[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7281-7283]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4343]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-373 AND 50-374]


Commonwealth Edison Co.; Notice of 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 

[[Page 7282]]
    considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-11 and NPF-18 issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the 
licensee) for operation of the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, 
located in LaSalle County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendment would change the setpoints for the automatic 
primary containment isolation signal upon detection of a high main 
steamline tunnel differential temperature. Additionally, the proposed 
amendments would delete the automatic isolation function upon detection 
of a high main steamline tunnel temperature. Both these temperature 
generated signals detect possible steam leaks in the main steamline 
tunnel and initiate the isolation signals cited above, thereby 
providing automatic closure of the main steamline isolation valves 
(MSIVs) and the main steamline drain isolation valves. The intent of 
the proposed actions is to minimize spurious isolation signals which, 
in turn, would trip the reactor. The licensee proposes to provide for 
early detection of a main steamline break by relying on an automatic 
isolation signal which would be generated by a main steamline leak of 
100 gallons per minute (gpm) or greater. The current isolation 
setpoints are based on a steam leakage of 25 gpm in the main steamline 
tunnel.
    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) Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated because:
    a. There is no effect on accident initiators so there is no 
change in probability of an accident. The accident analysis 
associated with a steam line break in the main steam line tunnel 
assumes an instantaneous circumferential break of a main steam line 
downstream of the outermost isolation valve. The leak detection 
isolation on differential temperature based on less than or equal to 
10 percent of a calculated critical crack of a main steam line is 
only a precursor of a break, and thus does not affect the 
probability of a break.
    b. There is no or minimal effect on the consequences of analyzed 
accidents due to deletion of the automatic isolation on high 
temperature leak detection in the main steam line tunnel or due to 
increasing the leak detection differential temperature setpoint and 
allowable values to detect a 100 gpm steam leak from a crack in a 
main steam line. The worst case accident corresponding to main steam 
lines outside of the reactor vessel and primary containment boundary 
is a main steam line break, which bounds the dose consequences of 
any size steam leak less than a full break. Also, a 200 gpm steam 
leak results in a calculated offsite dose within the annual whole 
body dose limit and the radioiodine release limit per 10 CFR 50 
Appendix I, if detected and isolated within several weeks.
    (2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any accident previously evaluated because:
    The purpose of the main steam line isolation is based on leak 
detection and automatic isolation for leakage in the main steam line 
tunnel downstream of the outermost isolation valve. This change 
maintains this capability with only the leak detection based on high 
differential temperature in the steam line tunnel. Also, the primary 
containment isolation logic for main steam line leak detection 
isolation on high differential temperature remains the same. Thus no 
new or different accident is created.
    (3) Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety 
because:
    The increased setpoint for differential temperature leak 
detection for automatic isolation of the main steam lines due to a 
steam leak outside of the primary containment is based on 
calculated/analyzed response to a steam leak [that is] small 
compared to the leak from a critical crack. The leak detection 
isolation logic remains single failure proof. The previous 
evaluation of diversity of isolation parameters considered the 
ambient temperature and differential temperature isolations as one 
parameter in Table 5.2-8 of the LaSalle [Updated Final Safety 
Analysis Report] UFSAR. The deletion of leak detection isolation of 
the main steam lines based on high ambient temperature in the main 
steam line tunnel is acceptable, because the differential 
temperature isolation has been analyzed to detect and isolate the 
main steam lines based on bounding inlet air temperatures. 
Therefore, the Main Steam Line High flow, vessel low level, and the 
differential temperature instruments maintain adequate diversity of 
isolation parameters without main steam line tunnel high 
temperature.
    The differential temperature leak detection for the main steam 
line tunnel depends on normal ventilation flow to detect leakage. 
Therefore, the trip function will be declared inoperable upon loss 
of or shutdown of normal ventilation. The Technical Specifications 
currently allow the main steam tunnel high temperature and high 
differential temperature isolation channels to be inoperable for up 
to 4 or 12 hours during the performance of specified required 
surveillances. The 12 hours allowed outage time is currently for an 
18 month surveillance requirement. The addition of allowance for up 
to 12 hours allowed outage time to recover normal ventilation 
following an unplanned loss of normal ventilation is reasonable, 
since the time is small compared to the time frame over which a pipe 
crack grows. Also, supplemental monitoring of water collection sumps 
and area temperature in the main steam line tunnel provides 
heightened awareness of operators to detect leakage in the main 
steam line tunnel during the time normal ventilation is not 
available. The planned shutdown of normal ventilation is currently 
allowed for up to 4 hours by the Technical Specifications. The 
unplanned loss of normal ventilation is expected to be less than two 
times per cycle upon completion [of] design changes to make the 
isolation logic power supply D.C. instead of A.C. through motor 
generator sets.

    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. 

[[Page 7283]]
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 March 28, 1996, 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 Jacobs Memorial Library, Illinois Valley 
Community College, Oglesby, Illinois 61348. 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, 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 
60603, 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 January 18, 1996, 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 Jacobs Memorial Library, Illinois 
Valley Community College, Oglesby, Illinois 61348.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of February 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
M. David Lynch,
 Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-4343 Filed 2-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P