[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