[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 158 (Monday, August 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43965-43967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22082]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306]
Northern States Power Company; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-42 and DPR-
60; Proposed no Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and
Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-
42 and DPR-60 issued to Northern States Power Company (the licensee)
for operation of the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1
and 2, located in Goodhue County, Minnesota.
The proposed amendments would allow a design modification to the
existing Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS) Mitigation System
Actuation Circuitry (AMSAC). The
[[Page 43966]]
design modification would install a Diverse Scram System (DSS) designed
to meet the requirements of a DSS described by 10 Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) 50.62 (ATWS Rule) for non-Westinghouse designed
plants and make major modifications to the existing AMSAC.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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 amendments 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 operation of the facility with the proposed amendment[s]
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an accident previously evaluated?
The proposed changes affect two systems which are contributors
to initiating events for previously evaluated anticipated
operational occurrences. These systems are rod control and turbine
generator. The AMSAC also affects the auxiliary feedwater system.
The interaction of the AMSAC/DSS with these systems will not
significantly increase the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
The addition of another means of initiating a signal to cause
rods to drop into the core introduces an increased probability for
an RCCA [rod cluster control assembly] Misalignment event (USAR
[Updated Safety Analysis Report section] 14.4.3). Because the AMSAC/
DSS circuitry has been designed to minimize spurious actuations,
this increased probability is not significant. In addition, because
the AMSAC/DSS circuitry is designed to provide a signal to each rod
control power cabinet resulting in the cancellation of gripper coil
current for all rods powered from that cabinet, the probability of
dropping a single rod of sufficiently small worth not to trigger the
negative rate reactor trip is not significant. Previous analysis has
indicated that more than one rod dropping into the core at the same
time will trigger the negative rate reactor trip.
The addition of another means of initiating a signal to cause a
turbine trip introduces an increased probability for an event nearly
identical to a Loss of External Electrical Load event (USAR 14.4.9).
Because the AMSAC/DSS circuitry has been designed to minimize
spurious actuations, this increased probability is not significant.
The addition of another means of initiating a signal to start
auxiliary feedwater flow to the steam generators introduces an
increased probability for an event similar to an Excessive Heat
Removal Due to Feedwater System Malfunction event (USAR 14.4.6)
though greatly reduced in magnitude. Because the flow capacity of
the auxiliary feedwater system is much less than the flow capacity
of the main feedwater system, the consequences of any spurious
actuation of the auxiliary feedwater system are bounded by the
Feedwater System Malfunction event. In addition, because the AMSAC/
DSS circuitry has been designed to minimize spurious actuations the
increased probability of this ``event of negligible consequence'' is
not significant.
2. Does operation of the facility with the proposed amendment[s]
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from
any accident previously evaluated?
The AMSAC/DSS is an instrumentation system that is separated and
isolated from the reactor protection system. The AMSAC/DSS may
initiate a spurious signal which results in tripping the turbine
generator, dropping some or all control rods into the core, starting
auxiliary feedwater flow to the steam generators, or any combination
of these events. Individually and in combination these events are
well understood and have been previously analyzed. Review of this
modification does not indicate that it will create the possibility
for a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does operation of the facility with the proposed amendment[s]
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Deterministic analyses have demonstrated that the proposed
AMSAC/DSS will preserve all safety margins inherent in the fuel
cladding and the RCS [reactor coolant system] boundary during
postulated ATWS events.
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
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 Minneapolis Public Library, Technology and
Science Department, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401. 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
[[Page 43967]]
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 close of business on 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 Jay Silberg,
Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20037, 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 February 27, 1998, as supplemented July
14, 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
Minneapolis Public Library, Technology and Science Department, 300
Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of August 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tae Kim,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-22082 Filed 8-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
