[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 209 (Thursday, October 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58072-58074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-28992]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456, STN 50-457]


Commonwealth Edison Co.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-37 and NPF-66, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the 
licensee) for operation of Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, located in 
Ogle County, Illinois and Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-72 and 
NPF-77, issued to ComEd for operation of Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 
2, located in Will County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendments present a full conversion from the current 
Technical Specifications (TS) to TS based on NUREG-1431, Revision 1, 
``Standard Technical Specifications--Westinghouse Plants,'' dated April 
1995. NUREG-1431 has been developed through working groups composed of 
both NRC staff members and industry representatives and has been 
endorsed by the staff as part of an industry-wide initiative to 
standardize and improve TS. The December 13, 1996, application was 
supplemented by letters dated February 24, September 2, October 10, 
October 28 and December 8, 1997 and January 27, January 29, February 6, 
February 13, February 24, February 26, April 13, April 16, June 1, June 
2, July 2, July 8, July 30, July 31, August 11, August 12, September 
21, September 25, October 1, October 2, October 5 and October 15, 1998. 
As part of this submittal, ComEd has applied the criteria contained in 
the Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specification 
Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors (final policy statement),'' 
published in the Federal Register on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132), to 
the current Byron and Braidwood TSs and using NUREG-1431 as a basis, 
developed a proposed set of improved TSs for Byron and Braidwood. The 
criteria in the final policy statement were subsequently added to 10 
CFR 50.36, ``Technical Specifications,'' in a rule change which was 
published in the Federal Register on July 19, 1995 (60 FR 36953) and 
became effective on August 18, 1995.
    The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the existing 
TSs into five general groupings. These groupings are characterized as

[[Page 58073]]

administrative changes, relocated changes, more restrictive changes, 
less restrictive changes, and removed detail.
    Administrative changes are those that involve restructuring, 
renumbering, rewording, interpretation and complex rearranging of 
requirements and other changes not affecting technical content or 
substantially revising an operational requirement. The reformatting, 
renumbering and rewording process reflects the attributes of NUREG-1431 
and do not involve technical changes to the existing TSs. The proposed 
changes include: (a) providing the appropriate numbers, etc., for 
NUREG-1431 bracketed information (information which must be supplied on 
a plant-specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant), (b) 
identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and (c) 
changing NUREG-1431 section wording to conform to existing licensee 
practices. Such changes are administrative in nature and do not impact 
initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or 
transient events.
    More restrictive changes are those involving more stringent 
requirements for operation of the facility or eliminate existing 
flexibility. These more stringent requirements do not result in 
operation that will alter assumptions relative to mitigation of an 
accident or transient event. The more restrictive requirements will not 
alter the operation of process variables, structures, systems and 
components described in the safety analyses. For each requirement in 
the current Byron and Braidwood TSs that is more restrictive than the 
corresponding requirement in NUREG-1431 which the licensee proposes to 
retain in the improved Technical Specifications (iTSs), they have 
provided an explanation of why they have concluded that retaining the 
more restrictive requirement is desirable to ensure safe operation of 
the facilities because of specific design features of the plant.
    Less restrictive changes are those where current requirements are 
relaxed or eliminated, or new flexibility is provided. The more 
significant ``less restrictive'' requirements are justified on a case-
by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to provide little or 
no safety benefit, their removal from the TSs may be appropriate. In 
most cases, relaxations previously granted to individual plants on a 
plant-specific basis were the result of (a) generic NRC actions, (b) 
new NRC staff positions that have evolved from technological 
advancements and operating experience, or (c) resolution of the Owners 
Groups' comments on the improved Standard Technical Specifications 
(iSTS). Generic relaxations contained in NUREG-1431 were reviewed by 
the staff and found to be acceptable because they are consistent with 
current licensing practices and NRC regulations. The licensee's design 
will be reviewed to determine if the specific design basis and 
licensing basis are consistent with the technical basis for the model 
requirements in NUREG-1431 and, thus, provides a basis for these 
revised TSs or if relaxation of the requirements in the current TSs is 
warranted based on the justification provided by the licensee.
    Some less restrictive changes involve removal of detail from the 
current TS to a licensee-controlled document. The details being removed 
from the current TS are not assumed to be an initiator of any analyzed 
event and are not assumed to mitigate accidents or transients. 
Therefore, the relocation does not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 
Moving some details to a licensee-controlled document will not involve 
a significant change in design or operation of the plant and no 
hardware is being added to the plant as part of the proposed changes to 
the current TS. The changes will not alter assumptions made in the 
safety analysis and licensing basis. Therefore, the changes will not 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated. The changes do not reduce the margin of 
safety since they have no impact on any safety analysis assumptions.
    Some less restrictive changes involve the relocation of entire 
specifications, which contain surveillance requirements for structures, 
systems, components or variables that do not meet the criteria for 
inclusion in the TSs. Relocated changes are those current TS 
requirements which do not satisfy or fall within any of the four 
criteria specified in the Commission's policy statement and may be 
relocated to appropriate licensee-controlled documents.
    The licensee's application of the screening criteria is described 
in that portion of their December 13, 1996, application titled, 
``Application of Selection Criteria to the Byron/Braidwood Technical 
Specifications.'' The affected structures, systems components or 
variables are not assumed to be initiators of analyzed events and are 
not assumed to mitigate accident or transient events. The requirements 
and surveillances for these affected structures, systems, components or 
variables will be relocated from the TS to administratively controlled 
documents such as the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), the 
TS Bases, the Technical Requirements Manual (TRM), the Selected 
Licensee Commitments or plant procedures. Changes made to these 
documents will be made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 or other appropriate 
control mechanisms. In addition, the affected structures, systems, 
components or variables are addressed in existing surveillance 
procedures which are also subject to 10 CFR 50.59. These proposed 
changes will not impose or eliminate any requirements.
    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.
    By November 30, 1998, 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 the: 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

[[Page 58074]]

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.
    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: Rulemaking 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).
    If a request for a hearing is received, the Commission's staff may 
issue the amendment after it completes its technical review and prior 
to the completion of any required hearing if it publishes a further 
notice for public comment of its proposed finding of no significant 
hazards consideration in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and 50.92.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendments dated December 13, 1996, as supplemented by 
letters dated February 24, September 2, October 10, October 28 and 
December 8, 1997 and January 27, January 29, February 6, February 13, 
February 24, February 26, April 13, April 16, June 1, June 2, July 2, 
July 8, July 30, July 31, August 11, August 12, September 21, September 
25, October 1, October 2, October 5 and October 15, 1998, which are 
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, at the Byron 
Public Library District, 109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 
61010; and for Braidwood, at the Wilmington Public Library, 201 S. 
Kankakee Street, Wilmington, Illinois 60481.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23d day of October 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ramin R. Assa,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-28992 Filed 10-28-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P