[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 112 (Monday, June 13, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34161-34163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-3050]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324]
Carolina Power & Light Company, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant,
Units 1 and 2; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments 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 No.
DPR-71 and Facility Operating License No. DPR-62 issued to Carolina
Power & Light Company (the licensee), for operation of the Brunswick
Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in Brunswick County, North
Carolina.
The proposed changes replace the existing requirement of Technical
Specification (TS) 3.4.5, ``RCS [Reactor Coolant System] Leakage
Detection Instrumentation,'' Required Action D.1, to enter Limiting
Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.0.3 if required leakage detection
systems are inoperable with the requirement to be in Mode 3 within 12
hours and Mode 4 within 36 hours.
[[Page 34162]]
The reason for the exigency is to fulfill the NRC's requirement for
the request for exigent processing of the proposed amendments as
indicated in NRC Inspection Manual Part 9900, ``Operations--Notices of
Enforcement Discretion [NOEDs],'' following NRC's granting of a verbal
NOED on May 12, 2005 (documented in a letter to the NRC on May 13,
2005).
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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 amendments 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. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change replaces the existing requirement of TS
3.4.5, Required Action D.1 to enter LCO 3.0.3 if required leakage
detection systems are inoperable with the requirement to be in Mode
3 within 12 hours and Mode 4 within 36 hours. This is accomplished
by deleting Condition D and including the ``all required leakage
detection systems inoperable'' statement in Condition C.
The proposed change does not involve physical changes to any
plant structure, system, or component. As a result, no new failure
modes of the RCS leakage detection systems are being introduced.
Additionally, the RCS leakage detection systems have no impact on
any initiating event frequency. Therefore, the proposed change
cannot increase * * * the probability [of an accident] previously
evaluated.
The consequences of a previously analyzed accident are dependent
on the initial conditions assumed for the analysis, the behavior of
the fuel during the analyzed accident, the availability and
successful functioning of the equipment assumed to operate in
response to the analyzed event, and the setpoints at which these
actions are initiated. The RCS leakage detection systems do not
perform an accident mitigating function. ECCS [emergency core
cooling system], RPS [reactor protection system], and primary and
secondary containment isolation actuations all occur based on high
drywell pressure and/or low vessel water level. The proposed change
has no impact on any setpoints or functions related to these
actuations. Therefore, the proposed change cannot increase * * * the
consequences [of an accident] previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change eliminates the unnecessarily restrictive
shutdown requirements of entering LCO 3.0.3 when all TS required
leakage detection systems are inoperable. No installed equipment is
being operated in a different manner. There is no alteration to the
parameters within which the plant is normally operated or in the
setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative actions. As a
result no new failure modes are being introduced. Therefore, the
proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change maintains the existing level of safety by
imposing shutdown requirements that are as conservative as those
currently imposed by TS 3.4.4 for actual RCS operational leakage in
excess of TS requirements. The net effect of this change is to allow
a unit to operate for five additional hours in Mode 1 with no
operable TS required leakage detection systems, while exiting the
Mode of Applicability for RCS leakage detection instrumentation one
hour earlier (i.e., 36 hours to be in Mode 4 versus 37 hours per the
existing TS 3.4.5, Required Action D.1). Elimination of the
intermediate 7 hours to Mode 2 requirement, imposed by LCO 3.0.3,
allows the unit to reach the Mode 3 from full power conditions in an
orderly manner and without challenging plant safety systems.
Therefore, the proposed change does not result in 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 requests involve 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 amendments 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.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, 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 2.309, which is available at the
Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area
01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition
for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a
presiding officer designated by the Commission or
[[Page 34163]]
by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the
Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate
order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, 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 general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
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/requestor must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts
or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor 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/
requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy 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.
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.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition,
request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing
of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)-(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications
Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, [email protected];
or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification
number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and
petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of
the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by
means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to
[email protected]. A copy of the request for hearing and petition
for leave to intervene should also be sent to David T. Conley,
Associate General Counsel II--Legal Department, Progress Energy Service
Company, LLC, Post Office Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602,
attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated May 17, 2005, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System's (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 7th day of June 2005. For The
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda L. Mozafari,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-3050 Filed 6-10-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P