Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Notices 5061

will now comply with applicable NRC

requirements.

The Director, Office of Enforcement,

may, in writing, relax or rescind any of

the above conditions upon

demonstration by Mr. Nelson of good

cause.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202,

James C. Nelson must, and any other

person adversely affected by this Order

may, submit an answer to this Order,

and may request a hearing on this

Order, within 20 days of the date of this

Order. Where good cause is shown,

consideration will be given to extending

the time to request a hearing. A request

for extension of time must be made in

writing to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission Washington, D.C. 20555,

and include a statement of good cause

for the extension. The answer may

consent to this Order. Unless the answer

consents to this Order, the answer shall,

in writing and under oath or

affirmation, specifically admit or deny

each allegation or charge made in this

Order and shall set forth the matters of

fact and law on which James C. Nelson

or any other person adversely affected

relies and the reasons as to why the

Order should not have been issued. Any

answer or request for a hearing shall be

submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Attn: Chief,

Docketing and Service Section,

Washington, DC 20555. Copies also

shall be sent to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to

the Assistant General Counsel for

Hearings and Enforcement at the same

address, to the Regional Administrator,

NRC Region II, 101 Marietta Street N.W.,

Suite 2900, Atlanta, GA 30323, and to

James C. Nelson if the answer or hearing

request is by a person other than James

C. Nelson. If a person other than James

C. Nelson requests a hearing, that

person shall set forth with particularity

the manner in which his or her interest

is adversely affected by this Order and

shall address the criteria set forth in 10

CFR 2.714(d).

If a hearing is requested by James C.

Nelson or any other person whose

interest is adversely affected, the

Commission will issue an Order

designating the time and place of any

hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to

be considered at such hearing shall be

whether this Order should be sustained.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i),

James C. Nelson, or any other person

adversely affected by this Order, may, in

addition to demanding a hearing, at the

time the answer is filed or sooner, move

the presiding officer to set aside the

immediate effectiveness of the Order on

the ground that the Order, including the

need for immediate effectiveness, is not

based on adequate evidence but on mere

suspicion, unfounded allegations, or

error.

In the absence of any request for

hearing, or written approval of an

extension of time in which to request a

hearing, the provisions specified in

Section IV above shall be effective and

final 20 days from the date of this Order

without further order or proceedings. If

an extension of time for requesting a

hearing has been approved, the

provisions specified in Section IV shall

be final when the extension expires if a

hearing request has not been received.

An answer or a request for hearing shall

not stay the immediate effectiveness of

this order.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 27th day

of January 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Edward L. Jordan,

Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory

Effectiveness, Program Oversight,

Investigations and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 97–2536 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301]

Wisconsin Electric Power Company

(Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.

1 and 2); Exemption

I

Wisconsin Electric Power Company

(the licensee) is the holder of Facility

Operating License Nos. DRP–24 and

DRP–27, which authorize operation of

the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1

and 2, respectively. The licenses

provide, among other things, that the

licensee is subject to all rules,

regulations, and orders of the

Commission now or hereafter in effect.

The facility consists of two

pressurized-water reactors located at the

licensee’s site in Manitowoc County,

Wisconsin.

II.

In its letter dated July 1, 1996, as

supplemented November 18, 1996, the

licensee requested an exemption from

the Commission’s regulations. Title 10

of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part

50, Section 60 (10 CFR 50.60),

‘‘Acceptance Criteria for Fracture

Prevention Measures for Lightwater

Nuclear Power Reactors for Normal

Operation,’’ states that all lightwater

nuclear power reactors must meet the

fracture toughness and material

surveillance program requirements for

the reactor coolant pressure boundary as

set forth in Appendices G and H to 10

CFR Part 50. Appendix G to 10 CFR Part

50 defines pressure/temperature (P/T)

limits during any condition of normal

operation, including anticipated

operational occurrences and system

hydrostatic tests to which the pressure

boundary may be subjected over its

service lifetime. It is specified in 10 CFR

50.60(b) that alternatives to the

described requirements in Appendices

G and H to 10 CFR Part 50 may be used

when an exemption is granted by the

Commission under 10 CFR 50.12.

