[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 156 (Friday, August 13, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44243-44245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-21053]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278]


PECO Energy Co., 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. 
DPR-44 and DPR-56, issued to PECO Energy Company (the licensee), for 
operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS) Units 2 and 
3, located in York County, Pennsylvania.
    The proposed amendments would revise the Technical Specifications 
(TSs) contained in Appendix A to the Operating Licenses to incorporate 
a note into the TSs which will permit a one-time exemption, until 
September 30, 1999, from the 90  deg.F limit stated in Surveillance 
Requirement (SR) 3.7.2.2. This SR currently requires that the average 
water temperature of the normal heat sink be less than or equal to 90 
deg.F as demonstrated on a 24-hour frequency. As stated in the proposed 
TS note, during the time period between approval and September 30, 
1999, the average water temperature of the normal heat sink will be 
limited to less than or equal to 92  deg.F.
    The licensee requested that these proposed amendments be processed 
as an exigent request pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) to permit 
implementation during this summer. The licensee's basis for the exigent 
request is as follows: ``On August 1, 1999 at approximately 1500 hours, 
the normal heat sink temperature for the intake of Units 2 and 3 
reached 89  deg.F. Based on the current and projected low rainfall 
conditions, above normal atmospheric temperatures, and below normal 
precipitation, the Conowingo Pond (Normal Heat Sink) temperature is 
expected to approach and/or exceed 90  deg.F on a periodic basis 
resulting in the failure to meet Technical Specification SR 3.7.2.2. 
This would require PBAPS, Units 2 and 3 to enter into Mode 3 [hot 
shutdown] operation within 12 hours and Mode 4 [cold shutdown] 
operation within 36 hours.
    On July 18, 1999, the normal heat sink temperature reached 86 
deg.F, which is four (4) degrees below the TS limit of 90  deg.F. At 
that time, PBAPS Engineering began to identify the design basis impacts 
of the increased cooling water temperatures, analyze the environmental 
conditions that impact the normal heat sink temperature, and develop 
the analysis which would support continued safe plant operation at 
elevated cooling water temperatures. Throughout this period, up to the 
submittal of this exigent license change, significant resources have 
been committed to performing engineering analysis and preparing related 
documents, reviews of the analysis by on-site and off-site review 
groups, and preparation of the license amendment package itself.
    Shutdown of the plants would cause undue stress on the regional 
electrical grid which could potentially destabilize power flow to all 
customers and to the PBAPS offsite sources. During two periods in the 
month of July (July 6 and 19, 1999), energy demands resulted in voltage 
reduction situations. Loss of the PBAPS, Units 2 and 3, capacity during 
a period in which energy is needed most, could result in a load 
shedding situation. Additionally, the unforeseen weather conditions 
resulting in the recent abnormally high normal heat sink temperature 
did not permit the submittal of this change under the normal license 
amendment process.'' 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 
requests involve 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 amendments 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

[[Page 44244]]

50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no 
significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. The proposed TS changes do not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated 
because the probability of a Loss of Coolant Accident is independent 
of an increase in the normal heat sink temperature limit. The 
increase in the heat sink temperature does not affect any accident 
or transient initiators. The engineering analysis discussed has 
determined that ESW[Emergency Service Water]/HPSW[High Pressure 
Service Water] systems remain capable of their design safety 
functions at the increased normal heat sink temperature and will not 
impact the consequences of evaluated accidents.
    2. The proposed TS changes do not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated because the 
requested change is increasing the heat sink temperature limit, and 
this in and of itself does not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident. Increasing the heat sink temperature 
does not introduce any new accident initiator. Additionally, this 
change will not introduce any new failure mechanisms.
    3. The proposed TS changes do not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.

    The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety, because the PBAPS, Units 2 and 3 ESW/HPSW heat 
exchangers have been analyzed using current plant conditions and 
performance data. This analysis has concluded that the ESW/HPSW 
systems will continue to be capable of performing their design bases 
heat removal functions with normal heat sink temperature as high as 
92  deg.F. In order to maintain the margin of safety with a higher 
normal heat sink temperature, the performance of the equipment must 
be better than assumed in the design basis analyses. The actual 
performance of the affected heat exchangers is better than assumed 
in the accident analyses. Using the actual performance capability of 
the equipment, based on the most recent plant data and trending, 
more than compensates for the increased normal heat sink 
temperature. Additionally, many design calculations used a Normal 
Heat Sink temperature of 95  deg.F with minimum torus water level. 
Also, the containment heat-up analysis was performed with 
conservatisms including a decay heat input which is based on a rated 
power level which is nominally 5% above the maximum licensed 
operating power level. These are examples of additional conservative 
assumptions which remain in the analysis. Therefore, the increase in 
normal heat sink temperature 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 requests involve 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, US 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 September 13, 1999, 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 Government Publications Section, State 
Library of Pennsylvania (Regional Depository), Education Building, 
Walnut Street and Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, PA 17105. 
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

[[Page 44245]]

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 requests involve 
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 requests involve 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, 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, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to J. W. Durham, Sr., Esquire, Sr. VP 
and General Counsel, PECO Energy Company, 2301 Market Street, 
Philadelphia, PA 19101, 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 August 6, 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 Government Publications Section, State 
Library of Pennsylvania, (Regional Depository) Education Building, 
Walnut Street and Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, PA 17105.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of August 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Bartholomew C. Buckley,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-21053 Filed 8-12-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P