[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 2, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47520-47521]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-19574]



[[Page 47520]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-219]


GPU Nuclear, Inc. and Jersey Central Power & Light Co.; 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-16, issued to GPU Nuclear, Inc. and et al. (the licensee), for 
operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station located in 
Ocean County, New Jersey.
    The proposed amendment would remove a shutdown requirement with 
regard to the relief valve position indication system in Section 3.13 
of the Technical Specifications (TSs). The licensee requests that the 
proposed revision be considered under exigent conditions as the Oyster 
Creek Nuclear Generating Station is currently operating under a Notice 
of Enforcement Discretion and needs the requested revision to prevent a 
shutdown of the reactor plant. The acoustic monitors provide an 
indication that an electromagnetic relief valve (EMRV) has closed after 
opening. This is an indication only, and provides no safety function.
    The exigent need for the proposed amendment to the TSs was a result 
of failed plant equipment. Realizing that the acoustic monitors could 
require a plant shutdown on short notice, the licensee had previously 
installed spare monitors on all five EMRVs and believed that the 
redundancy of the components in the drywell would increase the 
reliability of the instrumentation. This is the first time in the 
Oyster Creek history that both acoustic monitors on one EMRV were 
inoperable and unable to be repaired.
    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:

    1. Involve a significant increase in the probability [or 
consequences] of an accident previously evaluated; (or)
    This proposal will not increase the probability of occurrence or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the SAR [Safety 
Analysis Report]. The EMRV Position Indication System does not 
affect the operation of the EMRVs. No failure of the Position 
Indication System can affect the ability of these valves to perform 
their design functions or result in any condition where operation of 
one or more EMRVs is required. Failure of the Position Indication 
System to actuate in the event of an actual valve actuation does not 
affect the consequences of that event.
    During an event when an EMRV malfunctions (SORV [stuck open 
relief valve]) there are alternate indications available to the 
operator to indicate the malfunction of the valve in the event that 
the Position Indication System fails. EMRV tail pipe temperature 
rise above normal levels is a reliable indication of EMRV actuation 
and a reliable indication of closure. The probability of a stuck 
open EMRV (SORV) Event is not affected by the lack of position 
indication for the EMRV. The ability to detect the stuck open EMRV 
condition is adequately covered by backup indication or secondary 
(e.g. RPV [reactor pressure vessel] level, RPV pressure, and 
suppression pool temperature) indicators, and will not result in an 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated. Operators will be able to determine that a 
SORV has occurred and procedures are in place to mitigate this 
condition that do not depend on the EMRV acoustical monitoring 
system for indication.
    2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated; (or)
    This proposal does not create the possibility for an accident or 
malfunction of a different type than any previously identified in 
the SAR. The EMRV Position Indication System performs no control or 
protective function. It only provides an indirect indication of 
valve position. Failure of this device will not cause an unanalyzed 
failure of an engineered safety feature. Because of the diverse and 
redundant indications available, failure of the position indication 
system will not cause a new accident, nor will it cause the operator 
to commit errors to create the possibility of a new or different 
type of accident. This proposal does not affect the method of 
operation or maintenance or surveillance requirements of the EMRV 
position indication system, only the LCOs associated with the EMRV 
position indication system.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety
    This change does not reduce the margin of safety of any 
Technical Specification. Operating without one of the two position 
indicators for an EMRV does not reduce the design or operating basis 
margin to safety. In the unlikely event of an SORV, sufficient 
backup indication is available to identify and mitigate the 
occurrence. The SORV analysis assumes that operator action is taken 
on bulk suppression pool temperature (including a time delay) and 
does not credit any operator actions initiated as a result of 
operation of the position indicator system.
    Existing plant procedures provide sufficient guidance for 
detecting this condition and taking appropriate actions to mitigate 
an effect on continued safe operation. Thus, the proposed change 
does not involve a reduction in a 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.

[[Page 47521]]

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 1, 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 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 Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esquire, Shaw, 
Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 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 July 21, 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 27th day of July, 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Helen N. Pastis,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-19574 Filed 8-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P