[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 130 (Tuesday, July 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36580-36581]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17751]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388]


Susquehanna Steam Electric 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 an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-14 and NPF-22 issued to Pennsylvania Power & Light Company (PP&L, 
the licensee) for operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station 
(SSES), Units 1 and 2 located in Luzerne County, PA.
    The proposed amendment would change the Technical Specifications 
(TS) for the two units to clarify the current methodology for 
laboratory analysis of used carbon samples for the standby gas 
treatment system (SGTS) and the control room emergency outside air 
supply system (CREOASS).
    PP&L's request for this license amendment to be processed under 
exigent circumstances was based on its recent discovery that a standard 
cited in TS surveillances was not actually being used for laboratory 
analysis of activated carbon samples taken from the SGTS and CREOASS at 
SSES, Units 1 and 2. Despite the fact that the actual testing 
methodology being conducted on the carbon samples is an improvement 
over the TS referenced method, the licensee has requested that this 
amendment be processed in an exigent matter to correct this condition 
of non-compliance with its TSs. PP&L had determined that it would have 
been forced to shut down both units had it not requested enforcement 
discretion to be permitted to not comply with the specified TS 
surveillance requirements until this requested amendment could be 
reviewed and approved by the staff. The staff also determined that the 
licensee could not have avoided making this request since having them 
strictly comply with the TS methods would have taken several weeks to 
process new testing purchase orders and additional delay in compliance.
    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.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under 
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine 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 methods used to test charcoal samples do not increase the 
probability or consequences of an accident or malfunction of 
equipment important to safety as previously evaluated in the FSAR. 
The capability of the charcoal in SGTS and CREOASS to adsorb iodine 
is a consideration in assessing the consequences of an accident. The 
limit on methyl iodide penetration assures that the activated carbon 
in these safety-related systems will provide the iodine removal 
efficiencies assumed in the accident analyses. The charcoal testing 
methodology currently being used is equivalent or more conservative 
than that specified in Technical Specifications, and thus provides 
assurance that charcoal meeting the acceptance criteria will perform 
as designed. These changes do not affect the probability of event 
initiators or any ESF actuation setpoints or accident mitigation 
capabilities.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    Testing on carbon samples is performed offsite, and residual 
samples are not returned to the SGTS or CREOASS. Therefore, the 
testing methodology has no effect on system operation. No new or 
different accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure 
mechanisms or limiting single failures will be introduced as a 
result of these changes.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in the margin of safety.
    The limit on methyl iodide penetration assures that the 
activated carbon in these safety-related systems will provide the 
iodine removal efficiencies assumed in the accident analyses. Use of 
the ASTM-D-3803-1979 methodology more accurately assures that the 
SGTS and CREOASS perform their intended design functions. This 
change will not affect system operation or performance. Therefore, 
there is no reduction in the margin of safety. Offsite and control 
room dose analyses are not affected by this change. All offsite and 
control room doses will remain within the limits established in the 
accident analyses.

    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 14 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 14-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 14-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. 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

[[Page 36581]]

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 7, 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 Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania 18701. 
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 a 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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day 
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the 
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is 
requested, 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: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
by the above date. 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 Jay Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, 
Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street NW, Washington, DC 20037, 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 June 27, 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 Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania 18701.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of July 1997.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Chester Poslusny, Sr.
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-17751 Filed 7-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P