# 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

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A95-30175

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Notice
- **Published:** December 12, 1995
- **Citation:** 60 FR 63739

## Text

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A95-30175. Public record. Not legal advice.