[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