To prevent low-temperature

overpressure transients that would

produce pressure excursions exceeding

the P/T limits of Appendix G to 10 CFR

Part 50 while the reactor is operating at

low temperatures, the licensee installed

a low-temperature overpressure

protection (LTOP) system. The system

includes pressure-relieving devices

called power-operated relief valves

(PORVs). The PORVs are set at a

pressure low enough so that if an LTOP

transient occurred, the mitigation

system would prevent the pressure in

the reactor vessel from exceeding the P/

T limits of Appendix G to 10 CFR Part

50. To prevent the PORVs from lifting

as a result of normal operating pressure

surges (e.g., reactor coolant pumps

starting or stopping) with the reactor

coolant system in a water solid

condition, the operating pressure must

be maintained below the PORV setpoint.

The maximum LTOP setpoint of 425

psig was approved May 20, 1980, with

the issuance of Amendments 45 (DPR–

24) and 60 (DPR–27) to the Point Beach

operating licenses. This LTOP system

received pressure input from the

sensing taps located in the reactor

coolant system hot leg and at the

pressurizer. Subsequent evaluation

determined that the methodology used

to determine the LTOP system setpoint

did not account for the differential

pressure across the core during reactor

coolant pump operation. A recent

Westinghouse calculation (NSAL 93–

005) indicated that with both reactor

coolant pumps operating, the pressure

at core midplane may be as much as 63

psig higher than at the pressure sensing

points. To account for this differential

pressure, which could cause the reactor

vessel midplane pressure to exceed the

ASME Section XI, Appendix G limits,

the licensee implemented an

administrative requirement in 1993

allowing only one reactor coolant pump

in operation when reactor coolant

temperature is below 160 oF. Plant

operation with this restriction places an
5062 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Notices

unnecessary burden on plant operators

to ensure safety limits are maintained.

The licensee has requested the use of

the American Society of Mechanical

Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel

Code (ASME Code) Case N–514, ‘‘Low

Temperature Overpressure Protection,’’

which allows exceeding the pressure of

the P/T limits of 10 CFR Part 50,

Appendix G, by 10 percent. ASME Code

Case N–514, the proposed alternate

methodology, is consistent with

guidelines developed by the ASME

Working Group on Operating Plant

Criteria to define pressure limits during

LTOP events that avoid certain

unnecessary operational restrictions,

provide adequate margins against failure

of the reactor pressure vessel, and

reduce the potential for unnecessary

activation of pressure-relieving devices

used for LTOP. ASME Code Case N–514

has been approved by the ASME Code

Committee. The content of this code

case has been incorporated into

Appendix G of Section XI of the ASME

Code and published in the 1993

Addenda to Section XI.

III

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the

Commission may, upon application by

any interested person or upon its own

initiative, grant exemptions from the

requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 when (1)

the exemptions are authorized by law,

will not present an undue risk to public

health or safety, and are consistent with

the common defense and security and

(2) when special circumstances are

present. Special circumstances are

present whenever, according to 10 CFR

50.12(a)(2)(ii), ‘‘Application of the

regulation in the particular

circumstances would not serve the

underlying purpose of the rule or is not

necessary to achieve the underlying

purpose of the rule.’’

The underlying purpose of 10 CFR

50.60, Appendix G, is to establish

fracture toughness requirements for

ferritic materials of pressure-retaining

components of the reactor coolant

pressure boundary to provide adequate

margins of safety during any condition

of normal operation, including

anticipated operational occurrences, to

which the pressure boundary may be

subjected over its service lifetime.

Section IV.A.2 of this appendix requires

that the reactor vessel be operated with

P/T limits at least as conservative as

those obtained by following the

methods of analysis and the required

margins of safety of Appendix G of the

ASME Code, Section XI.

