[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 4 (Thursday, January 7, 1999)] [Notices] [Pages 1032-1034] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 99-280] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 and 50-265] Commonwealth Edison Company; 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 Licenses Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the licensee) for operation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, located in Grundy County, Illinois and Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-29 and DPR-30, issued to ComEd for operation of Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Rock Island County, Illinois. The proposed amendments would relocate, to a licensee-controlled document, the requirement for removal of the Reactor Protection System (RPS) shorting links. Removal of the shorting links enables a non- coincident scram on high neutron flux as detected by any Neutron Instrumentation. The staff's proposed no significant hazards consideration determination for the requested changes was published on December 30, 1998 (63 FR 71964). 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 amendments requested involve 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: Does the change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? The RPS shorting links are not precursors to any previously evaluated accident. The Source Range Monitors (SRMs), and the ability of the SRMs to provide a RPS trip, are also not precursors to any previously evaluated accident. Therefore, relocating the RPS shorting link requirement to administrative controls [the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, (UFSAR)] will not increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated. The RPS shorting links are not assumed to be removed in any accident analysis, and the SRMs are not assumed to provide a RPS trip in any accident analysis. The refueling interlocks and SHUTDOWN MARGIN calculations will continue to provide assurance of reactivity control. Therefore, relocating the RPS shorting link requirements to administrative controls [the UFSAR] will not increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The RPS shorting link requirements will be relocated to administrative controls that are administered pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, thereby reducing the level of regulatory control. The level of regulatory control has no impact on the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Consequently, this proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? [[Page 1033]] Relocating the RPS shorting link requirements to administrative controls [the UFSAR] does not create any new failure mechanisms. No new equipment will be installed or utilized, and no new operating conditions will be initiated as a result of this change. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? The refuel interlocks and SHUTDOWN MARGIN calculations will continue to ensure that the reactor stays subcritical in the Refuel Mode. The margin to safety as represented by the SHUTDOWN MARGIN designed into the core and verified in the SHUTDOWN MARGIN calculations will be unaffected by relocation of the RPS shorting link requirements to administrative controls [the UFSAR]. The margin to safety as represented by the fuel bundle drop assumptions protected by the refuel interlocks will be unaffected. In addition, no accident analysis assumes that the RPS shorting links are removed. In addition, the RPS shorting link requirements will be relocated to administrative controls [the UFSAR] for which future change will be evaluated pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59. Therefore, there will be no change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents released offsite, and, thus, these changes do not involve a significant reduction in 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 amendments requested involve 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 amendments involve 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 and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative 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 6D59, 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 February 8, 1999, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility operating licenses 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: for Dresden, Morris Area Public Library District, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450; for Quad Cities, Dixon Public Library, 221 Hennepin Avenue, Dixon, Illinois 61021. 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 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. [[Page 1034]] If the final determination is that the amendments requested involve 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 amendments. If the final determination is that the amendments requested involve 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 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above date. 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 Pamela B. Stroebel, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, ComEd, P.O. Box 767, 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 amendments dated November 30, 1998, 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: for Dresden, Morris Area Public Library District, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450; for Quad Cities, Dixon Public Library, 221 Hennepin Avenue, Dixon, Illinois 61021. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of December 1998. 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. 99-280 Filed 1-6-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P