[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11480-11482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6176]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-293]
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; 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-35 issued to Boston Edison Company (BECo, the licensee) for
operation of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station located in Plymouth
County, Massachusetts.
The proposed amendment would review and approve the engineering
analysis used to evaluate the effects of damping values in the seismic
analysis of various Pilgrim Station piping systems. Following NRC
approval, BECo would revise the Pilgrim Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR) to make the above engineering analysis the design basis
of record for the affected piping systems provided in the licensee's
January 24, 1997, letter, as supplemented on February 13 and 27, 1997.
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.
The engineering evaluation referenced above compared newly
generated in-structure response spectra for the reactor building
using an enhanced reactor building model and included the effects of
soil/structure interaction. The results show the new spectra are
enveloped by a comparable UFSAR design basis spectra and that piping
stresses are less than design basis allowables. The new spectra
differ from the current UFSAR response spectra in that the generic
Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectral shape is used to characterize the
0.15g Safe Shutdown Earthquake control motion using a soil/structure
interaction analysis with an upgraded structural model to evaluate
building response and ASME Code Case N411 damping values for piping
analyses.
The new piping stresses computed, as described above, result in
less than design basis allowables. Since the stresses are acceptable
and the methods to compute them used applicable Standard Review Plan
(SRP) guidance, the proposed UFSAR revision does not significantly
increase the probability of loss-of-coolant accidents (i.e., piping
failures) nor significantly reduce the reliability of piping needed
to mitigate the consequences of accidents. Therefore, the proposed
revision does 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 accident previously evaluated.
The revision relates to the method used to compute the response
of structures and piping to seismic excitation and does not
introduce a new type of failure mode. Since no new accident
initiators are created, no new types of accidents can occur.
Therefore, the proposed revision does not create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
(3) Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The margin of safety for affected piping systems is reduced
because the new response spectra results in a reduction of the
computed seismic stresses compared to those computed using current
UFSAR response spectra. However, this reduction in margin is not
significant because the resulting piping stresses are less than
design basis allowable values, and the methods used to compute
response spectra associated with the 0.15 g Safe Shutdown Earthquake
were determined using applicable NRC SRP guidance. Thus, although
margin of safety for the affected piping is reduced, it is not 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
[[Page 11481]]
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 April 11, 1997, 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 Plymouth Public Library, 132 South Street,
Plymouth, Massachusetts. 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 20555-0001, 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 Patrick D. Milano: 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 W.S.
Stowe, Esquire, Boston Edison Company, 800 Boylston Street, 36th Floor,
Boston, Massachusetts, 02199, 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
[[Page 11482]]
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 24, 1997, as supplemented
February 13 and 27, 1997, 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 Plymouth Public Library, 132 South Street, Plymouth,
Massachusetts.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of March 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan B. Wang,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-6176 Filed 3-11- 97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P