[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34939-34940]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17096]



[[Page 34939]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412]


Duquesne 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 Nos. 
DPR-66 and NPF-73 issued to Duquesne Light Company, et al. (the 
licensee) for operation of the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 
and 2 (BVPS-1 and BVPS-2) located in Beaver County, Pennsylvania.
    The proposed amendment would revise the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 Technical 
Specification (TS) definition of a channel calibration to add two 
sentences stating that (1) the calibration of instrument channels with 
resistance temperature detector or thermocouple sensors may consist of 
an inplace qualitative assessment of sensor behavior and normal 
calibration of the remaining adjustable devices in the channel and (2) 
whenever a sensing element is replaced, the next required channel 
calibration shall include an inplace cross calibration that compares 
the other sensing elements with the recently installed sensing element. 
This proposed change would make the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 TS definition of 
channel calibration consistent with the definition of a channel 
calibration contained in the NRC's improved Standard Technical 
Specifications for Westinghouse Plants (NUREG-1431, Revision 1).
    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. Does the change involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    The proposed change is administrative in nature. It does not 
involve any change to the configuration or method of operation of 
any plant equipment that is used to mitigate the consequences of an 
accident nor alter the conditions or assumptions in any of the 
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report [UFSAR] accident analyses. The 
revised definition would eliminate unnecessary and potentially 
damaging removal of resistance temperature detector (RTD) or 
thermocouple sensors in order to perform calibrations that are not 
technically possible. Therefore, it can be concluded that the 
proposed changes do not involve any increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    No new failure modes have been defined for any plant system or 
component important to safety nor has any new limiting failure been 
identified as a result of the proposed changes. There will be no 
change in the requirement to assess the entire RTD or thermocouple 
channel behavior including the sensor, alarm, display, and/or trip 
function. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed change 
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from those previously evaluated.
    3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin 
of safety?
    The proposed change is administrative in nature. Assessment of 
channel behavior, including sensors, will continue to be required. 
The addition to the Channel Calibration definition will provide 
greater flexibility in the use of the provision for surveillance 
testing, and will have no adverse effect on safety. Also, the 
inplace qualitative assessment obviates the need to remove the RTDs 
or thermocouples from their installed location, thereby eliminating 
the possibility of damaging them during removal. Therefore, it can 
be concluded that the proposed changes do not involve any 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 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, 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 July 27, 1998, 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 B. F. Jones Memorial Library, 663 Franklin 
Avenue, Aliquippa, PA 15001. 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

[[Page 34940]]

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, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
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 Jay E. Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, 
Pittman, Potts & 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 June 19, 1998, 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 B. F. Jones Memorial Library, 663 Franklin 
Avenue, Aliquippa, PA 15001.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of June 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Donald S. Brinkman,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-17096 Filed 6-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P