Appendix G of Section XI of the

ASME Code requires that the P/T limits

be calculated (a) using a safety factor of

2 on the principal membrane (pressure)

stresses, (b) assuming a flaw at the

surface with a depth of one-quarter (1⁄4)

of the vessel wall thickness and a length

of 6 times its depth, and (c) using a

conservative fracture toughness curve

that is based on the lower bound of

static, dynamic, and crack arrest fracture

toughness tests on material similar to

the Point Beach reactor vessel material.

In determining the setpoint for LTOP

events, the licensee proposed to use

safety margins based on an alternate

methodology consistent with the ASME

Code Case N–514 guidelines. The ASME

Code Case N–514 allows determination

of the setpoint for LTOP events such

that the maximum pressure in the vessel

would not exceed 110 percent of the

P/T limits of the existing ASME Code,

Section XI, Appendix G. This approach

results in a safety factor of 1.8 on

pressure. All other factors, including

assumed flaw size and fracture

toughness, remain the same. Although

this methodology would reduce the

safety factor on pressure, it was

demonstrated in the Bases of the ASME

Code Case N–514 that due to the

isothermal nature of LTOP events, the

margin with respect to toughness for

LTOP transients is within the range

provided by ASME, Section XI,

Appendix G for normal heatup and

cooldown in the low temperature range.

Thus, applying Code Case N–514 will

satisfy the underlying purpose of 10

CFR 50.60 for fracture toughness

requirements. Further, by relieving the

operational restrictions, the potential for

undesirable lifting of the PORV would

be reduced, thereby improving plant

safety.

IV

For the foregoing reasons, the NRC

staff has concluded that the licensee’s

proposed use of the alternate

methodology in determining the

acceptable setpoint for LTOP events will

not present an undue risk to public

health and safety and is consistent with

the common defense and security. The

NRC staff has determined that there are

special circumstances present, as

specified in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), in

that application of 10 CFR 50.60 is not

necessary in order to achieve the

underlying purpose of this regulation.

Accordingly, the Commission has

determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR

50.12(a), an exemption is authorized by

law, will not endanger life or property

or common defense and security, and is

otherwise in the public interest.

Therefore, the Commission hereby

grants an exemption from the

requirements of 10 CFR 50.60 such that

in determining the setpoint for LTOP

events, the Appendix G curves for P/T

limits are not exceeded by more than 10

percent. This exemption is applicable

only to LTOP conditions during normal

operation.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the

Commission has determined that the

granting of this exemption will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment (61 FR 66062).

This exemption is effective upon

issuance.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day

of January 1997.

Frank J. Miraglia

Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–2537 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory

Committee; Open Committee Meeting

According to the provisions of section

10 of the Federal Advisory Committee

Act (Pub. L. 92–463), notice is hereby

given that meetings of the Federal

Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee

will be held on Wednesday, February 5,

1997.

The meeting will start at 10:45 a.m.

and will be held in Room 5A06A, Office

of Personnel Management Building,

1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory

Committee is composed of a Chair, five

representatives from labor unions

holding exclusive bargaining rights for

Federal blue-collar employees, and five

representatives from Federal agencies.

Entitlement to membership on the

Committee is provided for in 5 U.S.C.

5347.

The Committee’s primary

responsibility is to review the Prevailing

Rate System and other matters pertinent

to establishing prevailing rates under

subchapter IV, chapter 53, 5 U.S.C., as

amended, and from time to time advise

the Office of Personnel Management.

These scheduled meetings will start

in open session with both labor and

management representatives attending.

During the meeting either the labor

members or the management members

may caucus separately with the Chair to

devise strategy and formulate positions.

Premature disclosure of the matters

discussed in these caucuses would

unacceptably impair the ability of the

Committee to reach a consensus on the

matters being considered and would

disrupt substantially the disposition of