[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54524-54525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-26274]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-443]


North Atlantic Energy Service 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-86 issued to North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation (the 
licensee) for operation of the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 located in 
Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
    The proposed amendment would modify the Appendix A Technical 
Specifications for the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System 
(ESFAS) Instrumentation. Specifically, the proposed amendment would 
revise the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications to relocate 
Functional Unit 6.b, ``Feedwater Isolation--Low RCS Tavg 
Coincident with a Reactor Trip'' from Technical Specification 3.3.2. 
``Engineered Safety Features Actuation System Instrumentation'' to the 
Seabrook Station Technical Requirements Manual which is a licensee 
controlled document.
    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 changes do not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The change considered for the relocation of the feedwater 
isolation setpoint from the Technical Specifications does not impose 
any new performance requirements on any system or component which 
could subsequently cause associated design criteria to be exceeded. 
The structural and functional integrity of the plant's structures, 
systems and components is maintained. This change does not affect 
the initiators of any transients evaluated in the Updated Final 
Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
    The sequence of obtaining feedwater isolation on low Tavg 
coincident with reactor trip is not credited in any of the LOCA and 
non-LOCA accidents evaluated in the UFSAR. Feedwater isolation is 
initiated for other reasons such as a Safety Injection (SI) 
actuation. This change is administrative in nature, in that it 
relocates the function from the Technical Specifications to the 
Seabrook Station Technical Requirements Manual and there are no 
changes to the plant's structures, systems and components.
    Since, for the reasons given above, the results of the UFSAR 
analyses are not affected by the implementation of the change, there 
is, therefore, no adverse impact on the radiological consequences of 
accidents reported in the UFSAR. Furthermore, this change does not 
degrade fission product barriers assumed in the dose consequence 
analysis such as the fuel cladding, the reactor pressure vessel, and 
containment. The performance and integrity of accident mitigating 
structures, systems and components such as the Emergency Feedwater 
and Safety Injection systems, are not affected by the change. 
Consequently, the ability of these systems to limit radiological 
consequences as described in the UFSAR is not adversely affected. 
Based on the above, the proposed changes do not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed change does not create any new failure modes for 
any structure, system or component. All design and performance 
criteria will continue to be met and no new single failure scenario 
is created that is not bounded by the accidents described in the 
UFSAR. The proposed change to the Technical Specifications does not 
introduce any new challenges to structures, systems and components 
that could introduce a new type of accident. Therefore the proposed 
changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. The proposed changes do not result in a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    The accidents analyzed in the UFSAR have been reviewed relative 
to the feedwater isolation on low RCS Tavg coincident with 
reactor trip. The applicable design criteria and the pertinent 
licensing basis acceptance criteria continue to be met. The margin 
of safety as defined in the Bases to the Technical Specifications is 
not reduced and the design and safety analysis limits remain 
applicable.

    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, and should cite the publication date and page 
number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be 
delivered to 

[[Page 54525]]
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 November 24, 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 Exeter Public Library, Founders Park, Exeter, 
NH 03833. 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 
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, 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, and to Lillian M. Cuoco, 
Esquire, 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 September 20, 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 Exeter Public Library, Founders 
Park, Exeter, NH 03833.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of October 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Albert W. De Agazio, Sr.,
 Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-26274 Filed 10-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P