[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43391-43393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21403]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249]
Commonwealth Edison Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance
of Amendment to Facility Operating Licenses, 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 Nos.
DPR-19 and DPR-25 issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (the licensee)
for operation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3,
respectively, located in Grundy County, Illinois.
The proposed amendment would delay the implementation of an
amendment issued on June 28, 1996. The implementation of the June 28,
1996, license amendment was scheduled to take place 90 days after
issuance of the amendment, prior to September 26, 1996. The amendment
was the last in a series of amendments issued as part of the licensee's
Technical Specification Upgrade Program (TSUP). Both Dresden units have
been in forced maintenance outages and, as a result, the licensee has
not been able to implement all of the Technical Specifications
associated with the TSUP program.
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 schedule changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated because:
In general, the Technical Specification provisions approved
under TSUP represent the conversion of current requirements to a
more generic format, or the addition of requirements which are based
on the current safety analysis. The delay of implementation of TSUP
will result in delay in the incorporation of provisions that provide
increased reliability of equipment assumed to operate in the current
safety analysis, or provide continued assurance that specified
parameters remain within their acceptance limits. A deferral in the
implementation of the TSUP will not result in alteration of the
precursors associated with the transients and accidents that the
current technical specifications and TSUP are based on. Therefore,
the deferral of TSUP implementation does not significantly increase
the probability or consequences of a previously evaluated accident.
Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any previously evaluated because:
In general, the Technical Specification provisions approved
under TSUP represent the conversion of current requirements to a
more generic format, or the addition of requirements which are based
on the current safety analysis. TSUP provisions also represent minor
curtailments of the current requirements which are based on generic
guidance or previously approved provisions for other licensees. The
changes to the Technical Specification approved under TSUP have not
required design changes to the plant nor will the deferral of TSUP
result in the creation of any design changes to Dresden Station. No
new modes of equipment operation are introduced by the deferral of
TSUP implementation. The deferral of TSUP implementation will
maintain at least the present level of operability.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety because:
Some individual changes under TSUP included the adoption of new
requirements which will provide enhancement of the
[[Page 43392]]
reliability of the equipment assumed to operate in the safety
analysis, or provide enhanced assurance that specified parameters
remain with their acceptance limits. The deferral of TSUP
implementation will result in delay of realization of the addition
of the enhanced provisions, but in no way creates an inadequacy of
the current Technical Specifications to maintain the existing margin
of safety. The margin of safety in the current Technical
Specifications is adequate and is not reduced by the deferral of
TSUP.
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
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 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 September 23, 1996, 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 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: 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
[[Page 43393]]
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: 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 20555-0001, and to
Michael I. Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, One First National
Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60603, 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 August 16, 1996, 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 19th day of August 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert M. Pulsifer,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2 Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-21403 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
