[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18860-18862]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9141]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324]
Carolina Power & Light 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 Nos.
DPR-71 and DPR-62 issued to the Carolina Power & Light Company (the
licensee) for operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1
and 2 (BSEP) located in Southport, North Carolina.
The proposed amendment would provide an exception to Technical
Specification (TS) 3.0.4. TS 3.0.4 allows entry of a unit into another
operational condition only if the conditions of the Limiting Conditions
for Operation (LCOs) are met without reliance on TS action statements.
The exception requested by the licensee would allow a change in a
unit's operational condition in a specific situation in which the
unit's LCO concerning the minimum number of operable offsite power
circuits is not fully satisfied. Specifically, the exception would
allow an operational mode change of a unit if the second unit is in
Operational Condition 4 or 5 (i.e., cold shutdown or refueling) and one
of the second unit's offsite power circuits is inoperable.
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 amendments do not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated. The proposed change would allow one unit to transition
through Operational Conditions 3, 2, and 1 to full power with the
opposite unit in Operation Condition 4 or 5 and one off-site power
circuit out of service. The current specification allows one unit to
operate for up to 45 days with the other unit shutdown and one of
the shutdown unit's off-site power circuits unavailable.
A significant level of redundancy of AC sources remains, even
with one of the shutdown unit's off-site circuits unavailable. If
the shutdown unit's remaining offsite circuit were to fail during
the restart of the other unit, some of the operating unit's
components that receive AC power from the shutdown unit's emergency
buses and their functions would be unavailable until power is
restored to the emergency buses by the emergency diesel generators.
For example, with Unit 1 shutdown and Unit 2 transitioning through
startup to full power operation, the Unit 2 components fed by
Emergency Buses E1 and E2 that would be temporarily unavailable on a
loss of both Unit 1 off-site circuits include 2 of the 4 drywell
coolers (4 of 8 drywell cooling fans), one conventional service
water pump, Residual Heat Removal System (RHR) and RHR service water
pumps 2C and 2D, Low Pressure Coolant Injection (LPCI) system
injection valves, torus spray valves, and two diesel building
exhaust fans. Were Unit 2 shutdown and Unit 1 transitioning through
startup to full power operation, a Group 6# valve isolation and
reactor building/secondary containment isolations also occurs on the
operating unit (Unit 1), as well as a Standby Gas Treatment System
automatic start. Temporary loss of these functions and the
associated isolations and actuations would not cause an automatic
unit reactor trip; therefore, a loss of offsite power to emergency
buses on the shutdown unit would not cause a transient initiating
event on the operating unit. Therefore, the probability of an
accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased by the
proposed change.
A loss of auxiliary (off-site) power (LOOP) event is an analyzed
transient for the Brunswick Plant. A loss of offsite power is
assumed to occur following a loss of all external grid connections
or faults in the offsite power system itself. The Brunswick
Probabilistic Safety Assessment has modeled the loss of offsite
power event. The most probably causes of a loss of offsite power
event involve natural events or transmission network maintenance.
Neither of these is affected by the proposed change. Therefore, the
probability of a previously evaluated transient is not significantly
increased.
This change does not affect the remaining off-site Technical
Specification requirements nor does it affect the on-site electrical
distribution Technical Specification requirements. The existing
Technical Specifications require all four diesel generators and the
remaining offsite power sources of both units be operable. Technical
Specifications 3.8.1.1.c and 3.8.1.1.d will still be applicable to
the unit transitioning through the startup evolution. These
specifications dictate requirements for the operating unit upon loss
of a diesel generator or an additional offsite power circuit. Thus,
operability of the emergency diesel generators and the remaining
offsite power sources is unaffected by this change. Since the
emergency diesel generator capability is unaffected by this change,
the proposed change would not affect the capability of accident
mitigating equipment; therefore, the consequences of previously
evaluated accidents is not affected by the proposed change.
2. The proposed amendments would not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated. A LOOP is one of the transients analyzed in the Brunswick
Update Final Safety Analysis Report. The proposed action would not
affect the conclusions of that analysis. In addition, the Brunswick
design basis accident analyses accommodate a loss of off-site power
coincident with the design basis accident and a single failure of
one emergency diesel generator. The proposed change does not affect
operability requirements of the emergency diesel generators.
Therefore, no new malfunction or accident is introduced by the
proposed action.
3. The proposed amendments do not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety. The basis of Technical
Specification 3.0.4 is to ensure that facility operation is not
initiated with either required equipment or systems inoperable or
other limits being exceeded. Exceptions to this provision are
provided for specifications when startup with inoperable equipment
would not affect plant safety. Sufficient redundancy of AC power
will continue to exist and no fewer sources of AC power will be
available than would be allowed for power operation for up to 45
days under Specification 3.8.1.1.a. Therefore, the proposed change
would not impact safety and the margin of safety imposed by either
Technical Specification 3.0.4 or Specification 3/4.8.1 would not be
significantly reduced.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three
[[Page 18861]]
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 May 15, 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 North Carolina at
Wilmington, William Madison Randall Library, 601 S. College Road,
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-3297. 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.
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 Data gram Identification Number N1023 and the following
message addressed to David B. Mathews, 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,
[[Page 18862]]
DC 20555, and to General Counsel, Carolina Power & Light Company, P.O.
Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602, 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 March 31, 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 North Carolina at
Wilmington, William Madison Randall Library, 601 S. College Road,
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-3297.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of April.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David C. Trimble,
Project Manager, Project Directorate II-I, Division of Reactor
Projects-I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-9141 Filed 4-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M