[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 59 (Friday, March 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14976-14977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-8028]



[[Page 14976]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-271]


Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.; 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-28 issued to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (the 
licensee) for operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station 
(VY) located in Windham County, Vermont.
    The proposed amendment would modify the licensing basis by limiting 
the time the large (18'') purge and vent valves may be open to 
containment.
    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.
    The Commission has made a proposed determination 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 operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in 
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    No physical change is being made to any systems or components 
that are credited in the safety analysis, therefore there is no 
change in the probability or consequences of any accident analyzed 
in the Final Safety Analysis Report.
    The proposed change will not affect the ability of the purge and 
vent valves to isolate primary containment. The ability to isolate 
primary containment remains unaffected by the proposed amendment.
    VY's current licensing basis allows for unlimited purge and vent 
operations, but this does not ensure the integrity of the [standby 
gas treatment] SBGT system. The proposed change will assure the 
integrity and operability of the SBGT system if a design basis 
accident occurs. This is accomplished by restricting the use of each 
18 inch containment vent and purge flow path during any period that 
primary containment integrity is required. The restrictions imposed 
by the license amendment request on the opening of the purge and 
vent valves will limit the period of time that a potential off-site 
release flow path exists. Consequently, the probability that a 
potential release path exists coincident with a breach of the 
primary coolant system will be reduced, providing additional 
assurance that a release of radioactive gases to the environment 
will be avoided.
    Allowing limited use of the purge and vent valves during periods 
when primary containment integrity is required reduces the 
probability of an accident by allowing personnel access to primary 
containment for the maintenance and inspection of equipment. In 
addition, it will allow performance of rated temperature and 
pressure inspections of the reactor coolant system (RCS) during 
plant startups which provide additional margin for safe operation of 
the unit by verifying all RCS boundaries that have been interrupted 
during the refueling outage have been returned to an operable 
condition.
    2. The operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in 
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not establish a new mode of operation 
for the purge and vent valve system, only the extent to which the 
system may be used. The proposed change imposes additional 
restrictions on the operations of the containment purge and vent 
valves. Additional restrictions for operation of these valves does 
not create the possibility for a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated.
    Additionally, the proposed change does not affect the ability of 
the containment purge and vent valves to mitigate previously 
evaluated accidents during the modes they are credited. The purge 
and vent valves, if open during an accident will maintain the 
ability to close against the postulated differential pressure.
    3. The operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in 
accordance with the proposed amendment, will not involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    Currently, [the technical specification] TS allows unlimited use 
of containment purge and vent isolation valves. The proposed change 
will assure the integrity and operability of the SBGT system. This 
is accomplished by restricting the use of each 18 inch containment 
purge and vent flow path during periods when primary containment 
integrity is required. The more restrictive requirements reduce the 
probability of an accident concurrent with purge and vent 
operations.

    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 amendment 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 amendment before the expiration of 
the 30-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 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 and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative 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 6D59, 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 April 27, 1998, 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

[[Page 14977]]

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 Brooks Memorial Library, 224 Main 
Street, Brattleboro, VT 05301. 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 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 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 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, 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 Mr. David R. Lewis, Shaw, Pittman, 
Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037-1128, 
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 March 20, 1998, 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 Brooks Memorial Library, 224 Main Street, 
Brattleboro, VT 05301.

    Dated at Rockville, MD, this 23rd day of March 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard P. Croteau,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-8028 Filed 3-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P