[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58111-58113]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24831]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-271]


Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation; 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-28 issued to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (the 
licensee) for operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station 
(Vermont Yankee) located in Vernon, Vermont.
    The proposed amendment would clarify the valve isolation signal 
information in the Technical Specification (TS) Table 4.7.2 and make an 
administrative change to the Table main steam isolation valves 
component identification. TS Table 4.7.2 lists containment isolation 
valves and the Primary Containment Isolation System (PCIS) groups to 
which the valves are assigned. Note 1 to Table 4.7.2 defines the 
isolation signals that are associated with the designated groups. The 
isolation signal description for Group 2 states that the valves are 
closed upon either low reactor water level or high drywell pressure. 
Residual heat removal (RHR) containment cooling valves V10-39A/B, V10-
34A/B, V10-26A/B, V10-31A/B, and V10-38A/B are designated as Group 2 in 
Table 4.7.2 and isolate upon either (1) low-low reactor water level and 
low reactor pressure, or (2) high drywell pressure. Table 4.7.2 and 
associated Note 1 are being revised to clarify Group 2 isolation 
signals. Additionally, main steam isolation valve component 
identifications are revised by this proposed change to more clearly 
reflect all four inboard and outboard valves.
    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. The operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in 
accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    No changes are being made to plant design, method of operation 
or method of testing. This change will not alter the basic operation 
of process variables, systems, or components as described in the 
safety analysis. No new equipment is introduced.
    The proposed change does not affect the ability of the primary 
containment isolation system or ECCS systems to perform their 
required safety functions. The essential safety functions of 
providing primary containment integrity and providing water to cool 
the core in the event of an accident are maintained. There is no 
physical or operational change being made which would alter the 
sequence of events, plant response, or conclusions of existing 
safety analyses. This proposed change results in no impact on 
analyzed accident event precursors or effects.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. The operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in 
accordance with the proposed amendment will not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve any physical alteration of 
plant equipment and does not change the method by which any safety-
related system performs its function. As such, no new or different 
types of equipment will be installed, and the basic operation of 
installed equipment is unchanged. There is no change in plant 
operation that involves failure modes other than those previously 
evaluated. The methods governing plant operation and testing remain 
consistent with current safety analysis assumptions.
    Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. The operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in 
accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    No changes are being made to plant design, method of operation 
or method of testing. This change will not alter the basic operation 
of process variables, systems, or components as described in the 
safety analysis. No new equipment is introduced.
    The proposed change does not affect the ability of the primary 
containment isolation system or ECCS systems to perform their 
required safety functions. The essential safety functions of 
providing primary containment integrity and providing water to cool 
the core in the event of an accident are maintained. There is no 
physical or operational change being made which would alter the 
sequence of events, plant response, or conclusions of existing 
safety analyses. This proposed change results in no impact on 
analyzed accident event precursors or effects.
    This proposed change does not alter the physical design of the 
plant, methods or modes of operation, testing or analyses, thereby 
resulting in no impact on safety functions. Since the proposed 
change does not alter the means by which primary containment 
isolation is maintained and containment cooling valves are isolated 
in support of RHR LPCI actuation, there is no 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 request involves no significant hazards consideration.

[[Page 58112]]

    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
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. Copies of 
written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document 
Room, 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 October 27, 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, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 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, 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 David R. 
Lewis, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., 
Washington, DC, 20037-1128, 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 58113]]

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 September 14, 2000, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland, 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 21st day of September, 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard P. Croteau,
Sr. Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-24831 Filed 9-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P