[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 24, 1995)]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-26274]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-443]
North Atlantic Energy Service Company, et al.; 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 No.
NPF-86 issued to North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation (the
licensee) for operation of the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 located in
Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
The proposed amendment would modify the Appendix A Technical
Specifications for the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System
(ESFAS) Instrumentation. Specifically, the proposed amendment would
revise the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications to relocate
Functional Unit 6.b, ``Feedwater Isolation--Low RCS Tavg
Coincident with a Reactor Trip'' from Technical Specification 3.3.2.
``Engineered Safety Features Actuation System Instrumentation'' to the
Seabrook Station Technical Requirements Manual which is a licensee
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
1. The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The change considered for the relocation of the feedwater
isolation setpoint from the Technical Specifications does not impose
any new performance requirements on any system or component which
could subsequently cause associated design criteria to be exceeded.
The structural and functional integrity of the plant's structures,
systems and components is maintained. This change does not affect
the initiators of any transients evaluated in the Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
The sequence of obtaining feedwater isolation on low Tavg
coincident with reactor trip is not credited in any of the LOCA and
non-LOCA accidents evaluated in the UFSAR. Feedwater isolation is
initiated for other reasons such as a Safety Injection (SI)
actuation. This change is administrative in nature, in that it
relocates the function from the Technical Specifications to the
Seabrook Station Technical Requirements Manual and there are no
changes to the plant's structures, systems and components.
Since, for the reasons given above, the results of the UFSAR
analyses are not affected by the implementation of the change, there
is, therefore, no adverse impact on the radiological consequences of
accidents reported in the UFSAR. Furthermore, this change does not
degrade fission product barriers assumed in the dose consequence
analysis such as the fuel cladding, the reactor pressure vessel, and
containment. The performance and integrity of accident mitigating
structures, systems and components such as the Emergency Feedwater
and Safety Injection systems, are not affected by the change.
Consequently, the ability of these systems to limit radiological
consequences as described in the UFSAR is not adversely affected.
Based on the above, the proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
The proposed change does not create any new failure modes for
any structure, system or component. All design and performance
criteria will continue to be met and no new single failure scenario
is created that is not bounded by the accidents described in the
UFSAR. The proposed change to the Technical Specifications does not
introduce any new challenges to structures, systems and components
that could introduce a new type of accident. Therefore the proposed
changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not result in a significant reduction
in a margin of safety.
The accidents analyzed in the UFSAR have been reviewed relative
to the feedwater isolation on low RCS Tavg coincident with
reactor trip. The applicable design criteria and the pertinent
licensing basis acceptance criteria continue to be met. The margin
of safety as defined in the Bases to the Technical Specifications is
not reduced and the design and safety analysis limits remain
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
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
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 November 24, 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 Exeter Public Library, Founders Park, Exeter,
NH 03833. 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-
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, 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 Phillip F. McKee: 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 Lillian M. Cuoco,
Esquire, Northeast Utilities Service Company, P.O. Box 270, Hartford,
CT 06141-0270, 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 20, 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 Exeter Public Library, Founders
Park, Exeter, NH 03833.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of October 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Albert W. De Agazio, Sr.,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-26274 Filed 10-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P