[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49137-49139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-24568]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-305]
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation; Wisconsin Power and Light
Company; Madison Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-43
issued to Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Wisconsin Power and
Light Company, Madison Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) for
operation of the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant located in Kewaunee
County, WI.
The proposed amendment would reduce the maximum allowable level of
reactor coolant system (RCS) specific activity (dose equivalent Iodine-
131). This change is based on Generic Letter 95-05, and, as described
therein, provides a means of accepting higher projected leak rates for
steam generator tubes while still meeting offsite and control room dose
criteria. The proposed amendment also includes a change to the
secondary coolant activity level for which an increased sampling
frequency applies. The latter change is consistent with a previously
approved amendment. These changes were previously noticed (63FR25119)
and are being renoticed because the licensee has revised the
application so as to further reduce the RCS specific activity limit.
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; (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 change was reviewed in accordance with the
provisions of 10 CFR 50.92 to show no significant hazards exist. The
proposed change will not:
(1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequence of an accident previously evaluated.
The change implements a more restrictive reactor coolant system
(RCS) activity limit. Specific RCS activity is an initial plant
condition and, therefore, is not an accident initiator and can not
cause the occurrence of or increase the probability of an accident.
The change also lowers the curve of Figure TS 3.1-3 which restricts
operation with high specific activity. The new value for specific
activity is justified by the Westinghouse calculation which
demonstrates acceptable offsite and control room doses following a
main steam line break (MSLB) with a maximum allowable primary to
secondary leak rate. By lowering the RCS specific activity and
maintaining leakage within the projected maximum allowable, 10 CFR
100 and GDC 19 criteria are satisfied. Therefore, the change does
not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
(2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed change to the RCS specific activity limit will not
significantly affect operation of the plant nor will it alter the
configuration of the plant. There will be no additional challenges
to the main steam system or the reactor coolant system pressure
boundary and no new failure modes are introduced. Therefore, the
proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or
[[Page 49138]]
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
(3) Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
Reduction of the RCS specific activity limit allows an increase
in the MSLB allowable primary to secondary leakage. The net effect
is no reduction in the margin of safety provided by 10 CFR 100 and
GDC 19 criteria. The maximum allowable leakage is the leakage limit
for projected steam generator (SG) leakage following SG tube
inspection and repair. Reducing specific activity to increase
projected leak rate follows guidance given by GL 95-05 and
effectively takes margin available in the specific activity limits
and applies it to the projected SG leak rate. This has been
determined to be an acceptable means for accepting higher projected
leak rates while still meeting the applicable limits of 10 CFR 100
and GDC 19 criteria with respect to offsite and control room doses.
Additionally, monitoring of the specific activity and compliance
with the required actions remains unchanged. Therefore, the proposed
change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of
safety.
For consistency, the value of secondary coolant activity for
which an increased sampling frequency applies, is being corrected
from 1.0 microcurie/gram to 0.1 microcurie/gram. This is consistent
with a previously submitted and approved amendment, therefore, no
significant hazards exist for this change.
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 October 14, 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 University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Library,
2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, WI 54311-7001. 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.
[[Page 49139]]
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 Bradley D. Jackson, Esq., Foley and
Lardner, P.O. Box 1497, Madison, WI 53701-1497, 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 April 8, 1998, as modified by letter
dated August 27, 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 University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Library, 2420 Nicolet Drive, Green
Bay, WI 54311-7001.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of September 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William O. Long,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-24568 Filed 9-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
