFR 100 limits.
Thus, the consequences of an accident previously analyzed are not
significantly increased.
2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed changes do not add new or different types of plant
equipment nor do they alter any plant procedures used during
recovery from accidents described in the analysis. Installed
equipment is not being [[Page 27799]] operated in a new or different
manner. No new failure mechanisms are created by this change.
Because no change is being made to the initiating mechanisms of an
accident, and no equipment or procedural changes are involved, the
proposed LAR does not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety.
The margin of safety for allowable tube degradation is based on
a conservative allowance for eddy current uncertainty and a high
confidence level that sufficient tube wall thickness remains to
operate until the next scheduled inspection period with an
acceptably low risk of tube failure. The indications of interest are
characterized as I.D. PWSCC located at the roll transition nominally
18.25 inches deep in the tube sheet crevice. Past inspections
indicate that any crack growth will be into the rolled portion of
the tube. The recent operating history of Unit 1, both in the lack
of primary-to-secondary leakage and the stable behavior of the tubes
in service, provides confidence that sufficient structural integrity
exists to support at least the additional four months of power
operation. Thus, the margin of safety has not been adversely
impacted.
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 15 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 15-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 15-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 Rules Review and
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, 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 26, 1995, 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 Waukegan Public Library, 128 North County
Street, Waukegan, Illinois 60085. 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. 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. [[Page 27800]]
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, 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 Robert A. Capra, Director, Project Directorate
III-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, and to Michael I. Miller, Esquire; Sidley and
Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60690, 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 17, 1995, 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 Waukegan Public Library, 128 North County
Street, Waukegan, Illinois 60085.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of May 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Reckley,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-12850 Filed 5-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
