[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 23, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38229-38231]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18665]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311]


Public Service Electric and Gas Company Salem Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 1 and 2; 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 
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
DPR-70 and DPR-75 issued to Public Service Electric and Gas Company 
(the licensee) for operation of the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, 
Units 1 and 2, located in Salem County, New Jersey.
    The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS) 
3.3.2.1, ``Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System Instrumentation'' 
to reflect a revised setpoint for the interlock designated P-12.
    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 change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    This change to the Technical Specifications does not involve any 
physical changes to the plant or any procedures changes.
    There is no safety consequence to the [safety injection] SI 
function being enabled at 543  deg.F. The Tavg no-load 
temperature is at 547  deg.F with increasing Tavg for higher 
power operation. The allowable value of 545  deg.F as the upper 
limit assures the availability of the SI function, therefore, the 
protective function will perform within its analyzed range. On 
increasing temperature, P-12 automatically

[[Page 38230]]

enables SI in both High Streamline Flow coincident with Low-Low 
Tavg and High Steamline Flow coincident with Low Steamline 
Pressure. It also provides an arming signal to the Steam Dump 
System.
    On decreasing temperature, P-12 permits manual block of SI in 
both High Steamline Flow coincident with Low-Low Tavg and High 
Steamline Flow coincident with Low Steamline Pressure. This permits 
blocking of the SI below the minimum temperature for criticality 
during a controlled shutdown. With a 2  deg.F allowable deviation 
from the nominal setpoint, the setpoint of 543  deg.F is adequate to 
enable the operator to block SI.
    Hardware design of the [engineered safety feature actuation 
system] ESFAS provides that actuation of the SI block, enable, and 
ESFAS protection system operations are all provided by the same 
bistables. The analyses were performed supporting the design of the 
ESFAS system.
    Revision of the P-12 setpoint to enable manual block of SI from 
541  deg.F to 543  deg.F does not impact the safety analyses. SI is 
available at or above the Tavg no-load value of 547  deg.F, 
which is consistent with the setpoint for Low-Low Tavg in TS 
Table 3.3-4. Retaining the allowable value of 541  deg.F is also 
consistent with Table 3.3-4. The proposed revisions do not affect 
the integrity of the fuel assembly or reactor internals such that 
their function in the control of radiological consequences is 
affected. In addition, the proposed revisions do not affect any 
fission product barrier. The proposed revision does not change, 
degrade, or prevent the response of safety related mitigation 
systems to accident scenarios, as described in the [Final Safety 
Analysis Report] FSAR.
    Therefore the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes to the TS setpoints for P-12 do not create 
failure modes that could adversely impact safety-related equipment 
or cause the initiation of any accident. The P-12 interlock circuit 
pertains to accident mitigation systems and not accident initiation. 
Functions of safety related systems and components, which are 
related to accident mitigation, have not been altered.
    The proposed TS setpoint change does not cause the initiation of 
any accident or create any new credible failure in the system. The 
proposed revisions do not result in any malfunction of equipment 
previously evaluated. The proposed revisions do not result in 
increased probability of equipment failure scenarios previously 
deemed improbable.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated, the revisions will not create the possibility of a 
malfunction of equipment important to safety different than 
previously evaluated in the FSAR.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    Several different steamline break analyses are performed to 
support operation of the Salem units. Analyses are performed to 
determine the core response to postulated steamline breaks and to 
calculate mass and energy releases both inside and outside 
containment.
    In the current licensing basis core response steamline break 
analysis, the High Steamline Flow coincident with Low-Low Tavg 
or Low Steamline Pressure protective functions are not modeled. As 
such, a change to the SI permissive has no impact on the analysis. 
Other SI signals generated from a postulated steamline break are 
credited in the analysis. Interlock P-12 is independent of these 
credited SI signals. Therefore, this change has no impact on the 
safety analysis.
    The licensing basis steamline break mass and energy release 
safety analyses, inside and outside containment, for Salem Units 1 
and 2 assumes the availability of the High Steamline Flow coincident 
with Low-Low Tavg or Low Steamline Pressure for actuation of SI 
and steamline isolation. However, no credit is taken for these trip 
functions. The noted Technical Specification change is resolving a 
discrepancy between the permissive P-12 setpoint and the Low-Low 
Tavg setpoint. Even though this Low-Low Tavg function is 
available in the steamline break mass and energy release analyses, 
operation is not credited in the analyses.
    There are no new safety analyses or revision[s] to any existing 
safety analyses as a result of these changes. In addition, the 
proposed change does not impact any input assumptions or results of 
any current licensing basis analyses for the design basis events. 
Therefore, there is no significant reduction in the 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 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 Chief, Rules 
Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and 
Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 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 August 22, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West 
Broadway, Salem, New Jersey. 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

[[Page 38231]]

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 20555-0001, 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 John F. Stolz: 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 20555-0001, and to Mark 
J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston and Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20005-3502, 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 July 12, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West 
Broadway, Salem, New Jersey.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of July 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Donald S. Brinkman,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-18665 Filed 7-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P