[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20840-20842]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11431]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353]


Philadelphia Electric 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 Licenses 
Nos. NPF-39 and NPF-85 issued to Philadelphia Electric Company (the 
licensee) for operation of the Limerick Generating Station (LGS), Units 
1 and 2, located in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
    The proposed amendment would relocate the Technical Specifications 
(TSs) Traversing In-Core Probe (TIP) System Limiting Condition For 
Operation (LCO) 3/4.3.7.7, and its Bases 3/4.3.7.7, to LGS Technical 
Requirements Manual (TRM) and modify Note (f) of TS Table 4.3.1.1-1, 
``Reactor Protection System Instrumentation Surveillance 
Requirements,'' to remove its reference to the TIP System in accordance 
with NRC NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical Specifications, General 
Electric Plants, BWR/4.''
    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 proposed TS changes do not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes will relocate requirements from TS to a 
licensee controlled document (i.e., TRM) and delete surveillance 
details pertaining to the TIP system which are already contained in 
licensee controlled documents. The relocated requirements will be 
retained in licensee controlled documents which will be maintained 
under the requirements of TS Administrative Controls Section 6.0 and 
the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59. Since any changes to licensee 
controlled documents are required to be evaluated per 10 CFR 50.59, 
no increase (significant or insignificant) in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated will be allowed.
    In addition, these proposed changes will not affect any 
equipment important to safety, in structure or operation. These 
changes will not alter operation of process variables, structures, 
systems, or components as described in the safety analysis report 
and licensing basis. The changes will not increase the probability 
or consequences of occurrence of a malfunction of equipment 
important to safety previously evaluated in the SAR [Safety Analysis 
Report].
    2. The proposed TS changes do not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes will not alter the plant configuration or 
change the methods governing normal plant operation. The changes 
will not impose different operating requirements and adequate 
control of information will be retained. The changes will not alter 
assumptions made in the safety analysis report and licensing basis. 
Since the proposed changes cannot cause an accident, and the plant 
response to the design basis events is unchanged, the changes do not 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from 
any accident previously evaluated.
    3. The proposed TS changes do not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.
    The proposed changes to relocate requirements from TS to a 
licensee controlled document and modify surveillance details 
pertaining to the TIP system which are

[[Page 20841]]

already contained in other licensee controlled documents have been 
performed under the guidance of NRC NUREG-1433, and the NRC Final 
Policy Statement noticed in the Federal Register on July 22, 1993 
``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements 
for Nuclear Power Reactors.'' PECO Energy has concluded that the TIP 
LCO and surveillance details do not meet any of the four criteria 
delineated in the NRC's Policy Statement and therefore, may be 
removed from TS. The relocated requirements will be retained in 
licensee controlled documents which will be maintained under the 
requirements of TS Administrative Controls Section 6.0 and the 
provisions of 10 CFR 50.59.
    The existing requirements for NRC review and approval of 
revisions (in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90), pertaining to the 
details and requirements proposed for relocation, do not have a 
specific margin of safety upon which to evaluate. However, since the 
proposed changes are consistent with the BWR Improved Standard 
Technical Specifications (NUREG-1433, approved by the NRC Staff) and 
the change controls for proposed relocated requirements provide an 
equivalent level of regulatory authority, revising the TS to reflect 
the approved level of detail and requirements ensures no reduction 
in the margin of safety.
    These changes will not reduce the margin of safety since they 
have no impact on any safety analysis assumptions. Since any future 
changes to the removed TIP System requirements will be evaluated 
under the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, no reduction (significant or 
insignificant) in a margin of safety will be allowed. Therefore, the 
proposed TS changes do 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 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 
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 June 7, 1996, 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 Pottstown Public Library, 500 High Street, 
Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464. 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

[[Page 20842]]

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: 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: 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 J.W. 
Durham, Sr., Esquire, Sr. V.P. and General Counsel, Philadelphia 
Electric Company, 2301 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101, 
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 April 25, 1996, 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 Pottstown Public Library, 500 High Street, 
Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of May 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frank Rinaldi,
Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-11431 Filed 5-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P