[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4296]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: February 25, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318]

 

Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.; Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendments 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 amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
DPR-53 and DPR-69 issued to Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (the 
licensee) for operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 
Nos. 1 and 2, located in Calvert County, Maryland.
    The proposed amendments would allow the removal of an orifice plate 
in the containment vent/purge line to allow greater flow through the 
line. The restoration of full flow capability will result in less time 
required to vent the containment. A reanalysis of the maximum 
hypothetical accident, as currently described in the Update Final 
Safety Analysis Report, was performed to support the requested 
amendments. The results of the reanalysis indicate that the 
consequences of the accident previously analyzed would be increased. 
Although the consequences result in an increase in the fission product 
release, the total doses are well within the limits of 10 CFR part 100, 
``Factors to be considered when evaluating sites.''
    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 
amendments 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. Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or
    This proposed change does not involve an increase in the 
probability of an accident previously evaluated. The removal of the 
orifice plate will decrease the amount of time the containment vent/
hydrogen purge line is open to accomplish containment venting. This 
decreases the probability of occurrence of a maximum hypothetical 
accident while venting. In addition, this proposed change would not 
affect any precursors to any of the accidents in the Updated Final 
Safety Analysis Report.
    However, this proposed change does involve an increase in the 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated. In the worst case 
event, a maximum hypothetical accident, the exclusion area whole 
body dose and the low population zone thyroid and whole body doses 
increased above the previously approved doses. This increase is not 
significant. In fact, the offsite doses presented here are similar 
to those reported in the NRC's Safety Evaluation Report [Safety 
Evaluation of the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company's Calvert 
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, dated August 28, 
1972]. Other accident scenarios were evaluated to determine if this 
change would impact them as well. No other accident scenario is 
impacted by this change. Therefore, removal of the orifice plate in 
the containment vent/hydrogen purge line 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 type of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated; or
    The proposed change affects a previously evaluated accident, but 
creates no new or different type of accident. The equipment required 
to mitigate the consequences of an accident would continue to be 
operable. We are not proposing to alter the function of any 
equipment or have it operate differently than it was designed to 
operate. In fact, we are restoring the containment vent/hydrogen 
purge line to full flow capability by removal of an orifice plate. 
Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new or 
different type of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The margin of safety defined by 10 CFR Part 100 has not been 
significantly reduced. There will be an increase in the exclusion 
area and low population zone doses, but the total dose is still 
significantly less than the guidelines given in 10 CFR Part 100. 
Additionally, the NRC has previously calculated offsite dose for 
Calvert Cliffs [Safety Evaluation of the Baltimore Gas and Electric 
Company's Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, 
dated August 28, 1992] using assumptions similar to those used for 
the analysis performed in support of this request. The NRC's results 
are similar to those obtained from our calculations. The increase in 
dose does not affect any conclusions stated in the NRC's SER. 
Therefore, the margin of safety has not been significantly reduced.

    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 
amendments 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 amendments 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 amendments before the expiration 
of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is 
that the amendments involve 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 page number 
of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered 
to Room P-223, Phillips Buildings, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, 
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 of hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By March 28, 1994, the licensee may file a request for a hearing 
with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility 
operating licenses 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 Calvert County Library, Prince 
Frederick, Maryland 20678. 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 petition 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 amendments 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 amendments request involves 
no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the 
amendments and make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendments.
    If the final determination is that the amendments request involves 
a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place 
before the issuance of any amendments.
    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 Robert A. Capra, Director, Project 
Directorate I-1: 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. Silbert, 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 the amendments dated November 4, 1993, 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 Calvert County 
Library, Prince Frederick, Maryland 20678.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of February.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Daniel G. McDonald,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-4296 Filed 2-24-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M