[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17590-17592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8575]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-374]


Commonwealth Edison Co.; 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-18, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (the licensee), for 
operation of the LaSalle County Station, Unit 2, located in LaSalle 
County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendment would revise the safety/relief valve (SRV) 
safety function lift setting allowable tolerance band from (-3% to +1%) 
to (-3% to +3%) and include as-left SRV lift setting tolerances of (-1% 
to +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.
    Section 50.91(a)(6) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
specifies that the Commission may, where exigent circumstances exist, 
allow less than the 30 days for public comment. Exigent circumstances 
have been found to exist for this proposed amendment. On March 18, 
1995, with LaSalle Unit 2 in a shutdown condition for the current 
refueling outage, the licensee learned that two of the six SRVs tested 
had lift settings that were not within the current tolerance band 
allowed by the technical specifications. This resulted in three 
additional SRVs being tested and two additional SRVs found to lift at 
pressures slightly outside the existing tolerance band. The remaining 
nine SRVs are required to be tested based on the current technical 
specifications. This testing would involve a significant financial 
cost, the collection of approximately 11 person-rem of radiation 
exposure by plant workers, and a delay in the restart of Unit 2. The 
history of the safety relief value testing at LaSalle is such that the 
licensee did not anticipate the immediate need for an increased 
tolerance band. However, as part of a longer range plan to reduce the 
number of SRVs and increase the allowable lift setting tolerances, the 
licensee had performed much of the analyses required to justify the 
proposed amendment request. On March 27, 1995, the licensee decided to 
expedite the SRV lift setting technical specification change for 
LaSalle Unit 2. The licensee completed the review and submitted the 
request on March 31, 1995. To avoid the radiation exposures and restart 
delays associated with testing the remaining nine SRVs, the proposed 
amendment would need to be issued before April 22, 1995, and therefore 
the request does not afford the normal 30-day comment period.
    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 analysts of 
the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The staff has 
reviewed the licensee's analysis against the standards of 10 CFR 
50.92(c). The NRC staff's review is presented below.
    1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The probability of an accident previously evaluated will not 
increase as a result of this change, because the only change are the 
tolerances for the SRV opening setpoints and the speed of 
[[Page 17591]] the reactor core isolation cooling system (RCIC) turbine 
and pump. Changing the maximum allowable opening setpoint for the SRVs 
does not cause any accident previously evaluated to occur, or degrade 
valve or system performance in any way so as to cause an accident to 
occur with an increased frequency. In addition, the increased speed of 
the RCIC turbine and pump are within the design limits of the system. 
RCIC operability and failure probabilities are not impacted by this 
change.
    The consequences of an ASME overpressurization event are not 
significantly increased and do not exceed the previously accepted 
licensing criteria for this event. GE has calculated the revised peak 
vessel pressure for LaSalle Station to be 1341 psig, which is well 
below the 1375 psig criterion of the ASME Code for upset conditions, 
referenced in Section 5.2.2, Overpressurization Protection, of the 
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), and NUREG-0519 (Safety 
Evaluation Report related to the operation of LaSalle County Station, 
Units 1 and 2, March 1981), and Section 15.2-4, Closure of Main Steam 
Isolation Valves (BWR) of NUREG-0800 (Standard Review Plan).
    GE has also performed an analysis of the limiting anticipated 
transient without scram (ATWS) event, which is the main steam isolation 
valve (MSIV) closure event. This analysis calculated the peak vessel 
pressure to be 1457 psig, which is well below the 1500 psig criterion 
of the ASME Code for emergency conditions.
    Per NUREG-0519, listed above, Section 5.4.1 and Technical 
Specification 4.7.3.b, the RCIC pump is required to develop flow 
greater than or equal to 600 gpm in the test flow path with a system 
head corresponding to reactor vessel operating pressure when steam is 
supplied to the turbine at 1000 +20, -80 psig. Increasing the turbine 
and pump speed ensures these criteria will still be met and the 
consequences of an accident will not increase.
    Therefore, there is not a significant increase in the 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 only physical changes are to increase the allowable tolerances 
for SRV opening setpoints and to increase the RCIC pump and turbine 
speeds. These changes do not result in any changed component 
interactions. The SRVs and RCIC will still provide the functions for 
which they were designed. Since all of the systems evaluated will 
continue to function as intended, the proposed changes do not create 
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 
previously evaluated.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in 
the margin of safety.
    While the calculated peak vessel pressures for the ASME 
overpressurization event and the MSIV closure ATWS event are larger 
than that previously calculated without the proposed setpoint tolerance 
increases, the new peak pressures remain far below the respective 
licensing acceptance limits associated with these events. These 
licensing acceptance limits have been previously evaluated as providing 
a sufficient margin of safety. For other accidents and transients, the 
increased setpoint tolerances have a negligible, if any, effect on the 
results, so the margin of safety is preserved.
    Based on the 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 15 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 15-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 15-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 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 8, 1995, 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 Public Library of Illinois Valley 
Community College, Rural Route No. 1, Oglesby, Illinois 61348. 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 [[Page 17592]] 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 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, 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 Robert A. Capra, Director, Project Directorate 
III-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, and to Michael I. Miller, Espire; Sidley and 
Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60690, 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 31, 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 Public Library of Illinois Valley 
Community College, Rural Route No. 1, Oglesby, Illinois 61348.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of April 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Reckley,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-8575 Filed 4-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M