65FR37807 Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
robop...@us.govnews.org
Posting-number: Volume 65, Issue 117, Page 37807
[Federal Register: June 16, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 117)]
[Notices]
[Page 37807-37808]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16jn00-92]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-410]
Niagara Mohawk Power 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 No.
NPF-69 issued to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the licensee) for
operation of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2 (NMP2)
located in Scriba, Oswego County, New York.
The proposed amendment would revise Section 3.10.8, ``Shutdown
Margin (SDM) Test--Refueling,'' of the Technical Specifications (TS),
correcting an administrative error introduced when Amendment No. 91,
converting the TS to the Improved Technical Specifications (ITS) format
was processed. The error of omission was introduced by the licensee in
that a February 7, 2000, licensee submittal did not propose to revise
ITS Specification 3.10.8 consistent with the changes made to ITS Table
3.3.1.1 with regards to the inclusion of the Oscillation Power Range
Monitor function (OPRM). The OPRM function was introduced into the TS
by Amendment No. 92, which was being processed concurrently with the
ITS conversion and which was issued within days after issuance of
Amendment No. 91. Specifically, the licensee did not propose to revise
ITS Limiting Condition of Operation (LCO) 3.10.8.a, ITS Surveillance
Requirement 3.10.8.1 and associated Bases to reflect the re-numbering
of Function 2.e to 2.f on ITS Table 3.3.1.1-1 as a consequence of the
insertion of a new Reactor Protection System function (i.e., Function
2.e, ``OPRM-Upscale''). Thus the amendment proposed by the licensee's
June 7, 2000, application would only correct such omission to match
technical changes already approved by Amendment No. 92.
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:
The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 2, in accordance with the
proposed amendment, will not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Changes are proposed to ITS Specification 3.10.8 whereby the
following aspects of this Specification are revised: ITS LCO
3.10.8.a, ITS SR [Surveillance Requirement] 3.10.8.1 and the
associated ITS Bases. These changes replace references to Function
2.e with references to Function 2.f. These Functions are associated
with the ITS RPS [reactor protection system] Instrumentation Table
3.3.1.1-1. ``OPRM-Upscale'' is Function 2.e and ``2-Out-Of-4 Voter''
is Function 2.f on the ITS RPS Table. Since neither of these
functions are assumed to be initiators of any design basis accident
or transient, the changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes to ITS LCO 3.10.8.a, ITS SR 3.10.8.1 and
associated Bases ensure that the proper portions of the RPS are
required to be operable and that appropriate surveillances are
performed to enable shutdown margin testing during certain plant
conditions. These operability and surveillance requirements will
ensure mitigation of unacceptable reactivity excursions during
control rod withdrawal. Therefore, these changes will maintain test
operations as well as postulated accidents within the bounds of the
safety analysis as described in Section 15.4.9 of the Updated Safety
Analysis Report for a Control Rod Drop Accident. Accordingly, these
changes do not involve a significant increase in the consequences of
an accident previously evaluated.
The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 2, in accordance with the
proposed amendment, will not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes do not introduce any new failure modes. The
proposed changes ensure that proper portions of the RPS are required
to be operable and that appropriate surveillances are performed to
enable shutdown margin testing. Therefore, the proposed change will
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
The operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 2, in accordance with the
proposed amendment, will not involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety.
The proposed changes ensure that the proper RPS functions are
required to be operable and [surveyed] consistent with the safety
analysis as described in Section 15.4.9 of the Updated Safety
Analysis Report for a Control Rod Drop Accident. Therefore,
operation in accordance with the proposed amendment will 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
requested amendment 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
[[Page 37808]]
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 July 17, 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, 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). 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 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 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston
& Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005-3502, 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 June 7, 2000, 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 13th day of June 2000.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-15269 Filed 6-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P