[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 70 (Monday, April 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18048-18050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-9655]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-341]


Detroit Edison Company; 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. 
NPF-43 issued to the Detroit Edison Company (the licensee) for 
operation of the Fermi 2 plant located in Monroe County, Michigan.
    The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS) 
3.8.1.1 to change the emergency diesel generator (EDG) allowed outage 
time (AOT) from 3 to 7 days. This would be a one-time amendment, 
effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 1998. In order 
to use the extended AOT, the revised TS will require the licensee to 
ensure the alternate AC power source (combustion turbine-generator 11-
1) is operable and to verify the planned activity is not potentially 
risk significant in accordance with use of the licensee's On-Line 
System Maintenance Risk Matrix specified in its Integrated Work 
Management Guidelines.
    The one-time amendment was requested in a submittal dated April 3, 
1998. It relies on the technical information and the discussion of no 
significant hazards consideration (NSHC) associated with an earlier 
submittal and supplements for a permanent amendment dated November 22, 
1995, as supplemented February 19, April 19, May 3, June 12, and 
December 4, 1996, and January 30 and August 7, 1997. The staff issued a 
Federal Register notice on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7550), providing 
the notice of consideration of issuance of the amendment, proposed no 
significant hazards consideration, and opportunity for a hearing. The 
proposed one-time amendment does not modify the discussion of NSHC. 
However, the discussion will be repeated below. The portions of the 
November 22, 1995, submittal related to changes in EDG surveillance 
testing and reporting requirements (also discussed in the NSHC) were 
addressed in amendment no. 107 issued on June 20, 1996.
    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 proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident. Changing the out-of-
service time, surveillance frequency and reporting requirements for 
emergency diesel generators (EDGs) will not affect the initiation of 
an accident, since EDGs are not associated with any accident 
initiation mechanism. The proposed changes will not impact the plant 
design or method of EDG operation. The increased out-of-service time 
has been evaluated to have only a small impact on plant risk. 
Performing the EDG inspections during plant operations will decrease 
plant risk during plant outages. Deleting the accelerated testing 
provisions will not affect the consequences of an accident since the 
implementation of a maintenance and monitoring program for EDGs 
consistent with the provisions of the maintenance rule will assure 
EDG performance as discussed in Generic Letter 94-01. Deleting 
reporting requirements has no impact on consequences of an accident 
since reporting has no accident effect. Based on the amount of 
electrical system redundancy, the small increase in plant risk 
during operations and the decrease in plant risk during outages, 
this change will not result in a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident.
    2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new 
or different accident from any previously evaluated. The proposed 
changes do not modify the plant design or method of diesel 
operation. Therefore, no new accident initiator is introduced, nor 
is a new type of failure created. For these reasons, no new or 
different type of accident is created by these changes.
    3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety. Since implementation of a maintenance program 
for the EDGs consistent with the Maintenance Rule will ensure that 
high EDG performance standards are maintained, the accelerated 
testing schedule is not needed to maintain the margin of safety. 
Deleting reporting requirements has no impact on safety or margin of 
safety. Increasing the allowed out-of-service time for one division 
of onsite AC power will slightly increase EDG unavailability during 
plant operation. However, this change does not impact the redundancy 
of offsite power supplies, the

[[Page 18049]]

allowed out-of-service time if both divisions are inoperable, or the 
ability to cope with a station blackout event. This request also 
does not change the Action statement for AC electrical power systems 
required when the plant is shutdown. The increase in core damage 
frequency was assessed to be small by an evaluation using the plant 
PSA [probabilistic safety assessment] for the operating condition. 
Enabling the diesel generator inspections to be performed on-line 
will improve safety while shutdown by reducing EDG out-of-service 
time during outages. For these reasons, the proposed changes do not 
involve a significant reduction in 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 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 May 13, 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 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 Monroe County Library System, 3700 South 
Custer Road, Monroe, Michigan 48161. 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

[[Page 18050]]

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 John Flynn, Esq., Detroit 
Edison Company, 2000 Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48226, 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 April 3, 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 Monroe County Library System, 3700 South 
Custer Road, Monroe, Michigan 48161.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of April 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew J. Kugler,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-9655 Filed 4-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P