[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 98 (Friday, May 21, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27824-27826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-13023]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-249]


Commonwealth 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-25, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the licensee), 
for operation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, located in 
Grundy County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendment would reduce the number of safety valves 
required for overpressure protection at Dresden, Unit 3, by excluding 
from Technical Specifications (TS) section 3.6.E the safety valve 
function of the Target Rock safety/relief valve (SRV). The proposed 
amendment would also move the safety valve lift pressure setpoints from 
TS section 3.6.E to TS section 4.6.E.
    This request for amendment was submitted under exigent 
circumstances to prevent undue shutdown or derate of the unit due to 
the safety valve function of the Target Rock safety/relief valve 
becoming inoperable on May 3, 1999. The time necessary for ComEd to 
develop this TS request would not allow the normal 30-day period for 
public comment since ComEd had no prior knowledge of this 
inoperability.
    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:
    1. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
probability of occurrence or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated?
    The probability of an evaluated accident is derived from the 
probabilities of the individual precursors to that accident. The 
consequences of an evaluated accident are determined by the operability 
of plant systems designed to mitigate those consequences. Limits have 
been established consistent with NRC-approved methods to ensure that 
fuel performance during normal, transient, and accident conditions is 
acceptable. The proposed change to permit operation with the Target 
Rock valve safety function OOS (out of service) does not affect the 
ability of plant systems to adequately mitigate the consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    This conclusion was derived by evaluating all applicable analyses 
including thermal limit, ASME (American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers) pressurization events, margin to unpiped safety valve, 
anticipated transient analysis without scram, LOCA (loss of coolant 
accident), station blackout, and Appendix R analyses. Therefore, there 
is no increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated because the analyses support operation with the 
Target Rock SRV safety function OOS.
    2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Since the requested change has been previously evaluated, no new 
precursors of an accident are created and no new or different kinds of 
accidents are created. Therefore, the proposed change does not create 
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated.
    This conclusion was derived by evaluating all applicable analyses 
including thermal limit, ASME pressurization events, margin to unpiped 
safety valve, anticipated transient analysis without scram events, 
station blackout, and Appendix R analyses. Therefore, the proposed 
change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any accident previously evaluated because the analyses 
support operation with the Target Rock SRV safety function OOS.
    3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety?
    Allowing Dresden operation with the Target Rock SRV safety function 
out of service will not involve any reduction in margin of safety. This 
conclusion was derived by evaluating all existing analyses including 
thermal limit, ASME pressurization events, margin to unpiped safety 
valve, anticipated transient analysis without scram events, station 
blackout, and Appendix R analyses. The analyses previously evaluated 
remain valid and conservative. Thus there is no reduction in the margin 
of safety.
    Therefore, based upon the above evaluation, ComEd has concluded 
that these changes do not constitute 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 by close of business (4:15 p.m. 
EDST) 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 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

[[Page 27825]]

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 
Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and 
Publications 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 June 21, 1999, 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 Morris Area Public Library District, 604 
Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450. 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, US 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. Pamela B. Stroebel, Senior Vice President and 
General Counsel, Commonwealth Edison Company, P.O. Box 767, Chicago, 
Illinois 60690-0767, 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 May 5, 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 Morris Area Public Library District, 604 
Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450.

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


[[Page 27826]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lawrence W. Rossbach,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate III, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-13023 Filed 5-20-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P