[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 215 (Monday, November 8, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60854-60856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-29121]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-333 ]
Power Authority of the State of New York; Notice of Consideration
of Issuance of Amendment To Facility Operating License and Opportunity
for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-59, issued to the Power Authority of the State of New York, (PASNY
or the licensee), for operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear
Power Plant, (FitzPatrick), located in Oswego County, New York.
The proposed amendment, requested by the licensee in a letter dated
March 31, 1999, as supplemented by letters dated May 20, June 1, July
14, and October 14, 1999, represent a full conversion from the current
Technical Specifications (CTS) to a set of Improved Technical
Specifications (ITS) based on NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical
Specifications (STS) for General Electric Plants, BWR/4'' Revision 1,
dated April 1995. NUREG-1433 has been developed by the Commission's
staff through working groups composed of both NRC staff members and
industry representatives, and has been endorsed by the staff as part of
an industry-wide initiative to standardize and improve the Technical
Specifications (TS) for nuclear power plants. As part of this
submittal, the licensee has applied the criteria contained in the
Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specification
Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors (Final Policy Statement),''
published in the Federal Register on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132), to
the CTS, and, using NUREG-1433 as a basis, proposed an ITS for
FitzPatrick. The criteria in the Final Policy Statement were
subsequently added to 10 CFR 50.36, ``Technical Specifications,'' in a
rule change that was published in the Federal Register on July 19, 1995
(60 FR 36953) and became effective on August 18, 1995.
The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the CTS into
four general groupings. These groupings are characterized as
administrative changes, relocated changes, more restrictive changes and
less restrictive changes.
Administrative changes are those that involve restructuring,
renumbering, rewording, interpretation and complex rearranging of
requirements and other changes not affecting technical content or
substantially revising an operating requirement. The reformatting,
renumbering and rewording process reflects the attributes of NUREG-1433
and does not involve technical changes to the CTS. The proposed changes
include: (a) Providing the appropriate numbers, etc., for NUREG-1433
bracketed information (information that must be supplied on a plant-
specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant), (b)
identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and (c)
changing NUREG-1433 section wording to conform to existing licensee
practices. Such changes are administrative in nature and do not impact
initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or
transient events.
Relocated changes are those involving relocation of requirements
and surveillances for structures, systems, components, or variables
that do not meet the criteria for inclusion in TS.
[[Page 60855]]
Relocated changes are those CTS requirements that do not satisfy or
fall within any of the four criteria specified in the 10 CFR
50.36(c)(2)(ii) and may be relocated to appropriate licensee-controlled
documents.
The licensee's application of the screening criteria is described
in the attachment of the licensee's March 31, 1999, submittal, which is
entitled, ``Application of NRC Selection Criteria to James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications'' (Split
Report) in Volume 1 of the submittal. The affected structures, systems,
components or variables are not assumed to be initiators of analyzed
events and are not assumed to mitigate accident or transient events.
The requirements and surveillances for these affected structures,
systems, components, or variables will be relocated from the TS to
administratively controlled documents such as the quality assurance
program, the final safety analysis report (FSAR), the ITS BASES, the
Technical Requirements Manual (TRM) that is incorporated by reference
in the FSAR, the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR), the Offsite Dose
Calculation Manual (ODCM), the Inservice Testing (IST) Program, or
other licensee-controlled documents. Changes made to these documents
will be made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 or other appropriate control
mechanisms, and may be made without prior NRC review and approval. In
addition the affected structures, systems, components, or variables are
addressed in existing surveillance procedures that are also subject to
10 CFR 50.59. These proposed changes will not impose or eliminate any
requirements.
More restrictive changes are those involving more stringent
requirements compared to the CTS for operation of the facility. These
more stringent requirements do not result in operation that will alter
assumptions relative to the mitigation of an accident or transient
event. The more restrictive requirements will not alter the operation
of process variables, structures, systems, and components described in
the safety analyses. For each requirement in the STS that is more
restrictive than the CTS that the licensee proposes to adopt in the
ITS, the licensee has provided an explanation as to why it has
concluded that adopting the more restrictive requirement is desirable
to ensure safe operation of the facility because of specific design
features of the plant.
