[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 158 (Monday, August 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43964-43965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22080]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-423]
Northeast Nuclear Energy 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.
NPF-49 issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (the licensee) for
operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, located in New
London County, Connecticut.
The latest Millstone Unit No. 3 steam generator tube inspection
began on September 24, 1996, and was complete on October 1, 1996. The
inspection results placed the steam generators in category C-2.
Technical Specification Surveillance 4.4.5.3.a establishes an allowable
inspection interval of 24 calendar months. Without an extension of the
interval, Millstone Unit No. 3 must shut down prior to September 24,
1998. This proposed amendment would request a one-time extension to the
surveillance interval until the next refueling outage.
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:
The proposed revision does not involve a [significant hazards
consideration] because the revision would not:
1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequence of an accident previously evaluated.
This proposed revision to Technical Specification 4.4.5.3.a for
a one time extension to the surveillance interval until the next
refueling outage will not increase the potential to impact steam
generator tube integrity by allowing a steam generator tube to be
degraded and go undetected. The only active damage mechanism,
affecting the steam generator tubes is vibration wear adjacent to an
antivibration bar that occurs during power operation. Since this
surveillance interval extension will not increase the actual plant
operating time, the vibration wear will not be increased. If there
is no increase in tube degradation, there will be no increase in the
probability of occurrence or consequence of a Steam Generator Tube
Rupture. The failure of a Steam Generator tube is evaluated within
Final Safety Analyses Report Section 15.6.3 and fully bounds this
proposed surveillance interval extension.
Thus it is concluded that the proposed revision does not involve
a significant increase in the probability or consequence of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
This proposed revision to the surveillance interval does not
change the operation of any plant system or component during normal
or accident conditions. The Final Safety Analyses Report evaluation
for a failure of a Steam Generator tube bounds this proposed
surveillance interval extension.
Thus, this does not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed revision to Technical Specification 4.4.5.3.a for a
one time extension to the surveillance interval until the next
refueling outage will not deviate from the guidance of Reg
[Regulatory] Guide 1.121. The active damage mechanism resulting in
Steam Generator tube degradation currently experienced at Millstone
Unit No. 3 has been primarily anti-vibration bar wear and is
dependent on power operation. Since this extension will not increase
the actual plant operating time, the vibration wear will not be
increased.
Thus, it is concluded that the proposed revision does not
involve a significant reduction in a 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
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 September 16, 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
[[Page 43965]]
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 Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers
Community-Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich,
Connecticut, and at the Waterford Library, ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope
Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut. 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 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 Lillian M. Cuoco, Esq., Senior
Nuclear Counsel, Northeast Utilities Service Company, P.O. Box 270,
Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270, 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)(l)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated August 6, 1998, 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 Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers
Community-Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich,
Connecticut, and at the Waterford Library, ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope
Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of August 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Stephen Dembek,
Project Manager, Special Projects Office--Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-22080 Filed 8-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
