Carolina Power & Light 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 Nos. 50-325 AND 50-324]

Carolina Power & Light 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 or NRC) is

considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.

DPR-71 and DPR-62 issued to the Carolina Power & Light Company (the

licensee) for operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1

and 2 (BSEP) located in Southport, North Carolina.

Effective October 26, 1995, the Commission amended its regulations

(10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J) to provide a performance-based option for

leakage-rate testing of containments of light-water-cooled nuclear

plants. The proposed amendment would permit the licensee to implement

this performance-based option, which allows leakage testing intervals

to be based on system and component testing performance.

The proposed amendment requires the establishment of a ``Primary

Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program'' (program) and makes general

reference to the NRC guidance utilized by the licensee for development

of this program, i.e. Regulatory Guide 1.163, ``Performance-Based

Containment Leak-Test Program''. Regulatory Guide 1.163 addresses the

acceptability of industry-

[[Page 63740]]

developed guidance described in Nuclear Energy Institute document NEI

94-01, entitled ``Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based

Option of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J.'' The proposed amendment takes

one exception to the guidance in NEI 94-01. Based upon the use of

compensatory measures, the exception would allow the use of less

accurate flow measuring equipment.

Certain containment leakage testing schedules and details regarding

the scope of containment valves and penetrations to be leak-tested will

be included in the licensee's program but would be removed by this

proposed amendment from the BSEP Technical Specifications. Consistent

with NEI 94-01 the proposed amendment relaxes the schedules for

performing primary containment air lock leakage surveillance testing

and, if the interval for testing of overall containment leakage (Type A

testing) has been extended under the program to 10 years, requires

inspections for containment integrity during two other refueling

outages before the next Type A test as well as immediately prior to

that test.

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. The proposed license amendments do not involve a significant

increase in the probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated. The proposed license amendments revise the

Technical Specifications to reflect the adoption of a performance-

based containment leakage-testing program. The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission has approved the use of a performance-based option for

containment leakage testing programs when it amended 10 CFR Part 50,

Appendix J (60 FR 49495).

For adoption of the revised regulations, licensees are required

to incorporate into their Technical Specifications, by general

reference, the NRC regulatory guide or other plant-specific

implementing document [used to develop the performance-based

leakage-testing program]. A new Administrative Control subsection is

being added to the Brunswick Plant Technical Specifications that

requires the establishment and maintenance of a Primary Containment

Leakage Rate Testing Program. As stated in the Technical

Specification, this Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program

will conform with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.163, Revision 0, dated

September 1995, ``Performance-Based Containment Leak-Rate Testing

Program'' by establishing leakage testing intervals based on the

criteria in Section 11.0 of NEI 94-01. The Technical Specifications

will continue to require performance of a periodic general visual

inspection of the containment to ensure early detection of any

structural deterioration of the containment system that might occur.

The effect of increasing containment leakage rate testing

intervals has been evaluated by the Nuclear Energy Institute using

the methodology described in NUREG-1493 [``Performance-Based

Containment Leak-Test Program'', September 1995] and historical

representative industry leakage rate testing data. The results of

this evaluation, as published in NEI 94-01, Revision 0, are that the

increased risk corresponding to the extended test interval is small

(less than 0.1 percent of total risk) and compares well to the

guidance of the NRC's safety goal. Therefore, adoption of

performance-based verification of leakage rates for isolation

valves, containment penetrations, and the overall containment

boundary will provide an equivalent level of safety and does not

involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of

an accident previously evaluated.

2. The proposed license amendments will not create the

possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated. No safety-related equipment, safety function,

or plant operations will be altered as a result of the proposed

license amendment. The safety objective for the primary containment

is stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, ``General Design Criteria for

Nuclear Power Plants.'' The safety function of the primary

containment will be met since the containment will continue to

provide ``an essentially leak-tight barrier against the uncontrolled

release of radioactivity to the environment * * *'' for postulated

accidents. Therefore, the proposed license amendments will not

create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated.

3. The proposed license amendments do not involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety. As stated above, the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission has approved the use of a performance-based

option for containment leakage testing programs when it amended 10

CFR Part 50, Appendix J (60 FR 49495). The new Primary Containment

Leakage Rate Testing Program will conform with NRC Regulatory Guide

1.163, Revision 0, dated September 1995, ``Performance-Based

Containment Leak-Rate Testing Program'' by requiring that leakage

testing intervals be established based on the criteria in Section

11.0 of NEI 94-01, Revision 0.

As discussed in Part 1 above, the effect of increasing

containment leakage rate testing intervals has been evaluated by the

Nuclear Energy Institute using the methodology described in NUREG-

1493 and historical representative industry leakage rate testing

data. The results of this evaluation, as published in NEI 94-01,

Revision 0, are that the increased safety risk corresponding to the

extended test intervals is small (less than 0.1 percent of total

risk) and compares well to the guidance of the NRC's safety goal. In

addition, as demonstrated by risk analyses contained in NUREG-1482

(sic) [NUREG-1493], relaxation of the integrated leak rate test

frequency does not significantly increase the probability or

consequences of a previously evaluated accident. Integrated leakage

rate tests have been demonstrated to be of limited value in

detecting significant leakages from penetrations and isolation

valves. Therefore, the proposed license amendments adopting a

performance-based approach for verification of leakage rates for

isolation valves, containment penetrations, and the containment

overall will continue to meet the regulatory goal of providing an

essentially leak-tight containment boundary, will provide an

equivalent level of safety, and do not involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety.

The revised Technical Specifications will continue to maintain

the allowable leak rate (La) as the Type A test [containment

overall leak-rate test] performance criterion. In addition, a

requirement to perform a periodic general visual inspection of the

containment has been maintained as part of the performance-based

leakage testing program.

The revised Technical Specifications will continue to maintain

the allowable leak rate (La) (sic) [0.6 La] as the Type B

[containment penetration leak-rate test] and C [containment

isolation valve leak-rate test] tests' performance criterion. As

supported by the findings of NUREG-1493, the percentage of leakages

detected only by integrated leak rate tests is small (only a few

percent) and Type B and C leakage tests are capable of detecting

more than 97 percent of containment leakages and virtually all such

leakages are identified by local leak rate tests (LLRTs) of

containment isolation valves.

Thus, the proposed license amendments do not involve a

significant reduction in a margin of safety and will continue to

ensure the revised Appendix J regulatory goal of ensuring an

essentially leak-tight containment boundary.

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

[[Page 63741]]

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 January 11, 1996, 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 University of North Carolina at

Wilmington, William Madison Randall Library, 601 S. College Road,

Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-3297. 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, 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 David B. Matthews, 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 General Counsel,

Carolina Power & Light Company, P.O. Box 1551, Raleigh, North Carolina

27602, attorney for the licensee.

[[Page 63742]]

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 September 13, 1995, as amended on

November 27, 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 University of North Carolina at Wilmington, William Madison Randall

Library, 601 S. College Road, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-3297.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of December 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David C. Trimble,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II-1, Division of Reactor

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

[FR Doc. 95-30175 Filed 12-11-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P