[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 132 (Thursday, July 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37079-37081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17992]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456 and STN 50-457]


Commonwealth Edison 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. 
STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, issued to 
Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the licensee) for operation of the 
Byron Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Ogle County, 
Illinois, and Braidwood Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, located 
in Will County, Illinois, respectively.
    The proposed amendments would authorize a revision to the realistic 
dose values for the process gas system rupture in Section 15.0 of the 
Byron/Braidwood (B/B) Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). 
During preparation of a UFSAR change package, ComEd discovered that the 
Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) had not been updated to correct an 
error from the previous revision of the dose calculation. Since the 
correct dose value is greater than that previously reported, the 
consequences of the accident had increased, and an unreviewed safety 
question resulted.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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 
amendments requested involve 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 amendments 
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. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    The proposed changes involve a slight increase to the consequences 
of the waste gas decay tank rupture event as shown in UFSAR Tables 
15.0-11 and 15.0-12. However, the values continue to be less than a 
small fraction of the 10 CFR 100 limits, i.e., 10 percent or 2.5 rem 
for whole-body dose. Standard Review Plan 11.3, Branch Technical 
Position (BTP) ETSB 11-5, ``Postulated Radioactive Releases Due to a 
Waste Gas System Leak or Failure,'' in NUREG-0800, July 1981 imposes 
lower dose limits than 10 CFR 100 because the probability of an 
accidental release from the waste gas system is relatively high. The 
BTP establishes a limit of 0.5 rem to an individual at the nearest 
exclusion area boundary. The recalculated doses also meet this 
criterion.
    All other aspects of the original accident event and analysis, as 
presented in UFSAR Subsection 15.7.1, are unchanged. The proposed 
changes do not impact any accident initiators or assumed mitigation of 
accident or transient events. They do not involve the addition or 
removal of any equipment, or any design changes to the facility. There 
is no change to the types of effluents released offsite. The source 
terms in UFSAR Table 15.7-2 are unaffected. The change affects only the 
post-accident dose; there is no impact on individual or cumulative 
occupational radiation exposure. Therefore, this request does not 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    The proposed changes do not involve a modification to the physical 
configuration of the plant (i.e., no new equipment will be installed) 
or change in the methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed 
changes will not impose any new or different requirements or introduce 
a new accident or malfunction mechanism. The proposed change affects 
only a calculation to determine dose following an event that has been 
previously analyzed. It has no impact on any event in the accident 
sequence, and no new failures are created. Therefore, the proposed 
changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety?
    The proposed changes do not result in any reduction in the margin 
of safety

[[Page 37080]]

because they have no impact on safety analysis assumptions. Technical 
Specification 3.11.2.6 restricts the quantity of radioactivity 
contained in each gas storage tank to provide assurance that, in the 
event of an uncontrolled release of the tank's contents, the resulting 
whole body exposure will not exceed 0.5 rem, as established in BTP ETSB 
11-5. The gas decay tank activity is limited to 50,000 curies of noble 
gas as Xe-133 equivalent. Since this activity limit is not affected and 
the calculated dose is less than 0.5 rem, the margin of safety remains 
the same.
    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 amendments 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 amendments before the expiration 
of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is 
that the amendments involve 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 August 7, 1997, the licensee may file a request for a hearing 
with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility 
operating licenses 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: for Byron, the Byron Public Library District, 
109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; for Braidwood, 
the Wilmington Public Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street, Wilmington, 
Illinois 60481. 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 amendments 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 amendments requested involve 
no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the 
amendments and make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendments.
    If the final determination is that the amendments requested involve 
a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place 
before the issuance of any amendments.
    A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must 
be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

[[Page 37081]]

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or 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 Michael I. 
Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, 
Illinois 60603, 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 amendments dated June 9, 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: for Byron, the Byron Public Library District, 
109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; for Braidwood, 
the Wilmington Public Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street, Wilmington, 
Illinois 60481.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of June 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George F. Dick, Jr.,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-17992 Filed 7-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P