[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11089-11091]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4892]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-255]


Consumers Energy 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-20, issued to Consumers Energy Company for operation of the 
Palisades Plant located in Van Buren County, Michigan.
    The proposed amendment would change Current Technical Specification 
(CTS) 4.9a.2, ``Auxiliary Feedwater System Tests--Surveillance 
Requirements--Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps,'' by removing the surveillance 
requirement with respect to the backup steam supply to turbine-driven 
auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pump P-8B. As changed, the monthly 
surveillance requirement would apply to the switch for the primary 
steam supply valve (CV-0522B) and the pump test-key switch on the 
automatic AFW actuation system, but not to the switch for the manual 
backup steam supply valve.
    Related changes would also be made to the Improved Technical 
Specification (ITS) 3.7.5, ``Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System,'' as 
issued November 30, 1999 (Amendment 189). Condition A for ITS 3.7.5 
currently provides a completion time of 7 days for restoration if one 
of the two steam supplies for the turbine-driven AFW pump becomes 
inoperable (provided the other supply is operable). The proposed 
amendment would delete ITS 3.7.5 Condition A, and the remaining 
conditions and their associated actions would be relettered. ITS 3.7.5 
Condition B currently allows a completion time of 72 hours for 
restoration of an inoperable AFW pump (provided that at least 100% of 
required AFW flow and at least two operable AFW pumps are available). 
Condition B also specifies a second completion time: ``10 days from 
discovery of failure to meet the LCO [limiting condition for 
operation].'' The proposed amendment would delete this second 
completion time in Condition B. The proposed amendment would also 
revise ITS Surveillance Requirement 3.7.5.1 to only require 
verification of valve alignment in the remaining steam supply to P-8B 
(i.e., reference to the backup steam supply would be eliminated). The 
licensee also forwarded associated changes for the CTS and ITS Bases.
    Exigent circumstances exist which cause the Commission to act 
promptly upon the proposed amendment request. During a maintenance 
outage on February 5, 2000, a steam leak developed beneath the floor of 
the turbine building from the underground piping that provides a manual 
backup steam supply to AFW pump P-8B. The licensee states that this 
manual backup steam supply line provides no required safety function, 
but it does provide an alternative steam supply to P-8B for operational 
flexibility. The licensee subsequently excavated the area immediately 
surrounding the leak and removed and replaced the leaking pipe section. 
Since the apparent cause of the leak was corrosion originating from the 
exterior of the pipe, the licensee concluded that the integrity of the 
remainder of the line, which has not been completely inspected, cannot 
be quantitatively proven and cannot easily be demonstrated to be in 
compliance with the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code for the entire length of 
underground pipe. Therefore, the licensee decided on February 13, 2000, 
to consider this manual backup steam supply line inoperable. Since the 
plant was scheduled to start up, the licensee requested in a letter and 
telephone call on February 16, 2000, that the Commission grant 
enforcement discretion to permit plant startup and subsequent operation 
until a TS change request could be processed. During the phone call, 
and in a subsequent letter dated February 18, 2000, the Commission 
noted its intention to exercise enforcement discretion for the period 
of time necessary to process a license amendment to change the TS. In 
its letter granting enforcement discretion, the Commission stated that 
the license amendment application was to be submitted no later than 
12:50 p.m. on February 18, 2000. Thus, the licensee's application for 
amendment, dated February 18, 2000, is in response to the degraded 
condition of an underground pipe that is not needed for any safety 
function and to the Commission's actions in granting enforcement 
discretion.
    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:

    A. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

[[Page 11090]]

    The proposed Technical Specifications changes would allow plant 
operation without requiring the manual backup steam supply to the 
turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump.
    The connections to the former underground backup steam supply 
for Pump P-8B turbine will be isolated from the main steam piping 
using at least one manual isolation valve, and from the P-8B turbine 
driver with a pipe cap or flanged connection prior to leaving Cold 
Shutdown from the current outage. Since the backup underground steam 
supply is not credited in any plant safety analyses nor required for 
any design or license basis events, adequate redundancy in other 
required sources of supplying auxiliary feedwater exists such that 
no increase in consequences of an accident will result. 
Probabilistic Safety Analysis, comparing plant operation with and 
without the manual backup steam supply, has shown there to be no 
significant change in risk. Therefore, operation of the plant in 
accordance with the proposed Technical Specifications would not 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of 
an accident previously evaluated.
    B. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Operation of the plant in accordance with the proposed Technical 
Specifications would not add any new equipment, settings, or alter 
any plant operating methodology. The only change is the elimination 
of a testing requirement for a removed plant component. Functioning 
of that plant component is not assumed in any safety analyses. Since 
there will be no change in operating plant equipment, settings, or 
normal operating methodology, operation in accordance with the 
proposed Technical Specifications would not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    C. Does this change involve a significant reduction in a margin 
of safety?
    The proposed Technical Specifications change would allow 
operation of the plant without the manual backup steam supply to the 
turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump. There are no analyzed 
accidents which require the manual backup steam supply to mitigate 
the effects of the accident. A Probabilistic Safety Analysis, 
comparing plant operation with and without the manual backup steam 
supply, has shown there to be no significant change in risk.
    Therefore, operation of the plant in accordance with the 
proposed Technical Specifications would 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 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 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, 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 March 31, 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 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

[[Page 11091]]

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, 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 Arunas T. Udrys, Esquire, Consumers 
Energy Company, 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, MI 49201, 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 February 18, 2000, which is 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 24th day of February, 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Darl S. Hood,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-4892 Filed 2-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P