[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 6, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36408-36409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-17017]
[[Page 36408]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-286]
Power Authority of the State of New York; 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.
DRP-64 issued to the Power Authority of the State of New York (the
licensee) for operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No.
3 (IP3) located in Westchester County, New York.
The proposed amendment would extend the allowed outage time (AOT)
for the 32 Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) and its Fuel Oil Storage
Tank (FOST) from 72 hours to 7 days on a one-time basis.
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 proposed License amendment involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated?
No. The proposed License amendment does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated. The EDGs and their associated fuel
oil systems are not part of any accident initiation; therefore,
there is no increase in the probability of an accident. At a
minimum, two EDGs are still available with sufficient fuel oil
supply to mitigate IP3 design basis accidents. The minimum
safeguards equipment can still be powered even if the 32 EDG is
assumed to be lost due to single failure. This has been verified by
EDG loading calculation, IP3-CALC-ED-00207, ``480V Bus 2A, 3A, 5A &
6A and EDGs 31,32 and 33 Accident Loading.'' With the 32 EDG
available and aligned for automatic start capability (although
declared inoperable) during this 32-FOST outage, further backup to
the 31 and 33 EDGs is provided. By the design of the overall EDG
fuel oil system, the 32 EDG fuel oil day tank is able to be supplied
with sufficient fuel oil supply from either the 31 or 33 FOSTs in
order to support operation of the 32 EDG, if necessary.
To support fuel oil needs of all three EDGs, if necessary, the
FSAR [final safety analysis report] describes that additional fuel
oil supplies are available on the Indian Point site and locally near
the site. Further EDG fuel oil supplies are maintained in the New
Rochelle-Mount Vernon, NY area, about 40 miles from IP3. Overall,
the EDGs are designed as backup AC power sources in the event of a
Loss of Offsite Power (LOOP). The proposed AOT does not change the
conditions or minimum amount of safeguards equipment assumed in the
safety analysis for design basis accident mitigation, since a
minimum of 2 EDGs is assumed. No changes are proposed as to how the
EDGs provide plant protection. Additionally, no new modes of overall
plant operation are proposed as a result of this change. A PRA
[probabilistic risk assessment] evaluation determined that the
conditional core damage probability (CCDP) for this scenario will be
less than the threshold value of 1 E-6. Therefore, the proposed one-
time license amendment to TS [Technical Specification] 3.7.B.1 does
not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
(2) Does the proposed License amendment create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
No. The proposed TS change does not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated. The proposed change does not introduce any new overall
modes of plant operation or make any permanent physical changes to
plant systems necessary for effective accident mitigation. The
minimum required EDG operation remains unchanged by removal of this
single FOST [Fuel Oil Storage Tank] for repair. Additionally, added
requirements to minimize risk associated with loss of offsite power
also support this one-time extended AOT. Also, as previously stated,
the EDGs and FOSTs are not part of any accident initiation.
Therefore, the proposed one-time license amendment to TS 3.7.B.1
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
(3) Does the proposed License amendment involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety?
No. The proposed License amendment does not involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety. The minimum safeguards
loads can be maintained available if needed for design basis
accident mitigation with 2 EDGs operable combined with their
respective FOSTs. The 32 EDG will be available and aligned for
automatic start capability (though declared inoperable) during this
outage. The additional fuel oil needed to support 3 EDGs in this
condition is available as indicated in the present design and
licensing basis. The FSAR describes that this fuel can be provided
from the Indian Point site, local sources and from a source about 40
miles away to support the additional 30,026 gallons TS required fuel
oil already existing at the Buchanan substation. Therefore,
sufficient fuel oil will be available for potential events that
could occur during this 7-day AOT. The PRA evaluation for the case
of maintaining the 32 EDG available (though declared inoperable)
with its FOST out for repair indicates an acceptable safety margin
below the risk-informed threshold of 1E-6.
The 480VAC electrical distribution system can be fed from a
number of TS independent 13.8kV and 138kV offsite power sources to
minimize reliance of IP3 on EDG power sources during the extended
AOT requested. Additional requirements to minimize risk associated
with the potential for loss of offsite power sources within this TS
change also ensure that this extended AOT does not involve a
significant reduction in safety margin. On this basis, the proposed
one-time license amendment to TS 3.7.B.1 does not involve a
significant reduction in the 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 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
[[Page 36409]]
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 maybe 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 August 5, 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 White Plains Public Library, 100 Martine
Avenue, White Plains, New York, 10601. 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 ccontention 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 Mr. David E. Blabey, 10 Colombus
Circle, New York, New York, 10019, 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 June 4, 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 Whiite Plains Public Library, 100 Martine
Avenue, White Plains, New York, 10601.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of June 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George F. Wunder,
Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-17017 Filed 7-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
