95-21033. Toledo Edison Company; Centerior Service Company; The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed no Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and ...  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 164 (Thursday, August 24, 1995)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 44090-44092]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-21033]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    [[Page 44091]]
    
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket No. 50-346]
    
    
    Toledo Edison Company; Centerior Service Company; The Cleveland 
    Electric Illuminating 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-3 issued to the Toledo Edison Company, Centerior Service Company, 
    and The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (the licensees) for 
    operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, located 
    in Ottawa County, Ohio.
        The proposed amendment would modify Technical Specification (TS) 3/
    4.7.5.1, Ultimate Heat Sink, which presently requires that the ultimate 
    heat sink (UHS) average water temperature be less than or equal to 85 
    deg.F during plant operating Modes 1 through 4. The proposed amendment 
    would require an UHS average water temperature of less than or equal to 
    90  deg.F during plant operating Modes 1 through 4.
        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:
    
        Toledo Edison has reviewed the proposed changes and determined 
    that a significant hazards consideration does not exist because 
    operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, in 
    accordance with these changes would:
        1a. Not involve a significant increase in the probability of an 
    accident previously evaluated because no accident initiators, 
    conditions, or assumptions are significantly affected by the 
    proposed change. The proposed change does not result in the 
    operation of equipment important to safety outside their acceptable 
    operating range.
        1b. Not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an 
    accident previously evaluated because the proposed change does not 
    change the source term, containment isolation, or allowable 
    releases.
        2. Not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
    accident from any accident previously evaluated because no new 
    accident initiators or assumptions are introduced by the proposed 
    change. The proposed change does not result in installed equipment 
    being operated in a manner outside its design operating range. No 
    new or different equipment failure modes or mechanisms are 
    introduced by the proposed change.
        3. Not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety 
    because the proposed change is not a significant change to the 
    initial conditions contributing to accident severity or 
    consequences, consequently there are no significant reductions 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 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 September 25, 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 University of Toledo Library, Documents 
    Department, 2801 Bancroft Avenue, Toledo, Ohio. 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 
    
    [[Page 44092]]
    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, 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 Gail H. Marcus: 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 Jay E. Silberg, 
    Esquire, 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 August 18, 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 University of Toledo Library, Documents 
    Department, 2801 Bancroft Avenue, Toledo, Ohio.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of August 1995.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Linda L. Gundrum,
    Project Manager, Project Directorate III-3, Division of Reactor 
    Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 95-21033 Filed 8-23-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
08/24/1995
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
95-21033
Pages:
44090-44092 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 50-346
PDF File:
95-21033.pdf