[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 117 (Monday, June 17, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30639-30641]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15256]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-423]


Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et al.; 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-49 issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (the licensee) for 
operation of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3, located 
in New London County, Connecticut.
    The proposed amendment would revise the Technical Specifications 
(TS) for the Overtemperature delta T time constants in TS Table 2.2-1 
and the Steam Line Pressure Negative Rate High Steam Line Isolation 
time constant on TS Table 3.3-4.
    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:

    The proposed changes do not involve a [significant hazards 
consideration] SHC because the changes would not:
    1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequence of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed Technical Specification changes will revise the 
mathematical notations associated with the time constants in Tables 
2.2-1 and 3.3-4. The proposed changes do not modify the value of any 
time constant.
    The proposed changes to Table 2.2-1 will replace the current 
equalities with inequalities in order to indicate the direction of 
conservatism for the time constants <greek-t><INF>1, 
<greek-t><INF>2, <greek-t><INF>4, <greek-t><INF>5 and 
<greek-t><INF>7. These time constants are used

[[Page 30640]]

in Note 1 and Note 3 for the Overtemperature [delta] T and Overpower 
[delta] T trips.
    The proposed change to Table 3.3-4 will revise the direction of 
the inequality from ``less than or equal to'' to ``greater than or 
equal to'' in order to indicate the correct direction of 
conservatism for the time constant for the rate-lag controller for 
the Steam Line Pressure-Negative Rate-High trip.
    The proposed changes will modify the setpoint calibration of 
plant instrumentation in a manner that is consistent with the 
Millstone Unit No. 3 setpoints analysis since the time constants 
will be treated as limits with a direction of conservatism. Based on 
the nature of the change, there is no effect on the probability of 
occurrence of previously evaluated accidents.
    The changes noted above related to the time constants in Tables 
2.2-1 are intended to indicate that the associated time constants 
are limiting values. The correction to the inequality in Table 3.3-4 
is made to indicate the correct direction of conservatism for this 
time constant. The treatment of the time constants as limiting 
values and the correction to Table 3.3-4 are consistent with the 
setpoints analysis for Millstone Unit No. 3. No changes are made to 
the specific time constant values. Therefore, the changes will not 
increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    Thus, the proposed changes will not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed Technical Specification changes will revise the 
mathematical notations associated with the time constants in Tables 
2.2-1 and 3.3-4. The proposed changes do not modify the value of any 
time constant.
    The proposed changes to Table 2.2-1 will replace the current 
equalities with inequalities in order to indicate the direction of 
conservatism for the time constants <greek-t><INF>1, 
<greek-t><INF>2, <greek-t><INF>4, <greek-t><INF>5 and 
<greek-t><INF>7. These time constants are used in Note 1 and Note 3 
for the Overtemperature [delta] T and Overpower [delta] T trips.
    The proposed change to Table 3.3-4 will revise the direction of 
the inequality from ``less than or equal to'' to ``greater than or 
equal to'' in order to indicate the correct direction of 
conservatism for the time constant for the rate-lag controller for 
the Steam Line Pressure-Negative Rate-High trip.
    The proposed changes, regarding the treatment of time constants 
as limits, will modify the operation of plant equipment, 
specifically the Reactor Trip System and engineered safety features 
actuation system trips noted above. However, these changes regarding 
the treatment of time constants are consistent with the existing 
Millstone Unit No. 3 setpoints analysis.
    Based on the nature of the changes, the changes do not introduce 
any new failure modes or malfunctions and do not create the 
potential for a new unanalyzed accident. Thus, the proposed changes 
do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The proposed Technical Specification changes will revise the 
mathematical notations associated with the time constants in Tables 
2.2-1 and 3.3-4. The proposed changes do not modify the value of any 
time constant.
    The proposed changes to Table 2.2-1 will replace the current 
equalities with inequalities in order to indicate the direction of 
conservatism for the time constants <greek-t><INF>1, 
<greek-t><INF>2, <greek-t><INF>4, <greek-t><INF>5 and 
<greek-t><INF>7. These time constants are used in Note 1 and Note 3 
for the Overtemperature [delta] T and Overpower [delta] T trips.
    The proposed change to Table 3.3-4 will revise the direction of 
the inequality from ``less than or equal to'' to ``greater than or 
equal to'' in order to indicate the correct direction of 
conservatism for the time constant for the rate-lag controller for 
the Steam Line Pressure-Negative Rate-High trip.
    The proposed changes to Technical Specification Tables 2.2-1 and 
3.3-4 will ensure that the associated time constants will be 
calibrated in a manner that is consistent with the Millstone Unit 
No. 3 setpoints analysis since the time constants will be treated as 
limits with a direction of conservatism. Therefore, based on the 
nature of the changes, there is no adverse effect on the results of 
the FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report] accident analysis and it is 
concluded that these changes are safe. Additionally, the changes do 
not adversely effect any equipment credited in the safety analysis 
and do not effect the probability of occurrence of any plant 
accident.
    The changes do not have any significant impact on the protective 
boundaries and there is no reduction in the margin of safety as 
specified in the Technical Specifications. Thus, the proposed 
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 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 July 17, 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 Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers 
Community-Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich, 
Connecticut, and the Waterford Library, ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope 
Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut. 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.

[[Page 30641]]

    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: 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 Phillip F. McKee: 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 
Lillian M. Cuoco, Esq., Senior Nuclear Counsel, Northeast Utilities 
Service Company, P.O. Box 270, Hartford, CT 06141-0270, 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 May 23, 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 Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers 
Community-Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich, 
Connecticut, and the Waterford Library, ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope 
Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of June 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Maudette Griggs,
Project Manager, Northeast Utilities Project Directorate, Division of 
Reactor Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-15256 Filed 6-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P