Less restrictive changes are those where CTS requirements are
relaxed or eliminated, or new plant operational flexibility is
provided. The more significant ``less restrictive'' requirements are
justified on a case-by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to
provide little or no safety benefit, their removal from the TS may be
appropriate. In most cases, relaxations previously granted to
individual plants on a plant-specific basis were the result of (a)
generic NRC actions, (b) new NRC staff positions that have evolved from
technological advancements and operating experience, or (c) resolution
of the Owners Groups' comments on the Improved Standard Technical
Specifications. Generic relaxations contained in NUREG-1433 were
reviewed by the staff and found to be acceptable because they are
consistent with current licensing practices and NRC regulations. The
licensee's design is being reviewed to determine if the specific design
basis and licensing basis are consistent with the technical basis for
the model requirements in NUREG-1433, thus providing a basis for the
ITS, or if relaxation of the requirements in the CTS is warranted based
on the justification provided by the licensee.
These administrative, relocated, more restrictive, and less
restrictive changes to the requirements of the CTS do not result in
operations that will alter assumptions relative to mitigation of an
analyzed accident or transient event.
In addition to the proposed changes solely involving the
conversion, there are also changes proposed that are differences to the
requirements in both the CTS and the Standard Technical Specifications
(STS) NUREG-1433. These proposed beyond-scope issues to the ITS
conversion are as follows:
1. ITS 3.0.3, Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) to be in MODE
2 was changed to allow a 9-hour completion time.
2. ITS 3.3.1.1, Reactor Protection System (RPS) Instrumentation
Function 5, reactor scram on main steam isolation valve (MSIV) closure.
The trip setting valve was changed from less than or equal to 10
percent (in the CTS) to less than or equal to 14 percent in the ITS.
3. ITS 3.3.1.1, Extending Required Action F.1 Completion Time from
6 hours to 8 hours for consistency with Current Licensing Basis (CLB)
and changing 3.0.3 which allows 8 hours to be in MODE 2 after
initiation of Action.
4. ITS 3.3.5.1, Automatic Depressurization System (ADS) initiation
timer and the Containment Spray (CS) and Low-Pressure Coolant Injection
(LPCI) pump start timer values were changed from the CTS and the STS
and tolerances relaxed to allow the extension of CALIBRATION Frequency
to 24 months in the ITS.
5. ITS 3.3.5.1, CS, LPCI and ADS Logic System Functional Test
(LSFT) Frequency was extended from 18 months (in the CTS) to 24 months
in the ITS.
6. ITS 3.4.9, Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Pressure/Temperature (P/
T) Limits in CTS were changed to add a new alternate criteria in ITS to
allow idle recirculating pump (loop) start if the operating loop is
greater than 40 percent flow or if the idle loop is less than 40% flow
for less than or equal to 30 minutes.
7. ITS 3.5.1, ECCS-Operating, High-Pressure Coolant Injection
(HPCI) and LPCI pump flow rates in CTS were reduced to SAFER/GESTR-
Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) flow rates in the ITS.
8. ITS 3.5.2, ECCS-Shutdown, reduced Residual Heat Removal (RHR)
LPCI pump flow rates in CTS to SAFER/GESTR-LOCA flow rates as in ITS
3.5.1 for RHR LPCI pumps.
9. ITS 3.8.1, AC Sources--Operating, Condition D for two reserve
circuits inoperable in CTS was changed to add new interim power
reduction to less than or equal to 45 percent with a 36-hour Completion
Time in the ITS.
10. ITS 3.8.4, DC Sources--Operating (in CTS) was changed to allow
8 hours to restore one inoperable source in the ITS.
11. ITS 5.5, changed Standby Gas Treatment (SGT) and Control Room
Emergency Ventilation Air Supply (CREVAS) system filter testing (in the
CTS) from 6 months (or 12 months) to 24 months in the ITS for
consistency with Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2 or the fuel cycle
length.
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.
By December 8, 1999, the licensee may file a request for a hearing
with respect to issuance of the amendment to the NMP2 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 accessible electronically through
[[Page 60856]]
the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site
(http://www.NRC.gov). 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 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.
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 Mr. David E. Blabey, 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 CAR 2.714(a)(1)(I)-(v) and 2.714(d).
If a request for a hearing is received, the Commission's staff may
issue the amendment after it completes its technical review and prior
to the completion of any required hearing if it publishes a further
notice for public comment of its proposed finding of no significant
hazards consideration in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and 50.92.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated March 31, 1999, as supplemented by
letters dated May 20, June 1, July 14, and October 14, 1999, which is
available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and
accessible electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading
Room link at the NRC Web site (http://www.NRC.gov).
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 3rd day of November 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Guy S. Vissing,
Sr. Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-29121 Filed 11-5-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P