[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