[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 24, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50054-50056]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-24410]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-255]


Consumers Power 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 No. 
DPR-20 issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee) for operation 
of the Palisades Plant located in Van Buren County, Michigan.
    The proposed amendment would revise the Palisades Technical 
Specifications (TS) to extend the surveillance interval frequency for 
the primary coolant pump (PCP) flywheels by one operating cycle. By 
letter dated January 18, 1996, the licensee previously submitted a 
request to amend the TS to delete the requirement to perform PCP 
flywheel inspections. NRC review of the original request will not be 
completed in time for the upcoming refueling outage scheduled for 
November 1996; therefore, the licensee has submitted this separate 
request to extend the surveillance frequency by one operating cycle. 
The licensee's August 14, 1996, submittal to extend the surveillance 
frequency stated that the no significant hazards consideration 
determination presented in its January 18, 1996, submittal remains 
bounding.
    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:

    The following evaluation supports the finding that operation of 
the facility in accordance with the proposed change to the Technical 
Specifications would not:
    1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change to the Technical Specifications would delete 
the requirement to perform non-destructive examination of the upper 
flywheel on the PCPs. The fracture mechanics analyses conducted to 
support the change show that a preexisting crack sized just below 
detection level will not grow to the flaw size necessary to result 
in flywheel failure within the life of the plant. This analysis 
conservatively assumes minimum material properties, maximum flywheel 
accident speed, location of the flaw in the highest stress area and 
a number of startup/

[[Page 50055]]

shutdown cycles eight times greater than expected. Since an existing 
flaw in the flywheel will not grow to the allowable flaw size under 
normal operating conditions or to the critical flaw size under LOCA 
[loss-of-coolant accident] conditions over the life of the plant, 
elimination of inservice inspection for such cracks during the 
plant's life will not involve a significant increase in the 
probability of an accident previously considered.
    The proposed changes do not increase the amount of radioactive 
material available for release or modify any systems used for 
mitigation of such releases during accident conditions. Therefore, 
operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change to 
the Technical Specifications would not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any previously evaluated.
    The proposed change to the Technical Specifications would not 
change the design, configuration, or method of operation of the 
plant and therefore, operation of the facility in accordance with 
the proposed change to the Technical Specifications would not create 
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 
previously evaluated.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The proposed change to the Technical Specifications would not 
result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety. 
Significant conservatisms have been used for calculating the 
allowable flaw size, critical flaw size and crack growth rate in the 
PCP flywheels. These include minimum material properties, maximum 
flywheel accident speed, location of the postulated flaw in highest 
stress area and a number of startup/shutdown cycles eight times 
greater than expected. Since an existing flaw in the flywheel will 
not grow to the maximum allowable flaw size under normal operating 
conditions or to the critical flaw size under LOCA conditions over 
the life of the plant, elimination of inservice inspections for such 
cracks during the plant's life will not involve a 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 October 24, 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 Van Wylen Library, Hope College, Holland, 
Michigan 49423. 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

[[Page 50056]]

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 Hannon: 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 Judd 
L. Bacon, Esquire, Consumers Power Company, 212 West Michigan Avenue, 
Jackson, Michigan 49201, 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 August 14, 1996, and the related 
application dated January 18, 1996, which are 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 Van Wylen Library, Hope College, Holland, 
Michigan 49423.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of September 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert G. Schaaf,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-24410 Filed 9-23-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P