[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 24, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14274-14275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-7167]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414]


Duke Energy Corporation; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-35 and NPF-52, issued to Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee), 
for operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located in 
York County, South Carolina.
    The proposed amendments would revise the Technical Specifications 
(TS), deleting Section 3.3.7, ``Control Room Area Ventilation System 
(CRAVS) Actuation Instrumentation,'' and Section 3.3.8, ``Auxiliary 
Building Filtered Ventilation Exhaust System (ABFVES) Actuation 
Instrumentation.'' The basis for the proposed deletion is that Sections 
3.3.7 and 3.3.8 do not correctly reflect the design of the Catawba 
CRAVS and ABFVES control systems. At Catawba, the Solid State 
Protection System (SSPS) provides input to the diesel generator load 
sequencer, which, in turn, provides input to the CRAVS and ABFVES. 
Thus, the CRAVS and ABFVES are not directly actuated by the SSPS. 
However, the surveillance requirements currently specified by Sections 
3.3.7 and 3.3.8 are written on the assumption that the CRAVS and ABFVES 
are directly actuated by the SSPS.
    The licensee requested approval on an exigent basis pursuant to its 
request for enforcement discretion. The staff verbally granted the 
enforcement discretion on March 11, 1999, and affirmed it by a 
subsequent notice of enforcement discretion (NOED) letter dated March 
15, 1999. The NOED letter stated that the enforcement discretion is in 
effect until the issuance of amendments to revise Section 3.3.7 and 
3.3.8. The staff intends to issue such amendments within 4 weeks of the 
NOED letter. This issuance schedule would not be accommodated by the 
normal 30-day notice to the public.
    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.
    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:

First Standard

    Implementation of this amendment would not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated. Approval of this amendment will have no effect 
on accident probabilities or consequences. No physical changes are 
being made to the plant design which will result in any increase in 
accident probabilities. Approval of this amendment will not result 
in a decrease in system or equipment reliability or availability. 
Therefore, there will be no impact on any accident consequences.

Second Standard

    Implementation of this amendment would not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated. No new accident causal mechanisms are created 
as a result of NRC approval of this amendment request. No changes 
are being made to the plant that will introduce any new accident 
causal mechanisms.

Third Standard

    Implementation of this amendment would not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety. Margin of safety is related to the 
confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers to perform 
their design functions during and following an accident situation. 
These barriers include the fuel cladding, the reactor coolant 
system, and the containment system. The performance of these fission 
product barriers will not be degraded by the implementation of this 
amendment. No safety margins will be impacted.
    Based upon the preceding discussion, Duke Energy Corporation has 
concluded that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
hazards consideration.

    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 amendments 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 amendments before the expiration 
of the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is 
that the amendments involve 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 April 23, 1999, the licensee may file a request for a hearing 
with respect

[[Page 14275]]

to issuance of the amendments 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 York County Library, 138 East Black Street, Rock Hill, South 
Carolina. 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 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.
    If the amendments are 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 
amendments and make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendments.
    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 amendments.
    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 Ms, Lisa F. Vaughn, Legal Department 
(PB05E), Duke Energy Corporation, 422 South Church Street, Charlotte, 
North Carolina, 28201, 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 amendments dated March 15, 1999, as supplemented by 
letter dated March 17, 1999, 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 York County Library, 138 East Black Street, Rock Hill, 
South Carolina.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of March 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate II-2, Division of Licensing 
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-7167 Filed 3-23-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P