[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 245 (Thursday, December 20, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65749-65751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31333]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-219]


Amergen Energy Company, LLC; 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 AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (the licensee) for 
operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station located in 
Ocean County, New Jersey.
    The proposed license amendment request is to revise Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.5.A.5.b to change the number of allowed inoperable 
suppression chamber to drywell vacuum breakers from two to five. This 
change decreases the required number of operable vacuum breakers for 
opening from twelve to nine.
    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 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. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change reduces the number of vacuum breakers 
required to be operable from twelve to nine, allows continued 
operation for 72 hours with one required vacuum breaker inoperable, 
and allows a vacuum breaker to remain operable with one position 
alarm circuit inoperable. The proposed change does not increase the 
probability of an accident. The number of vacuum breakers required 
to be operable is not assumed to be an accident initator of any 
analyzed event.
    [...] The change does not allow continuous operation with only 
eight vacuum breakers operable. Therefore, the consequences of an 
accident are not increased. This change does not alter assumptions 
relative to the mitigation of an accident or transient event. The 
position alarm circuits only provide indication of valve position 
prior to an event and do not perform any accident mitigation 
functions. Additional surveillance of an operable vacuum breaker 
with an inoperable position alarm circuit will provide adequate 
assurance of vacuum breaker status and operability of the remaining 
redundant position alarm circuit.
    Therefore, this change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    2. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change reduces the number of vacuum breakers 
required to be operable from twelve to nine, allows continued 
operation for 72 hours with one required vacuum breaker inoperable, 
and allows a vacuum breaker to remain operable with one position 
alarm circuit inoperable. This change will not physically alter the 
plant since [because] no new or different type of equipment will be 
installed. The change in analytical methods used to establish the 
proposed Technical Specification limits for normal plant operation 
preserves the current safety analysis assumptions and acceptable 
criteria. The proposed 72 hour allowed outage time for a required 
operable vacuum breaker is consistent with NRC Standard Technical 
Specifications, NUREG-1433, and is considered acceptable due to the 
low probability of an event in which the remaining vacuum breaker 
capability would not be adequate assuming a single failure to open. 
Additional surveillance of an operable vacuum breaker with an 
inoperable position alarm circuit will provide adequate assurance of 
vacuum breaker status and operability of the remaining redundant 
position alarm circuit.
    Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety.
    This proposed change reduces the number of vacuum breakers 
required to be operable from twelve to nine, allows continued 
operation for 72 hours with one required vacuum breaker inoperable, 
and allows a vacuum breaker to remain operable with one position 
alarm circuit inoperable. Reducing the number of required vacuum 
breakers from twelve to nine is consistent with the analysis that 
shows eight vacuum breakers are sufficient to maintain containment 
differential pressures and downcomer water column height below 
acceptable limits. Therefore, the margin of safety is not affected. 
The safety analysis assumptions and acceptance criteria are 
maintained. In addition, with one required vacuum breaker inoperable 
for 72 hours, the margin of safety is not significantly reduced 
considering the remaining vacuum breakers are still available and 
sufficient to mitigate an event, and the low probability of an 
accident occurring during this time period requiring vacuum breaker 
operation. Additional surveillance of an operable vacuum breaker 
with an inoperable position alarm circuit will provide adequate 
assurance of vacuum breaker status and operability of the remaining 
redundant position alarm circuit.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
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

[[Page 65750]]

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. Documents may 
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By January 22, 2002, 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, located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland, or electronically on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/CFR/index.html. If there are problems in accessing the 
document, contact the Public Document Room Reference staff at 1-800-
397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected]. 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.
    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, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 Kevin 
P. Gallen, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP, 1800 M Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036-5869, 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

[[Page 65751]]

balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 
2.714(d).
    Further details with respect to this action, see the application 
for amendment dated September 19, 2001, which is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. Persons who do not have access to 
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, should contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff by 
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of December 2001.

    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. 01-31333 Filed 12-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P