[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14167-14169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7507]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-388]


Pennsylvania Power & Light Company; 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. 
NPF-22, issued to Pennsylvania Power & Light Company (PP&L), (the 
licensee), for operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station 
(SSES), Unit 2, located in Luzerne County, PA.
    The proposed amendment would modify the Design Features Section 
5.3.1 of the Technical Specifications to reflect the Atrium-10 design 
and would include a Siemens Power Corporation (SPC) topical report 
reference in Section 6.9.3.2 to reflect mechanical design criteria for 
this fuel. This change would allow this fuel to be loaded and 
maintained in the core only under Condition 5, (refueling).
    PP&L has indicated that exigent circumstances exist which are a 
result of the following. PP&L submitted its proposal for amendment for 
the staff to approve the use of SPC Atrium-10 fuel in SSES, Unit 2 on 
December 18, 1996 and as supplemented on March 12, 1997. The staff 
approval has been predicated on the completion of an audit at SPC. 
Issues raised during the SPC audit have caused an unanticipated delay 
in completing the staff's review. In its letter, the licensee stated 
that this delay causes a threat to PP&L's ability to complete the Unit 
2 8th refueling and inspection outage as planned and the return to Unit 
2 operation. This outage has already begun. During the original Unit 2 
outage scoping process PP&L stated that it did not anticipate the need 
for a specific NRC inspection of SPC to support the NRC review and 
approval of the December 18, 1996 amendment. Further, PP&L reasonably 
expected that all audit results would be satisfactory and would not 
impact the current Unit 2 outage schedule. The resultant consequences 
required the supplemental submittal on March 12, 1997, and requires 
additional unavoidable NRC staff review which is ongoing. The March 17, 
1997 application is only to approve those changes that are applicable 
to allow fuel to be loaded and maintained in the reactor core only 
during Operational Condition 5 on an interim basis during the outage 
and prior to the NRC's approval of the December 18, 1996 and March 12, 
1997, requested TS changes, to minimize the delay in startup based on 
the NRC review of the two submittals discussed above. The staff agrees 
that exigent conditions exist that were not anticipated by the 
licensee.
    This notice is related to the amendment requested by the December 
18, 1996 and March 12, 1997 submittals by Pennsylvania Power and Light 
Company, but does not affect the previous notice dated March 12, 1997, 
which was published in the Federal Register on March 18, 1997 (62 FR 
12859).
    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:

    1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    The description of a fuel assembly (Section 5.3.1) is revised to 
reflect the fact that ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 contains a central water 
channel. Since the active fuel length of ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 is 
different from that of 9 x 9-2, reference to an active fuel length 
of 150 inches is no longer appropriate and was deleted. There is no 
safety significance to these changes.
    Due to the limitation of this proposed change to Operational 
Condition 5, only a subset of the accident events analyzed in the 
FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report] needed to be addressed. All 
other events were considered and the addition of ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 
fuel to the reactor core in Operational Condition 5 did not increase 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 
The events considered are described below.
    The maximum allowed enrichment (Section 5.3.1) is increased from 
4.0 to 4.5 weight percent U<INF>235. Criticality calculations were 
performed with a KENO Monte Carlo code to ensure that ATRIUM<SUP>TM-
10 fuel with a lattice average enrichment of 4.5 weight percent U235 
can be safely stored in both the new fuel vault and the spent fuel 
storage pool at Susquehanna. These calculations demonstrated, 
consistent with current Technical Specifications, that the maximum 
k-effective of both the new fuel vault and spent fuel storage pool 
will not exceed 0.95 under the worst credible storage array or 
accident conditions.
    The ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel assembly is unirradiated and its 
weight is nearly identical to the current SPC 9 x 9-2 fuel assembly 
weight as well as being less than the fuel assembly weight used in 
the 9 x 9-2 analyses (680 lbs.). The dose consequences of the 
current 9 x 9-2 licensing analyses of the Fuel and Equipment 
Handling Accidents bound the dose consequences of a Fuel Handling 
Accident involving ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel.
    The grappling of the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel is similar to the 
9 x 9-2, due to the similar bail handle dimensions and assembly 
weights. Therefore, ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel is completely compatible 
with the refueling platform main grapple. Because the assembly 
weights of the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel and the 9 x 9-2 fuel are 
essentially the same, the capacity of the refueling platform main 
hoist will be sufficient to handle the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel. Also, 
the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel uses the identical fuel channel design as 
the 9 x 9-2 fuel and the lower tie plate has very similar outside 
dimensions. Therefore, the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel is compatible with, 
and can be safely inserted/placed into the reactor core.
    Storage of channelled ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel in the Reactor Core 
was evaluated. Core shutdown margin calculations were performed 
using NRC approved methodology for the beginning of cycle core 
configuration. Validation of the shutdown margin methodology as it 
applies to ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 was done through comparisons to Siemens' 
Power Corporation analyses and higher-order Monte Carlo 
calculations. Calculated core shutdown margin for the beginning of 
cycle core loading is greater than 1.00%[delta]k/k which far exceeds 
the Technical Specification value of 0.38%[delta]k/k. Therefore, 
ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel can be placed into the U2C9 final core 
configuration with assurance that the core will remain subcritical 
with the strongest worth rod withdrawn. A positive core shutdown 
margin assures protection against the control rod removal error 
during refueling (FSAR Section 15.4.1.1) because subcriticality is 
maintained.

