[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 103 (Thursday, May 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29158-29160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14012]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

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


Public Service Electric and Gas Company; 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 & Gas Company (the 
licensee) for operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 
and 2, located in Salem County, New Jersey.
    The proposed amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS) 
Surveillance Requirement 4.7.6.1.d.1 to indicate that the specified 
acceptance filter differential pressure (DP) is to be measured across 
the filter housing and to change the filter DP acceptance value from 
 3.5 inches water gauge to  2.70 inches water 
gauge.
    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.
    The [Control Room Emergency Air Conditioning System] CREACS filter 
train is provided for post-accident atmospheric cleanup of the control 
room air volume in order to limit doses to control room personnel to 
less than the limits prescribed by 10CFR50, Appendix A, Criterion 19.
    The CREACS does not communicate with the Reactor Coolant System 
(RCS) and does not penetrate the Containment. The environmental 
controls portion of the system (i.e., cooling coil, fans, ductwork and 
associated dampers, and filtration capability) are not affected by the 
proposed changes. Therefore, control room temperature, humidity, air 
distribution and cleanliness requirements will continue to be 
maintained within acceptance limits. As such, the probability of an 
accident previously evaluated is unchanged.
    The change to the Surveillance Test boundary requires that the 
pressure drop across all elements in the filter train be evaluated, 
thereby ensuring that the CREACS filter is maintained in a condition 
which would not restrict post-accident CREACS flow below acceptable 
levels. The change to the filter DP acceptance limit reallocates design 
margin associated with filter performance to CREACS fan performance in 
the control room pressurization mode. As such,

[[Page 29159]]

infiltration of potentially contaminated air is limited to that 
presently in the dose analysis. The Technical Specification maximum 
allowable CREACS flow rate, minimum allowable [high-efficiency 
particulate air] HEPA and Charcoal Adsorber removal efficiencies, and 
post-accident control room pressurization requirements are not affected 
by this change. As such, the consequences of previously evaluated 
accidents are unchanged.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    The CREACS does not communicate with the Reactor Coolant System 
(RCS) and does not penetrate the Containment. The proposed changes do 
not require any modification to the CREACS or its support systems. The 
design basis safety function of the CREACS is unaffected by the 
proposed changes. The environmental controls portion of the CREACS 
(i.e., cooling coil, fans, ductwork and associated dampers, and 
filtration capability) are not affected by the proposed changes. As 
such control room temperature, humidity and air distribution 
requirements will continue to be maintained within acceptance limits. 
The maximum allowable CREACS flow rate and control room DP requirements 
imposed by the Technical Specifications are not changed by this 
proposal. For these reasons, the possibility of a new or different kind 
of accident is not created.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in 
a margin of safety.
    A new acceptance limit for filter DP (i.e., cleanliness) has been 
proposed. The change to the filter DP acceptance reallocates design 
margin associated with filter performance to CREACS fan performance in 
the control room pressurization mode. Planned modifications to reduce 
control room leakage paths, together with the proposed changes to the 
CREACS filter DP Surveillance Test acceptance limit, ensure that 
control room pressurization requirements and CREACS filter 
functionality are maintained during post-accident operation.
    The environmental controls portion of the system (i.e., cooling 
coil, fans, ductwork and associated dampers, and filtration capability) 
are not affected by the proposed changes. Therefore, control room 
temperature, humidity, air distribution and cleanliness requirements 
will continue to be maintained within acceptance limits. The proposed 
changes to the Surveillance Test boundary and acceptance limits 
maintain a conservative Operability standard for the CREACS filter 
train. Acceptance limits and test methods specified for the HEPA filter 
and Charcoal Adsorber efficiencies are not affected by this proposal.
    Based on the above discussions, it is concluded that the margin of 
safety has not been reduced.
    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. 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 June 30, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West 
Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. 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

[[Page 29160]]

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, Director, Project 
Directorate I-2, 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 May 14, 1997, 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 08079.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of May 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Leonard N. Olshan,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-14012 Filed 5-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P