[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 105 (Friday, May 31, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38150-38152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-13655]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

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


Southern California Edison Company; Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No 
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a 
Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-10 and NPF-15, issued to the Southern California Edison Company 
(SCE/the licensee), for operation of the San Onofre Generating Station 
(SONGS), Units 2 and 3 located in San Diego County, California.
    The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification 
5.5.2.11.f.1.h, ``Steam Generator (SG) Tube Surveillance Program,'' to 
more clearly delineate the scope of the SG

[[Page 38151]]

tube inspection required in the tubesheet (TS) region.
    Recent conference calls were held between NRC staff members and SCE 
to discuss the planned SONGS SG tube inspections. During the 
teleconferences, the NRC staff asked questions on the extent of the 
tube inspections that were being planned with a rotating probe within 
the TS region. SCE stated that the extent of its rotating plus point 
probe inspections in the TS region would cover 5 inches (as a minimum) 
below the top of the hot leg TS. SCE also stated it will repair or plug 
on detection any tubes with indications of cracking. The NRC requested 
that SCE clarify the tube inspection criteria within the TS for this 
region of the tube. Consequently, SCE is proposing a technical 
specification change to clarify the extent of the current SONGS 
technical specification tube inspections. For SONGS Unit 2, the 
technical specification change is needed by June 12, 2002, to support 
entry into Mode 4 from the current refueling outage. Therefore, SCE has 
requested an exigent technical specification change to clarify the SG 
inspections to be performed so that the plant can be restarted.
    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:

    The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    Southern California Edison (SCE) proposes to modify the San 
Onofre Units 2 and 3 Technical Specifications to define the SG tube 
inspection scope. The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS)-
specific analysis takes into account the reinforcing effect the TS 
has on the external surface of an expanded SG tube.
    Tube-bundle integrity will not be adversely affected by the 
implementation of the TEA [tube engagement area] tube inspection 
scope. SG tube burst or collapse cannot occur within the confines of 
the TS; therefore, the tube burst and collapse criteria of draft 
Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121 are inherently met. Any degradation 
below the TEA length is shown by analyses and test results to be 
acceptable, thereby precluding an event with consequences similar to 
a postulated tube rupture event.
    Tube burst is precluded for cracks within the TS by the 
constraint provided by the TS. Thus, structural integrity is 
maintained by the TS constraint. However, a 360-degree 
circumferential crack or many axially oriented cracks could permit 
severing of the tube and tube pullout from the TS under the axial 
forces on the tube from primary to secondary pressure differentials. 
Testing was performed to define the length of non-degraded tubing 
that is sufficient to compensate for the axial forces on the tube 
and thus prevent pullout.
    In conclusion, incorporation of the TEA inspection scope into 
San Onofre Units 2 and 3 Technical Specifications maintains existing 
design limits and does not involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    Tube-bundle integrity is expected to be maintained during all 
plant conditions upon implementation of the proposed tube inspection 
scope. Use of this scope does not induce a new mechanism that would 
result in a different kind of accident from those previously 
analyzed. Even with the limiting circumstances of a complete 
circumferential separation of a tube occurring below the TEA length, 
SG tube pullout is precluded and leakage is predicted to be 
maintained within the Final Safety Analysis Report limits during all 
plant conditions. Therefore, a possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated is not 
created.
    The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in 
a margin of safety.
    Upon implementation of the TEA inspection scope, operation with 
potential cracking below the TEA length in the explansion region of 
the SG tubing meets the margin of safety as defined by RG 1.121 and 
RG 1.83 and the requirements of General Design Criteria 14, 15, 31, 
and 32. Accordingly, 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 
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. 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 July 1, 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, and available electronically on the Internet at the NRC Web 
site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr. If a

[[Page 38152]]

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, 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 
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)(is)-(v) and 2.714(d).
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated May 22, 2002, which is available for 
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible 
electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management 
System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the 
NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do 
not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff 
by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to 
[email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of May, 2002.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan Wang,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 02-13655 Filed 5-30-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P