[[Page 14168]]

    In addition, the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel assembly dimensions 
critical to interface with the Spent Fuel Storage Pool and Reactor 
Vessel are essentially the same as the 9 x 9-2 design. Therefore, 
the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 can be properly stored.
    Included in the revised Technical Specifications via reference 
(Section 6.9.3.2) is one NRC approved topical report containing the 
criteria for the design of Siemens Power Corporation fuel. SPC 
analyses have demonstrated that ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel complies with 
the NRC approved criteria thus assuring the structural integrity of 
the fuel. Compliance with the criteria applicable to Operational 
Condition 5 assures that ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel can be safely stored 
in the spent fuel pool and loaded in the Unit 2 reactor core during 
Operational Condition 5.
    Based on the foregoing, the proposed action does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The changes to the Unit 2 Technical Specifications (Design 
Features and inclusion of the methodology reference) to allow 
Operational Condition 5 loading of ATRIUM-10 fuel do not require any 
physical plant modifications (other than loading of the 
ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 assemblies), physically affect any plant 
components, or entail changes in plant operation. ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 
fuel assemblies have approximately the same weight, outer 
dimensions, and the same basic bail handle design as 9 x 9-2 fuel 
assemblies and are handled in the same manner as 9 x 9-2 fuel 
assemblies. Thus, the proposed change does not create the 
possibility of a previously unevaluated operator error.
    The topical report reference added to Section 6.9.3.2 contains 
NRC approved acceptance criteria. SPC analyses have been performed 
according to their Quality Assurance Program which demonstrate 
compliance with these NRC approved fuel design criteria. Thus, the 
ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel will maintain its structural integrity during 
core loading.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    The changes to the Unit 2 Technical Specifications discussed in 
Item 1 above (Design Features and inclusion of the mechanical design 
methodology reference) will allow loading of ATRIUM-10 fuel in 
Operational Condition 5. The proposed change does not require any 
physical plant modifications (other than the loading of the 
ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel), physically affect any plant components, or 
entail changes in plant operation. Therefore, the proposed change 
will not jeopardize or degrade the function or operation of any 
plant system or component governed by Technical Specifications. The 
analyses performed provide assurance that the ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel 
will remain subcritical during storage and core loading and meets 
the requirements of Technical Specification 5.6 and, thus, an 
equivalent margin of safety is maintained.
    ATRIUM<SUP>TM-10 fuel assemblies have approximately the same 
weight, outer dimensions, and the same basic bail handle design as 
9 x 9-2 fuel assemblies and are handled in the same manner as 9 x 9-
2 fuel assemblies. The dose consequences of the Fuel and Equipment 
Handling Accidents are not increased and, thus, an equivalent margin 
of safety is maintained.
    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 
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 
Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and 
Publications 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 6D22, 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, the Gelman Building, 2120 L 
Street, NW., Washington, DC.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By April 24, 1997, 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, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public 
document room located at the Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701. 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 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.

[[Page 14169]]

    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: Docketing and 
Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of 
the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so 
inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 
1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union 
operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the 
following message addressed to John F. Stolz, Director, Project 
Directorate I-2: petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition 
was mailed, plant name, and publication date and page number of this 
Federal Register notice. 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 Jay Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, 
Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC 20037, 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)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated March 17, 1997, which is available for 
public inspection at--the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public 
document room, located at the Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of March 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chester Poslusny,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-7507 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P