Peco Energy Company, Public Service Electric and Gas Company, Delmarva Power and Light Company, Atlantic City Electric Company, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3; 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. 50-277 AND 50-278]

Peco Energy Company, Public Service Electric and Gas Company,

Delmarva Power and Light Company, Atlantic City Electric Company, Peach

Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3; 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-44 and DPR-56, issued to the PECO Energy Company (PECO, the

licensee), for operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,

Units 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom, PBAPS), located in York County,

Pennsylvania.

The proposed amendment would revise the ventilation filter test

program (VFTP) bypass and penetration leakage test acceptance criteria

from less than 0.05 percent to less than 1.0 percent. The change

corrects an administrative error that occurred during the development

of the Peach Bottom Improved Technical Specifications which were issued

as Amendments 210 and 214 to the Peach Bottom licenses on August 30,

1995.

The amendment is being proposed on an exigent basis in accordance

with 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6). On December 11, 1995, the licensee determined

that a change to the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Improved

Technical Specifications, issued by Amendments 210 and 214 to the Unit

2 and Unit 3 licenses, respectively, was required. An administrative

error contained in the Improved Technical Specification VFTP would

result in the Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) filter ventilation

systems being declared inoperable upon implementation of Improved

Technical Specifications. Implementation of the Improved Technical

Specifications is scheduled for January 11, 1996. Because these ESF

filter ventilation systems are common to both Units and because the ESF

filter ventilation systems cannot be maintained operable in accordance

with the administrative error in the VFTP, a shutdown of both Units

would be required. Therefore, the licensee has requested approval of

the proposed amendment in advance of the implementation of the Improved

Technical Specifications in order to eliminate the unnecessary hardship

associated with shutting down both units.

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.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under

exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine 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:

(1) The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase

in the probability or consequences of an accident previously

evaluated because the changes are purely administrative and do not

involve any physical changes to plant SSC [systems, structures and

components]. These proposed changes do not impact initiators of

analyzed events, and will not increase the probability of occurrence

of an accident previously evaluated. These proposed changes do not

impact the assumed mitigation of accidents or transient events.

Therefore, these changes will not involve a significant increase in

the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

(2) The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new

or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated

because the changes will not involve a physical alteration of the

plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or

changes in methods governing normal plant operation. The changes do

not allow plant operation in any mode that is not already evaluated

in the safety analysis. Therefore, these changes will not create the

[[Page 66998]]

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

previously evaluated.

(3) The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction

in a margin of safety because they are purely administrative and

will not involve any technical changes. Generic Letter 83-13 (GL 83-

13), ``Clarification of Surveillance Requirements for HEPA [high

efficiency particulate air] Filters and Charcoal Adsorber Units in

Standard Technical Specifications on ESF Cleanup Systems,'' was

reviewed for guidance. GL 83-13 based in-place penetration and

bypass leakage testing acceptance criteria in part on the NRC staff

assumptions used in its safety evaluation reports (SERs) for the ESF

atmospheric cleanup systems. GL 83-13 stated, ``0.05% value

applicable when a HEPA filter or charcoal adsorber efficiency of 99%

is assumed, or 1% when a HEPA filter or charcoal adsorber efficiency

of 95% or less is assumed in the NRC staff's safety evaluation.'' In

the original SER for PBAPS dated August 11, 1972, the NRC staff

assumed a 90% halogen removal efficiency for the elemental and

particulate forms of iodine, and 70% for the organic forms of iodine

in the HEPA filters and charcoal adsorbers of the Standby Gas

Treatment System (SGTS). The SER for Amendments 10/7 dated June 25,

1975 was issued to resolve an issue raised by a December 10, 1974,

letter from the NRC proposing model TS [technical specifications]

for PBAPS Control Room Air Treatment Systems and SGTS. The June 25,

1975, SER documented the acceptability of values of less than 1%

penetration and bypass leakage which is still in place in the

existing TS Bases. No SERs assumed HEPA filter or charcoal adsorber

efficiency of 99%. Therefore, GL 83-13 recommends acceptance of less

than 1% penetration and bypass leakage. Therefore, maintaining the

current requirements for penetration and bypass leakage does not

involve a reduction in the margin of safety. Also, because the

change is administrative in nature, no question of safety is

involved. Therefore, the change 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 15 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 15-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 15-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. 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 25, 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 Government Publications Section, State

Library of Pennsylvania, (Regional Depository) Education Building,

Walnut Street and Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg,

Pennsylvania 17105. 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 a 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.

[[Page 66999]]

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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day

hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the

issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is

requested, 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 John F. Stolz, Director, Project Directorate I-2:

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 J. W. Durham, Sr., Esquire, Sr. V.P. and General Counsel,

PECO Energy Company, 2301 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19101, 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 December 19, 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 Government Publications Section,

State Library of Pennsylvania, (Regional Depository) Education

Building, Walnut Street and Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg,

Pennsylvania 17105.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of December, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Joseph W. Shea,

Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor

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

[FR Doc. 95-31299 Filed 12-26-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P