[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66670-66671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-30910]
[[Page 66670]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Northern States Power Company; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-42 and DPR-60
Proposed No Significant Hazards; Consideration Determination, and
Opportunity for a Hearing
[Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-
42 and DPR-60 issued to Northern States Power Company (the licensee)
for operation of the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1
and 2, located in Goodhue County, Minnesota.
The proposed amendments would change Technical Specification
Section 3.1.A.1.b to allow continued operation in Mode 3 with no
reactor coolant pumps in operation for a period not to exceed 72 hours,
provided that specified actions have been accomplished. The proposed
amendments would also increase the time period in which both reactor
coolant pumps are permitted to be turned off from 1 hour to 12 hours to
allow sufficient time to conduct either preplanned maintenance or
electrical lineup switching that would require both reactor coolant
pumps to be turned off while in Mode 3.
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 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 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:
1. Does operation of the facility with the proposed amendment[s]
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an accident previously evaluated?
The proposed change does not significantly affect any system
that is a contributor to initiating events for previously evaluated
accidents. The probability of occurrence for the ``Uncontrolled RCCA
[reactor control cluster assembly] Withdrawal From a Subcritical
Condition'' abnormal operational transient will be decreased by the
actions required by the proposed change, and the consequences will
remain unchanged. The probability of occurrence and consequences for
the ``Chemical and Volume Control System Malfunction'' (Uncontrolled
Boron Dilution) abnormal operational transient will not be changed
by the actions required by the proposed change. Neither does the
change significantly affect any system that is used to mitigate any
previously evaluated accidents. The proposed change extends the time
that the plant can remain in Mode 3 on natural circulation. This
will not degrade the ability of the plant to later reduce reactor
coolant system temperature and pressure to Mode 4 conditions where
the diesel generators and RHR [residual heat removal] system are
still available to remove decay heat. The proposed changes do not
involve any significant increase in the probability or consequence
of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does operation of the facility with the proposed amendment[s]
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from
any accident previously evaluated?
The proposed change does not alter the design, function, or
manner of operation of any plant component and does not install any
new or different equipment. The proposed change extends the time
that the plant can remain in Mode 3 on natural circulation. A
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from those
previously analyzed has not been created.
3. Does operation of the facility with the proposed amendment[s]
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
The proposed change extends the time that the plant can remain
in Mode 3 on natural circulation. Sufficient capacity to remove
decay heat is still available. Under natural circulation conditions
the availability of both steam generators provides the expected
redundancy of this required safety function associated with the
reactor coolant system Technical Specification basis. The proposed
change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of
safety associated with the safety limits inherent in either the
principle barriers to a radiation release (fuel cladding, RCS
[reactor coolant system] boundary, and reactor containment), the
maintenance of critical safety functions (subcriticality, core
cooling, ultimate heat sink, RCS inventory, RCS boundary integrity,
and containment integrity), or other structures, systems or
components (SSCs) significant to 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 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, December 29, 1999, 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 accessible
electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room link at
the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov).
[[Page 66671]]
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 20555-0001, 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 close of business on 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 Jay Silberg,
Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20037, 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 November 19, 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, Maryland, this 23d day of November 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Claudia M. Craig,
Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of Licensing
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-30910 Filed 11-26-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P