[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2648-2650]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1038]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362]


Southern California Edison Company; San Onofre Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 2 and 3; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Nos. 
NPF-10 and NPF-15 issued to Southern California Edison Company (SCE, 
the licensee) for operation of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating 
Station (SONGS), Units 2 and 3, located in San Diego County, 
California.
    The proposed amendments would revise the SONGS Units 2 and 3 
Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.6, ``Condensate Storage Tank (CST T-
121 and T-120)'' to change the minimum inventory of water maintained in 
the condensate storage tank (T-120) from 280,000 gallons to 360,000 
gallons during plant operation Modes 1, 2 and 3.
    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.
    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 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 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of 
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented 
below:

    1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The purpose of the increased water volume is to ensure that the 
required volume of water preserved by Technical Specification 3.7.6 
is sufficient to meet the San Onofre Units 2 and 3 Licensing and 
Design Basis. To meet the guidance of Reactor Systems Branch 
Technical Position RSB-5-1, the Southern

[[Page 2649]]

California Edison Company (SCE) committed to provide an assured 
source of water for 24-hour Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) pump 
operation. This requirement necessitates the use of approximately 
200,000 gallons of water from Condensate Storage Tank (CST) T-120. 
Revising the minimum water level will not initiate an accident. 
Therefore, increasing the minimum water level in T-120 from 280,000 
gallons to 360,000 gallons will not increase the probability of an 
accident, and the requirement for 360,000 gallons ensures the 
required 200,000 gallons of water will be available when the current 
required level does not provide that assurance.
    Therefore, this change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of any accident previously 
evaluated.
    2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    Increasing the minimum water volume required in a 500,000-gallon 
tank from 280,000 gallons to 360,000 gallons will not initiate any 
accident.
    Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The margin of safety intended by the original 280,000 gallon 
requirement was to ensure that following a Design Basis Earthquake 
(DBE) CST T-120 would have at least 200,000 gallons to meet Southern 
California Edison's (SCE's) commitment to RSB-5-1. Raising the 
minimum volume to 360,000 gallons to account for calculated water 
losses, with additional allotment for future allocations, increases 
the margin above the 200,000 gallons and therefore increases the 
assurance that the RSB-5-1 commitment is met.
    Therefore, this change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    Based on the responses to these three criterion, Southern 
California Edison (SCE) has concluded that the proposed amendment 
involves no 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 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 
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 February 17, 2000, 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 accessible 
electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room link at 
the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov). 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 contention will not be 
permitted to participate as a party.

[[Page 2650]]

    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, 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 Douglas K. Porter, Esquire, Southern 
California Edison Company, 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead, 
California 91770, 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 January 11, and supplemented November 
29, 1999, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's 
Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., 
Washington, DC, and accessible electronically through the ADAMS Public 
Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site 
(http://www.nrc.gov).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11 TH day of January 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Raghavan,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV & 
Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-1038 Filed 1-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P