[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 189 (Friday, September 30, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24211]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: September 30, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-352/50-353]
Philadelphia Electric Company; 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 Nos.
NPF-39 and NPF-85 issued to Philadelphia Electric Company (the
licensee) for operation of the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and
2, located in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
The proposed amendment would extend the snubber functional testing
interval from 18-months (+/- 25%) to 24 months (+/- 25%), and to
increase the sample plan size from 10% to 13.3%.
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:
1. The proposed Technical Specifications (TS) changes do not
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed TS changes do not require any modifications to
plant systems, snubbers, or other plant equipment. The snubber will
continue to function as designed to mitigate the effects of
earthquakes and other dynamic transients (e.g., main turbine trip).
Extending the snubber functional testing interval from 18 months to
24 months ([greater than or equal to] 25%) and increasing the
initial sample size from 10% to 13.3%, as proposed, will continue to
maintain the same test scope ratio as that which currently exists
(i.e. 1.5 yr./interval [at] 10% snubbers/interval and 2 yr./interval
[at] 13.3% snubbers/interval results in approximately 100% of all
snubbers of a given type being tested within 15 years). The proposed
TS change will only affect the interval between functional tests and
the initial sample size population. As previously stated, LGS
currently uses the 10% plan for compensating struts only, and since
there are less than 10 struts per Unit, this proposed change will
have a negligible impact on the number of struts in the initial
sample size to be tested during a particular interval (i.e., each
refueling outage). All systems and equipment important to safety
that rely on snubbers will continue to function as designed.
Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not involve an increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed TS changes do not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed TS changes do not involve any physical changes to
plant systems or equipment. The snubbers will continue to function
as designed to mitigate the effects of earthquakes and other dynamic
transients (e.g., main turbine trip). Snubbers are not accident
initiators, and function to mitigate the effects of an accident. The
snubbers will continue to protect piping and equipment during
dynamic events. Extending the snubber functional testing interval
from 18 months to 24 months ([greater than or equal to] 25%) and
increasing the initial sample size from 10% to 13.3%, as proposed,
will continue to maintain the same test scope ratio as that which
currently exists in the TS. The proposed TS changes will continue to
ensure that approximately 100% of the snubbers of a given type are
tested within a 15-year period.
Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. The proposed TS changes do not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The bases for the TS require that all snubbers whose failure
could have an adverse effect on any safety-related systems, be
operable. This ensures that the structural integrity of the reactor
coolant system and other safety-related systems are maintained
during and following a seismic or other event initiating dynamic
loads. The bases also discuss clarification and grouping of the
general snubber population, snubber listing requirements, visual
inspection frequency, and visual acceptance criteria. The proposed
TS changes will provide for the same confidence level as that which
currently exists in TS for determining snubber operability. The
proposed TS changes will continue to maintain the same test scope
ratio as that currently provided in the TS. The 10% plan is used at
LGS for compensating struts only, and increasing initial sample size
to 13.3%, as proposed, will have a negligible effect on the number
of struts functionally tested during each interval. No other aspects
of the bases associated with snubber surveillance will be affected
by these proposed TS changes.
Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not involve a 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 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
20555.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By October 31, 1994, 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 20555 and at the local
public document room located at the Pottstown Public Library, 500 High
Street, Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464. 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, 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 20555, 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 Mohan C. Thadani (Acting): 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 J.W. Durham, Sr. V.P. and General Counsel, Philadelphia Electric
Company, 2301 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101, 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 September 16, 1994, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the
Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the
local public document room located at the Pottstown Public Library, 500
High Street, Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of September 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frank Rinaldi,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-24211 Filed 9-29-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
