[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 25, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63896-63898]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27381]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-269, 50-270, and 60-287]
Duke Energy Corporation; 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 Nos.
DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 issued to the Duke Energy Corporation (the
licensee) for operation of the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and
3 located in Seneca, South Carolina.
By letter dated June 6, 2000, the Commission approved Amendment
Nos. 312, 312, and 312 to add Technical Specification (TS) Surveillance
Requirement 3.8.1.17 to verify operability of the Keowee Hydro Units
(KHUs) out-of-tolerance logic trip and closure blockage relays
associated with the overhead and underground power path breakers. The
amendments specified that the TS change would be implemented by
November 30, 2000.
Subsequently, by application dated October 18, 2000, the licensee
submitted a proposed amendment to change the implementation date. The
proposed new date would be based on an engineering study that is being
conducted to evaluate the appropriate KHU OOT surveillance criteria and
resolve overshoot concerns. These overshoot concerns are described in
Amendment Nos. 316, 316 and 316 that were issued on October 4, 2000,
which also added a note that requires an amendment, based on the
results of this evaluation, be submitted by April 5, 2001.
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
[[Page 63897]]
analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is
presented below:
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91, Duke Power Company (Duke) has made the
determination that this amendment request involves a No Significant
Hazards Consideration by applying the standards established by the
NRC regulations in 10 CFR 50.92. This ensures 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.
No. The License Amendment Request (LAR) involves revising the
implementation date of November 30, 2000 for the Keowee Hydro Unit
[KHU] out-of-tolerance [OOT] voltage and frequency modification.
Revising this date will allow Duke to integrate resolution of the
overshoot issues.
This LAR involves an administrative issue, rather than the
inability of the KHU to perform its intended safety function. The
out-of-tolerance voltage and frequency modification is considered an
enhancement to the existing design. Changing the implementation date
for the modification has no impact on existing plant equipment.
Revising the requirements for implementation does not involve:
(1) A physical alteration to the Oconee Units; (2) operating any
installed equipment in a new or different manner; or (3) a change to
any set points for parameters which initiate protective or
mitigative action.
There is no adverse impact on containment integrity,
radiological release pathways, fuel design, filtration systems, main
steam relief valve set points, or radwaste systems. No new
radiological release pathways are created.
Therefore, the probability or consequence of an accident
previously evaluated is not significantly increased.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
No. The LAR involves revising the implementation date for the
KHU voltage and frequency OOT modification.
Delaying implementation does not involve a physical effect on
the unit, nor is there any increased risk of a unit trip or
reactivity excursion. No new failure modes or credible accident
scenarios are postulated from this activity.
Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated is not
created.
3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
No. The LAR involves delaying implementation of the KHU voltage
and frequency OOT modification. Delaying implementation will allow
Duke to fully integrate the resolution of the overshoot issues.
Delaying implementation does not involve: (1) A physical
alteration of the Oconee Units; (2) the installation of new or
different equipment; (3) operating any installed equipment in a new
or different manner; (4) a change to any set points for parameters
which initiate protective or mitigative action; or (5) any impact on
the fission product barriers or safety limits.
Therefore, this request does 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 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. Documents may
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document
Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By November 24, 2000, 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, located at One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland, and accessible electronically through 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 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
[[Page 63898]]
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, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 Anne
W. Cottington, Winston and Strawn, 1200 17th Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20555, 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 October 18, 2000, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, located
at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland, 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 19th day of October 2000.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David E. LaBarge,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-27381 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P