[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 82 (Friday, April 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21009-21011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10479]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265]


Commonwealth Edison Co.; 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 Nos. 
DPR-29 and DPR-30 issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the 
licensee) for operation of the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 
1 and 2, located in Rock Island County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendments would change the Technical Specifications 
by: (1) Revising the low pressure value at which the High Pressure 
Coolant Injection (HPCI) and Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) 
systems can be tested to 150 psig, and (2) to test these systems 
against a system head corresponding to reactor vessel pressure when 
steam is supplied to the turbines at 920 psig to 1005 psig for high 
pressure testing and 150 psig to 325 psig for low pressure testing.
    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.
    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 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) Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated because:
    The proposed changes revise the testing requirements for the low 
pressure HPCI and RCIC systems, and as such do not affect any 
accident precursors or initiators. Therefore, the proposed changes 
do not increase the probability of any previously evaluated 
accident.
    Similarly, the proposed changes implement testing requirements 
which will [[Page 21010]] reduce unnecessary strain on the HPCI and 
RCIC systems during testing, and provide added assurance that the 
HPCI and RCIC will perform their design functions throughout the 
entire operating pressure range of the equipment. Therefore, the 
proposed changes enhance the ability of the HPCI and RCIC systems 
and equipment to mitigate the consequences of an accident.
    (2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any accident previously evaluated because:
    The proposed changes do not modify the HPCI or RCIC design or 
reduce the capability of the systems to perform their design 
function. The proposed changes will implement testing requirements 
which will reduce unnecessary strain on the HPCI and RCIC systems 
during testing, and provide added assurance that the systems are 
capable of performing their design functions throughout the entire 
operating pressure range of the equipment. As such, the proposed 
changes are more conservative than the current requirements. Since 
the design basis of the HPCI or RCIC system is not changed, there is 
no possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 
previously evaluated.
    (3) Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety 
because:
    The proposed changes implement testing requirements which will 
reduce unnecessary strain on the HPCI and RCIC systems during 
testing, and provide added assurance that the HPCI and RCIC systems 
will perform their design functions throughout the entire operating 
pressure range of the equipment. The proposed changes will not 
reduce the availability and capability of the HPCI and RCIC systems 
to mitigate the consequences of an accident. The proposed changes do 
not involve a relaxation of the criteria used to establish safety 
limits, a relaxation of the bases for limiting safety settings, or a 
relaxation of the bases for limiting conditions of operation. 
Therefore the proposed changes do not impact 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.
    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 amendments 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 amendments 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 Rules Review and 
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications 
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555, 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 May 30, 1995, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with 
respect to issuance of the amendments 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 Dixon Public Library, 221 Hennepin Avenue, 
Dixon, Illinois. 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 amendments 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 [[Page 21011]] 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 
amendments and make them 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 amendments.
    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, 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 Mr. Robert A. Capra: 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, and to Michael I. 
Miller, Esquire, Sidley and Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, 
Illinois 60603, 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 amendments dated April 10, 1995, 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 Dixon Public Library, 221 Hennepin Avenue, 
Dixon, Illinois.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of April 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert M. Pulsifer,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-10479 Filed 4-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M