Public Service Electric and Gas Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311]

Public Service Electric and Gas Company; Notice of Consideration

of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No

Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a

Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos.

DPR-70 and DPR-75 issued to Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the

licensee) for operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1

and 2, located in Salem County, New Jersey.

The proposed amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS)

Surveillance Requirement 4.7.6.1.d.1 to indicate that the specified

acceptance filter differential pressure (DP) is to be measured across

the filter housing and to change the filter DP acceptance value from

3.5 inches water gauge to 2.70 inches water

gauge.

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:

1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in

the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The [Control Room Emergency Air Conditioning System] CREACS filter

train is provided for post-accident atmospheric cleanup of the control

room air volume in order to limit doses to control room personnel to

less than the limits prescribed by 10CFR50, Appendix A, Criterion 19.

The CREACS does not communicate with the Reactor Coolant System

(RCS) and does not penetrate the Containment. The environmental

controls portion of the system (i.e., cooling coil, fans, ductwork and

associated dampers, and filtration capability) are not affected by the

proposed changes. Therefore, control room temperature, humidity, air

distribution and cleanliness requirements will continue to be

maintained within acceptance limits. As such, the probability of an

accident previously evaluated is unchanged.

The change to the Surveillance Test boundary requires that the

pressure drop across all elements in the filter train be evaluated,

thereby ensuring that the CREACS filter is maintained in a condition

which would not restrict post-accident CREACS flow below acceptable

levels. The change to the filter DP acceptance limit reallocates design

margin associated with filter performance to CREACS fan performance in

the control room pressurization mode. As such,

[[Page 29159]]

infiltration of potentially contaminated air is limited to that

presently in the dose analysis. The Technical Specification maximum

allowable CREACS flow rate, minimum allowable [high-efficiency

particulate air] HEPA and Charcoal Adsorber removal efficiencies, and

post-accident control room pressurization requirements are not affected

by this change. As such, the consequences of previously evaluated

accidents are unchanged.

2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

The CREACS does not communicate with the Reactor Coolant System

(RCS) and does not penetrate the Containment. The proposed changes do

not require any modification to the CREACS or its support systems. The

design basis safety function of the CREACS is unaffected by the

proposed changes. The environmental controls portion of the CREACS

(i.e., cooling coil, fans, ductwork and associated dampers, and

filtration capability) are not affected by the proposed changes. As

such control room temperature, humidity and air distribution

requirements will continue to be maintained within acceptance limits.

The maximum allowable CREACS flow rate and control room DP requirements

imposed by the Technical Specifications are not changed by this

proposal. For these reasons, the possibility of a new or different kind

of accident is not created.

3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in

a margin of safety.

A new acceptance limit for filter DP (i.e., cleanliness) has been

proposed. The change to the filter DP acceptance reallocates design

margin associated with filter performance to CREACS fan performance in

the control room pressurization mode. Planned modifications to reduce

control room leakage paths, together with the proposed changes to the

CREACS filter DP Surveillance Test acceptance limit, ensure that

control room pressurization requirements and CREACS filter

functionality are maintained during post-accident operation.

The environmental controls portion of the system (i.e., cooling

coil, fans, ductwork and associated dampers, and filtration capability)

are not affected by the proposed changes. Therefore, control room

temperature, humidity, air distribution and cleanliness requirements

will continue to be maintained within acceptance limits. The proposed

changes to the Surveillance Test boundary and acceptance limits

maintain a conservative Operability standard for the CREACS filter

train. Acceptance limits and test methods specified for the HEPA filter

and Charcoal Adsorber efficiencies are not affected by this proposal.

Based on the above discussions, it is concluded that the margin of

safety has not been reduced.

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 20555-0001, 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 June 30, 1997, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West

Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. 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

[[Page 29160]]

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: 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 20555-0001, and to Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston

and 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 May 14, 1997, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 West

Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of May 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Leonard N. Olshan,

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

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

[FR Doc. 97-14012 Filed 5-28-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P