[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 81 (Tuesday, April 28, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23304-23306]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11247]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-293]


Boston 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. 
DPR-35, issued to Boston Edison Company (BECo/the licensee), for 
operation of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station located in Plymouth, 
Massachusetts.
    The proposed amendment would modify Technical Specification (TS) 
Section 3.6.A.1 to remove the requirement that the reactor vessel 
flange and adjacent shell differential temperature be monitored during 
heatup and cooldown events and also removes the 145 degrees Fahrenheit 
differential temperature limit.
    By letter dated April 8, 1998, the licensee requested that the 
proposed TS change be reviewed under exigent circumstances. A normal 
plant cooldown under current TS requirements would require monitoring 
reactor vessel shell flange temperature to maintain the vessel flange 
to adjacent vessel shell differential temperature at less than 145 
degrees Fahrenheit. However, the current condition of the vessel shell 
flange thermocouples prohibits accurate monitoring of the metal surface 
temperature to meet this TS requirement. The thermocouples are 
considered inoperable due to inconsistencies in their readouts. Because 
the need for plant shutdown and cooldown cannot be forecasted in 
advance, BECo has requested review of the submitted change under 
exigent circumstances to avoid a future short-notice request and 
possible violation of current TS requirements. BECo has made a good 
faith effort to prepare the proposed license amendment for NRC approval 
as expeditiously as practicable.
    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:

    a. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    The recent analysis, Ref.[10], [see application dated March 25, 
1998] has shown design and licensing bases for reactor vessel 
integrity will be maintained, and results supporting the T. S. 
change show the conclusions reached remain unchanged from previous 
conclusions reached in Ref.[3] [see application dated March 25, 
1998] and as described in the [final safety analysis report] FSAR, 
Ref.[1] [see application dated March 25, 1998]. Structural integrity 
for design basis loading conditions is assured, based on the results 
of Ref.[10] [see application dated March 25, 1998]. The ability to 
control plant heatup and cooldown rates has been shown by analysis 
to be unaffected by the removal of this T. S. requirement. This has 
been confirmed by initial startup testing results and the past 25 
years of service.
    b. The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    T/C's [thermocouples] used to monitor reactor vessel flange to 
adjacent shell DT [differential temperature] are used only during 
normal startup and shutdown conditions, and removal of the T. S. 
requirement to monitor this differential temperature will have no 
affect on the design basis accident conditions. Moderator 
temperature and pressure are monitored and, in the event fluid ramp 
rates exceed design basis requirements, an evaluation must be 
performed to determine the effect on structural integrity of the 
reactor vessel and components. ASME Code Section XI, Appendix E, 
Ref. [11] [see application dated March 25, 1998], provides a method 
for evaluating an operating event that causes excursion outside 
these limits.
    c. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
reduction in the margin of safety.
    Stress and fracture toughness calculations, Ref.[10] [see 
application dated March 25, 1998], have shown removal of the T. S. 
DT requirement will not increase levels above the conservative 
design basis limits previously established in the analysis of 
record, Ref.[3] [see application dated March 25, 1998], or those 
stated in the FSAR, Ref.[1] [see application dated March 25, 1998]. 
The loadings used to determine stresses are the same provided by the 
original equipment designer and manufacturer. The calculated stress 
levels and fatigue damage assessment for the existing condition are 
essentially unchanged from the values reported in the reactor vessel 
analysis of record, Ref.[3] [see application dated March 25, 1998]. 
The results of the recent analysis, Ref.[10] [see application dated 
March 25, 1998], show that the margins of safety, as defined in the 
bases for the Pilgrim T. S. and the FSAR, are not reduced and vessel 
integrity will be maintained during all normal and transient 
conditions previously analyzed and reported in the FSAR.

    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

[[Page 23305]]

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 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 28, 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 Plymouth Public Library, 11 North Street, 
Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360. 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, 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 W.S. Stowe, Esquire, Boston Edison 
Company, 800 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02199, 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 25, 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 Plymouth Public Library, 11 North Street, 
Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of April 1998.


[[Page 23306]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan B. Wang,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-11247 Filed 4-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P