Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-213]

Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company; 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.

61 issued to Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (the licensee) for

operation of the Haddam Neck Plant located in Middlesex County,

Connecticut.

The proposed amendment would be a one-time exception to the

technical specifcation 3.9.12, ``Fuel Building Storage Air Cleanup

System,'' to allow the fuel storage building air cleanup system to be

inoperable during intervals in which new fuel rack modules will be

moved into and old fuel modules will

[[Page 58689]]

be moved out of the fuel storage building (FSB).

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:

In accordance with 10CFR50.92, CYAPCO has reviewed the proposed

change and has concluded that it does not involve a significant

hazards consideration (SHC). The basis for this conclusion is that

the three criteria of 10CFR50.92(c) are not compromised. The

proposed change does not involve an SHC because the change would

not:

1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The requirements of technical specification 3/4.9.7 will be

maintained at all times. Any heavy load (rack or rig) with a

potential to drop on a rack will have no less than a 3 feet lateral

free zone clearance from active fuel. Safe load paths will be

developed for moving the rack modules in the FSB. The old or new

rack modules will not be carried over any region of the pool

containing fuel. In addition, there will be no fuel movement in the

spent fuel pool when the modules are being relocated with the hatch

open. Therefore, there is no possibility of a drop of a fuel

assembly which would necessitate the use of the FSB air cleanup

system when the hatch is open. There is no impact to the probability

or consequences of any previously evaluated accidents due to this

proposed modification.

2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident

from any accident previously evaluated.

There is no potential for a new or different kind of accident

from any previously analyzed. All failure modes that can cause an

accident have been identified and evaluated. When the movements of a

rack module are completed, and the roof hatch is closed, operation

of the FSB air cleanup system will be verified. The system will be

aligned and operated to verify the system maintains the spent fuel

pool storage area at a negative pressure greater than 0 inch water

gage differential, relative to the outside atmosphere as requirement

[SIC] by the technical specifications. CYAPCO will assure that the

plant is maintained in a safe condition by limiting rack movement

with the yard crane only in the cask pit area; no rack movement will

be allowed over stored fuel; any heavy loads will have no less than

3 feet lateral free zone clearance from active fuel and; no fuel

assemblies will be moved while the roof hatch is open. Verification

of system operation combined with the use of the safe load paths

ensure that there is no potential for a new or unanalyzed accident.

3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

There is no significant reduction in the margin of safety. The

function of the FSB air cleanup system is to ensure that all

radioactive material released from an irradiated fuel assembly will

be filtered through the HEPA filters and charcoal adsorber prior to

discharge to the atmosphere. The FSB air cleanup system shall be

operable during operations involving the movement of fuel within the

FSB or crane operation with loads over the storage pool. This

requirement is to reduce radioactive iodine release in the event of

a crane handling event involving spent fuel. Due to the safe load

paths which will be utilized in the movements of the rack modules

and the precluding of fuel movement with the hatch open, there is no

postulated accident that can cause a fuel failure. The operation of

the yard crane inside the SFB is physically limited to traverse

between the crane bay and the spent fuel pool cask area due to the

size of the roof hatch opening. All phases of the reracking activity

will be conducted in accordance with procedures reviewed and

approved by CYAPCO. Therefore, this change does not involve a

significant reduction to 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

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 Rules Review and

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications

Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page

number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be

delivered to Room 6D22, 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 28, 1995, 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 at the local public

document room located at the Russell Library, 123 Broad Street,

Middletown, CT 06457. 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

[[Page 58690]]

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, Attention: Docketing and Services

Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above

date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the

Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800)

248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union operator

should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following

message addressed to Phillip F. McKee: petitioner's name and telephone

number, date petition was mailed, plant name, and publication date and

page number of this Federal Register notice. A copy of the petition

should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Lillian M. Cuoco,

Esq., Senior Nuclear Counsel, Northeast Utilities Service Company, P.O.

Box 270, Hartford, CT 06141-0270, 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 14, 1995, 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 Russell Library, 123 Broad Street,

Middletown, CT 06457.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of November 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Alan Wang,

Project Manager, Project Directorate I-3, Division of Reactor

Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95-28976 Filed 11-27-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P