[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 7, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12038-12040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-5475]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-317]


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment To Facility Operating License, Proposed No 
Significant Hazards Condideration 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-53 issued to Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BGE or the 
licensee) for operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 
No. 1 located in Calvert County, Maryland.
    The proposed amendment would approve an issue involving the 
Societie Alsacienne Construction Mechaniques Del Melhouse (SACM) diesel 
generator (DG) that constitutes an unreviewed safety question. 
Specifically, a new failure mode has been identified for DG 1A (SACM) 
that is not adequately described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis 
Report. The manufacturer has indicated that operating the engine in a 
light load condition may degrade engine performance and ultimately 
result in engine failure.
    Baltimore Gas and Electric Company has determined that acceptance 
of the new failure mode constitutes an unreviewed safety question. BGE 
requests approval through an amendment to their operating license that 
concludes that the new failure mode is acceptable on the basis that BGE 
will assure on every shift that safety-related loads are sufficiently 
available to DG 1A to ensure that minimum load requirement is met. 
Otherwise, DG 1A will be declared inoperable.
    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

[[Page 12039]]

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. Would not involve a significant increase in the probability 
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The DGs are the standby, onsite source of power for the safety-
related systems necessary to safely shut down the units following a 
design basis accident and/or a loss-of-offsite power. The proposed 
change would revise the operating license to conclude that the new 
failure mode for DG 1A is acceptable.
    Diesel generators are not initiators in any previously evaluated 
accidents. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an 
increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated. For 
DG 1A to be considered operable, the required minimum load must be 
available to DG 1A from safety-related sources.
    The proposed change accepts operation with the new failure mode 
of DG 1A because the required minimum load required will be met by 
having safety-related loads available to DG 1A. Having the safety-
related loads available will ensure DG 1A will be capable of 
performing its safety function. Therefore, accepting the unreviewed 
safety question for DG 1A does not involve a significant increase in 
the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    Based on the above, the proposed change does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Would not create the possibility of a new different type of 
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve a significant change in the 
operation of the plant and no new or different accident initiation 
mechanism is created by accepting the new failure mode. Diesel 
Generator 1A is not being modified by the proposed change nor will 
an unusual operator action be required. The DG 1A will continue to 
operate in the same manner. Therefore, the proposed change does not 
support the possibility of a new different type of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated.
    3. Would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety.
    The margin of safety of the DGs is to provide a reliable 
standby, onsite source of power for the safety-related systems 
necessary to safely shut down the units following a design basis 
accident and/or a loss-of-offsite power. The proposed change accepts 
the new failure mode for the DG because the required minimum load 
requirement will be met by having the safety-related loads available 
to DG 1A. Therefore, accepting the DG as-is 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 
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 April 6, 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

[[Page 12040]]

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 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 Jay E. Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 
2300 N Street, NW. Washington, 20037 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 1st day of March 2000.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alexander Dromerick,
Project Manager, Section I, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-5475 Filed 3-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P