[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 6, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36408-36409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-17017]



[[Page 36408]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-286]


Power Authority of the State of New York; 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. 
DRP-64 issued to the Power Authority of the State of New York (the 
licensee) for operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 
3 (IP3) located in Westchester County, New York.
    The proposed amendment would extend the allowed outage time (AOT) 
for the 32 Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) and its Fuel Oil Storage 
Tank (FOST) from 72 hours to 7 days on a one-time basis.
    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.
    The Commission has made a proposed determination 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 proposed License amendment involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated?
    No. The proposed License amendment does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated. The EDGs and their associated fuel 
oil systems are not part of any accident initiation; therefore, 
there is no increase in the probability of an accident. At a 
minimum, two EDGs are still available with sufficient fuel oil 
supply to mitigate IP3 design basis accidents. The minimum 
safeguards equipment can still be powered even if the 32 EDG is 
assumed to be lost due to single failure. This has been verified by 
EDG loading calculation, IP3-CALC-ED-00207, ``480V Bus 2A, 3A, 5A & 
6A and EDGs 31,32 and 33 Accident Loading.'' With the 32 EDG 
available and aligned for automatic start capability (although 
declared inoperable) during this 32-FOST outage, further backup to 
the 31 and 33 EDGs is provided. By the design of the overall EDG 
fuel oil system, the 32 EDG fuel oil day tank is able to be supplied 
with sufficient fuel oil supply from either the 31 or 33 FOSTs in 
order to support operation of the 32 EDG, if necessary.
    To support fuel oil needs of all three EDGs, if necessary, the 
FSAR [final safety analysis report] describes that additional fuel 
oil supplies are available on the Indian Point site and locally near 
the site. Further EDG fuel oil supplies are maintained in the New 
Rochelle-Mount Vernon, NY area, about 40 miles from IP3. Overall, 
the EDGs are designed as backup AC power sources in the event of a 
Loss of Offsite Power (LOOP). The proposed AOT does not change the 
conditions or minimum amount of safeguards equipment assumed in the 
safety analysis for design basis accident mitigation, since a 
minimum of 2 EDGs is assumed. No changes are proposed as to how the 
EDGs provide plant protection. Additionally, no new modes of overall 
plant operation are proposed as a result of this change. A PRA 
[probabilistic risk assessment] evaluation determined that the 
conditional core damage probability (CCDP) for this scenario will be 
less than the threshold value of 1 E-6. Therefore, the proposed one-
time license amendment to TS [Technical Specification] 3.7.B.1 does 
not involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    (2) Does the proposed License amendment create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    No. The proposed TS change does not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated. The proposed change does not introduce any new overall 
modes of plant operation or make any permanent physical changes to 
plant systems necessary for effective accident mitigation. The 
minimum required EDG operation remains unchanged by removal of this 
single FOST [Fuel Oil Storage Tank] for repair. Additionally, added 
requirements to minimize risk associated with loss of offsite power 
also support this one-time extended AOT. Also, as previously stated, 
the EDGs and FOSTs are not part of any accident initiation. 
Therefore, the proposed one-time license amendment to TS 3.7.B.1 
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any previously evaluated.
    (3) Does the proposed License amendment involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety?
    No. The proposed License amendment does not involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety. The minimum safeguards 
loads can be maintained available if needed for design basis 
accident mitigation with 2 EDGs operable combined with their 
respective FOSTs. The 32 EDG will be available and aligned for 
automatic start capability (though declared inoperable) during this 
outage. The additional fuel oil needed to support 3 EDGs in this 
condition is available as indicated in the present design and 
licensing basis. The FSAR describes that this fuel can be provided 
from the Indian Point site, local sources and from a source about 40 
miles away to support the additional 30,026 gallons TS required fuel 
oil already existing at the Buchanan substation. Therefore, 
sufficient fuel oil will be available for potential events that 
could occur during this 7-day AOT. The PRA evaluation for the case 
of maintaining the 32 EDG available (though declared inoperable) 
with its FOST out for repair indicates an acceptable safety margin 
below the risk-informed threshold of 1E-6.
    The 480VAC electrical distribution system can be fed from a 
number of TS independent 13.8kV and 138kV offsite power sources to 
minimize reliance of IP3 on EDG power sources during the extended 
AOT requested. Additional requirements to minimize risk associated 
with the potential for loss of offsite power sources within this TS 
change also ensure that this extended AOT does not involve a 
significant reduction in safety margin. On this basis, the proposed 
one-time license amendment to TS 3.7.B.1 does not involve a 
significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    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 30 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 30-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 30-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 and provide for opportunity for a hearing 
after 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

[[Page 36409]]

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 maybe 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 August 5, 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 White Plains Public Library, 100 Martine 
Avenue, White Plains, New York, 10601. 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 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 ccontention 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 a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final 
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. 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 Mr. David E. Blabey, 10 Colombus 
Circle, New York, New York, 10019, 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 June 4, 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 Whiite Plains Public Library, 100 Martine 
Avenue, White Plains, New York, 10601.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of June 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George F. Wunder,
Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-17017 Filed 7-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P