[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 155 (Tuesday, August 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43189-43191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21246]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-302]


Florida Power Corporation; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendment to Facility Operating License, 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 No. 
DPR 72, issued to the Florida Power Corporation, (FPC or the licensee), 
for operation of the Crystal River Nuclear generating Unit 3 (CR3) 
located in Citrus County, Florida.
    The proposed amendment would revise the CR3 technical 
specifications (TS) to extend the frequency for certain surveillances 
related to the emergency diesel generators (EDGs). Specifically, TS 
Surveillance Requirements (SR) 3.3.8.1, and SR 3.8.1.3, would be 
revised to extend the channel Functional test surveillance frequency 
and the EDG operation, respectively, from 31 days to 60 days. The 
proposed TS amendment would be a one time change and applicable until 
November 23, 1997.
    Currently, CR3 is in a voluntary shutdown and is in Mode 5. As part 
of its EDG load capacity upgrade program, the licensee originally 
planned to replace the EDG radiator during its cycle 11R outage in 
1998. The licensee has now determined that a potential exists for the 
EDGs to exceed the design basis ambient temperature and as a result, 
decided to implement the radiator replacement during the current 
outage. Initially, the planned duration for these radiator 
modifications was 25 days assuming a pre-fabricated radiator unit could 
be used as the replacement radiator. As the final design and extent of 
condition for the EDGs were determined, the licensee has discovered 
that the pre-fabricated radiator design could not be used and the 
radiator replacement involved more extensive fabrication than 
originally anticipated. The licensee estimates that the revised work 
scope may require 55 days, including the necessary post-modification 
test for operability. This schedule is based on a continuous work 
schedule, and contingency for rework, field challenges, or late 
delivery of parts. Thus, the time required to do the modification work 
exceeds the present TS surveillance interval.
    The licensee believes that while it is possible to perform these 
surveillances with one EDG inoperable, such an approach, however, would 
not be

[[Page 43190]]

desirable. These surveillances will require approximately 2 to 8 hours 
during which time potential exists for a condition where both EDGs 
could become inoperable at the same time. With both EDGs inoperable, a 
loss of the operating Decay Heat Removal (DHR) capability would occur 
during a loss of offsite power (LOOP), resulting in a heatup of the 
reactor coolant system and reliance on the operable steam generator 
steaming via the Atmospheric Dump Valves. Thus, simultaneously having 
one EDG inoperable due to radiator replacement and performing the 
monthly surveillances on the other EDG would reduce the overall 
defense-in-depth due to the potential consequences of a LOOP. In 
addition to a LOOP, the plant configuration requires bypassing the 
undervoltage (UV) relays while performing these surveillance 
procedures. The licensee states that based on its previous experience, 
bypassing of the UV relays may potentially result in a lockout of the 
power source and cause a loss of DHR capability.
    To avoid such reductions in the defense-in-depth associated with 
performing the surveillance tests, and to complete the necessary 
modifications during this current outage, the licensee requests NRC 
approval for a one time change to its TS SR.
    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 will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    An increase in the surveillance interval from 31 days to 60 days 
does not significantly decrease the reliability of the EDGs nor 
degrade their ability to perform their intended safety function when 
required. Based on data obtained over time the EDGs at CR-3 have an 
excellent record of availability. This extension of the interval 
will be applied to only one surveillance interval on each EDG and 
will not be in effect after November 23, 1997.
    CR-3 obtains data from surveillance testing and operational 
experience and maintains records of the unavailability of the EDGs 
and the relays. CR-3 monitors a parameter referred to as 
Unavailability Performance Indicator, defined as the sum of known 
and estimated unavailable hours divided by hours system required.
    As a limited scope effort the records for 1994 through June, 
1997 were reviewed. This data indicates very low values of the 
performance indicator, with the average value for the 14 quarters 
being 0.005. The yearly goal for this performance indicator was met 
in the years reviewed. In total these records reflect low 
unavailability; i.e., high availability.
    The EDG that is to remain operable during radiator replacement 
on the other diesel will be surveilled in accordance with SR 3.3.8.1 
and SR 3.8.1.3 just prior to initiation of the EDG outage. This test 
will ensure its operability.
    Based on the high availability of the EDGs at CR-3 and the fact 
that this is a one-time extension of the interval for each EDG, it 
is concluded that this requested extension of the surveillance 
interval will not result in a significant increased probability or 
consequences of previously evaluated accidents.
    2. The proposed changes will not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    This request for technical specification changes addresses the 
interval for performance of the surveillances on a one-time basis 
for each diesel generator. This requested change to the license by 
itself does not involve a modification to the EDG. The modifications 
of the EDGs to replace the radiator have been evaluated pursuant to 
10 CFR 50.59. The conclusion of that evaluation is that the radiator 
replacement does not create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    Based on the above FPC concludes that changing the surveillance 
frequency will not create the possibility of a new or different kind 
of accident.
    3. The proposed change will not involve a significant reduction 
to the margin of safety.
    As discussed above in item number one, the EDGs at CR-3 have a 
record of high availability. The high availability reflected in 
those records provides reasonable assurance that the operable EDGs 
will remain operable during the extended interval between 
surveillances. By not being required to perform the tests FPC will 
maintain a higher level of safety than would be possible if the 
tests were performed. Based on the high availability of the EDGs and 
the fact that this extension of the surveillance frequency is for 
one interval only FPC concludes that changing the surveillance 
interval does not result in a significant reduction to the margin of 
safety.

    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 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 September 11, 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

[[Page 43191]]

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 Coastal Region Library, 8619 W. Crystal Street, Crystal River, 
Florida 34428. 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 R. Alexander Glenn, General Counsel, 
Florida Power Corporation, MAC-A5A, P.O. Box 14042, St. Petersburg, 
Florida 33733-4042, 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 August 4, 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 Coastal Region Library, 8619 W. Crystal 
Street, Crystal River, Florida 34428.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of August 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Raghavan, Sr.,
Project Manager, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-21246 Filed 8-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P