[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 125 (Thursday, June 30, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-15941]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: June 30, 1994]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-295 and 50-304]

 

Commonwealth Edison Co.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant 
Hazards

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
DPR-39 and DPR-48, issued to the Commonwealth Edison Company (CECo, the 
licensee), for operation of the Zion Station, Units 1 and 2, located in 
Lake County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendments would consist primarily of an 
administrative change to the Zion Station's Technical Specifications 
(TSs) to reflect an exemption to 10 CFR part 50, appendix J, section 
III.D.3.
    The exemption from section III.D.3 of appendix J, which is 
schedular in nature, would authorize the licensee to defer, on a one 
time only basis, the Type C leak rate testing requirements for valves 
1(2)MOV-CC685 until the next refueling outage for each unit. NRC 
approval of this request would allow CECo continued operation of both 
units in full compliance with the operating license.
    Emergency circumstances existed in 1991, in that prior to that 
date, CECo was unaware of a number of penetrations and their associated 
valves, including 1(2)MOV-CC685, which had never been Type C leak rate 
tested in accordance with 10 CFR part 50, appendix J. On April 5, 1991, 
the NRC issued an Emergency Technical Specification Amendment (EMTSA) 
which allowed continued operation of Zion, Units 1 and 2, until their 
next refueling outages, at which time the required Type C leak rate 
tests for those penetrations were to be performed. The staff expected 
that 1(2)MOV-CC685 and the other penetrations would be subjected to the 
appropriate modifications and required testing performed, which would 
put Zion Station in compliance with the Type C testing requirement. 
However, on June 8, 1994, it was determined by Zion Station that the 
Type C leak rate testing requirement had inadvertently not been met for 
1(2)MOV-CC685. On June 13, 1994, the NRC issued a Notice of Enforcement 
Discretion (NOED) not to enforce compliance with the Technical 
Specification (TS) for Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 
pending submittal of a schedular exemption request to the requirements 
of 10 CFR part 50, appendix J, and a Technical Specification amendment 
request. The exigent nature of this request is necessary due to the 
identification of this issue after the completion of the Zion Station's 
refueling outage and startup operations and is required to be reviewed 
quickly by the staff to support an exemption request from the 
requirements to test in accordance with 10 CFR part 50, appendix J, for 
valves 1(2)MOV-CC685 until the next refueling outage for each unit. The 
exemption request was submitted by the licensee in another letter, also 
dated June 16, 1994.
    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.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6), for amendments to be granted under 
exigent circumstances the NRC staff must determine 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 amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability of occurrence or consequences of any 
accident previously evaluated.
    The subject pathway and associated containment isolation valves 
1(2)MOV-CC685and 1(2)MOV-CC9438 provide the necessary assurance to 
conclude that the overall containment leakage rates will remain 
within the limits assumed in the accident analysis. Failures in 
excess of design basis requirements would be necessary to adversely 
impact the offsite dose in the unlikely event of an accident. This 
conclusion can be reached since the isolation barriers of the 
Component Cooling Water return from the reactor coolant pumps' 
thermal barriers meet the following criteria:

--are of seismic design,
--are required to operate post accident (except for large break 
LOCA),
--the valves close automatically on Phase B isolation signal,
--are subject to Emergency Operating Procedure guidance for manual 
IVSW system actuation,
--are of similar design and exposed to similar environments as those 
penetrations that are Type C leak tested,

    As such, the consequences of previously evaluated accidents, with 
respect to offsite dose considerations, would not be significantly 
impacted.
    2. The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed.
    The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications do not result 
in plant operations or configurations that could create a new or 
different type of accident. Installed plant equipment is not operated 
in a new or different manner. The proposed amendment does not add new 
or different types of plant equipment nor do the proposed changes alter 
any plant procedures used during recovery from accidents described in 
the analysis. As such, it can be concluded that the possibility for a 
new or different type of accident has not been introduced.
    3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety.
    As described in Technical Specification Bases, dose calculations 
suggest that the public exposure would be well below the 10 CFR 100 
values in the event of a design basis accident.
    Calculations indicate that the accident leak rate could be allowed 
to increase to approximately 0.148%/day before the guidance thyroid 
[dose] value given in 10 CFR 100 would be exceeded. However, the 0.1%/
day pre-operational test acceptance criteria provides an adequate 
margin of safety to assure the health and safety of the public. 
Additional margin is achieved by establishing the allowable operational 
leakage rate at 0.075%/day. The measured containment leakage rates are 
well within that limit. Despite the lack of Type C testing of the 
subject valves in strict compliance with appendix J, substantial 
barriers to fission product release are provided by the intact system 
piping and associated valves.
    Testing that has been completed on the subject valves and 
penetrations provides a high degree of confidence that Type C leakage 
limits would be met. Based on this it is concluded that the proposed 
changes to the Technical Specifications do not involve a significant 
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 15 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 15-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 15-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. 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, 11555 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 August 1, 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 20555 and at the local public 
document room located at the Waukegan Public Library, 128 N. County 
Street, Waukegan, Illinois 60085. 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 a 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 
respects 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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day 
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the 
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is 
requested, 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 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, and to Michael I. 
Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, 
Illinois 60690, 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 date June 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 Waukegan Public Library, 128 N. County 
Street, Waukegan, Illinois 60085.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of June 1994.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert A. Capra,
Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor Projects--III/IV, Office 
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-15941 Filed 6-29-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M