Commonwealth Edison 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. STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456, and STN 50-457]

Commonwealth Edison 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.

NPF-37 and NPF-66, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd, the

licensee) for operation of Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, located in

Ogle County, Illinois and Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-72 and

NPF-77, issued to ComEd for operation of Braidwood Station, Units 1 and

2, located in Will County, Illinois.

This notification addresses the beyond scope bracketed items

identified in the requested amendments dated December 13, 1996. The

proposed amendments would revise current Technical Specifications (CTS)

of each unit to conform with NUREG-1431, Revision 1, ``Standard

Technical Specifications--Westinghouse Plants.'' The following

descriptions and proposed no significant hazard analyses cover only

those beyond scope bracketed changes. Associated with each change are

administrative/editorial changes such that the new or revised

requirements would fit the format of NUREG-1431.

1. CTS Limiting Condition of Operation (LCO) 3.2.2 ensures

compliance with FQ fuel design limits by a bounding analysis

that is verified in the plant by monitoring a height dependent radial

peaking factor FXY(Z). The CTS denotes associated LCOs,

Actions, and Surveillance Requirements (SRs) for the FXY(Z)

methodology. Improved Technical Specification (ITS) LCO 3.2.1 denotes

associated LCOs, Actions, and SRs for a method based on an equilibrium

FQ(Z) surveillance (FQ(Z)W(Z) methodology). The

proposed methodology change provides more available margin to the

FQ(Z) limit than is currently available with the

FXY(Z) surveillance methodology. The FXY(Z)

methodology is based on a 1 dimension-2 dimension synthesis of data

whereas the FQ(Z)W(Z) methodology is a more advanced 3

dimension calculation. ComEd proposes to replace the FXY(Z)

method by the FQ(Z)W(Z) method. NUREG-1431 provides the

option for either the FXY(Z) methodology or the

FQ(Z)W(Z) methodology. The revised

[[Page 58795]]

requirement will be stated as ITS LCO 3.2.1.

2. This beyond scope change applies to Braidwood Station only. CTS

SR 4.7.7.d.3 confirms the ability of both trains of the Nonaccessible

Area Exhaust Filter Plenum Ventilation System to maintain Emergency

Core Cooling System (ECCS) equipment rooms at -0.25 inches (water

gauge) relative to the outside atmosphere while operating at a

specified flow rate per train and a specified flow rate per bank. ComEd

proposes to eliminate the specified bank flow rates. The SR verifies

the integrity of the ECCS pump room areas. The ability of the

Nonaccessible Area Exhaust Filter Plenum Ventilation System to maintain

the ECCS pump room areas at a negative pressure, with respect to

potentially uncontaminated adjacent area, is periodically tested to

verify proper functioning of the Nonaccessible Area Exhaust Filter

Plenum Ventilation System. Verification of the train flow rates is

sufficient to satisfy this SR. In addition, several of the CTS 4.7.7

SRs include operating the system at a specified flow rate per train and

a specified flow rate per bank. The specified train and bank flow rates

are included in ITS Specification 5.5.11.a and 5.5.11.b for

surveillances performed after structural maintenance on the high-

efficiency particulate air (HEPA) or charcoal adsorber housings. ITS

Specifications 5.5.11.a and 5.5.11.b include only train flow rates for

other periodic surveillances. The flow distribution per train (bank

flow) is achieved by permanently welded baffle plates and was tested

during initial construction and periodically as required by the CTS.

These changes were permitted at Byron Station as described in NRC

safety evaluation (SE) dated October 22, 1993. The revised requirements

will be stated as ITS 3.7.12 and ITS 5.5.11.

3. CTS SR 4.8.1.1.2.a.5, 4.8.1.1.2.f.3, and 4.8.1.1.2.f.7 include

requirements associated with loading the diesel generator (DG) to

greater than or equal to the continuous rating of the DGs (5500 kW).

Consistent with NUREG-1431, ComEd proposes to modify these SRs to

include a 90 percent to 100 percent of the continuous rating of the DGs

load band (4950 kW to 5500 kW). These revised requirements will be

stated as ITS SR 3.8.1.3 (31 day, 60 minute run), ITS SR 3.8.1.10 (full

load reject), and ITS SR 3.8.1.14 (24 hour run). In addition, the Note

contained in ITS SR 3.8.1.15 (hot restart) includes this load band.

Regulatory Guide 1.9, Revision 3, recommends that these tests be

conducted at 90 percent to 100 percent of the DG continuous rating. The

maximum expected accident load for the worst case DG is 5166 kW (Byron

DG 1A--during the first 30 minutes). The footnotes associated with CTS

SR 4.8.1.1.2.f.7 include an allowance to load the DG for the first 2-

hours of the 24 hour test within a load band of +0 kW, -150 kW of the

2-hour rating of the DG (6050 kW). Consistent with NUREG-1431, ComEd

proposes to modify this load band in ITS SR 3.8.1.12 to include a 105

percent to 110 percent of the DG continuous rating (5775 kW-6050 kW)

load band. The 100 percent corresponds to the 2-hour rating, while the

105 percent corresponds to -275 kW from the 2-hour rating. In summary,

these revised requirements will be stated as ITS 3.8.1.3, 3.8.1.10,

3.8.1.14, and 3.8.1.15.

4. Consistent with plant specific analyses and current procedural

controls, ComEd proposes to raise the minimum steady state voltage

acceptance criterion for CTS SR 4.8.1.1.2.a.4, 4.8.1.1.2.f.2,

4.8.1.1.2.f.4.b, 4.8.1.1.2.f.5, and 4.8.1.1.2.f.6.b to 3950 volts. This

minimum steady state value ensures that certain low voltage sensitive

components can operate properly. This revised requirement will be

stated as ITS SRs 3.8.1.2, 3.8.1.7, 3.8.1.9, 3.8.1.11, 3.8.1.12,

3.8.1.15, and 3.8.1.19.

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 requested

amendments involve 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 for each of the above

proposed changes. The NRC staff has reviewed ComEd's analyses against

the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c). The staff's analysis is presented

below.

1. Will the changes involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

In all of the changes described above the answer is ``no.'' The

proposed changes will not affect the safety function of the subject

systems. There will be no direct effect on the design or operation of

any plant structures, systems, or components. No previously analyzed

accidents were initiated by the functions of these systems, and the

systems will continue to perform their functions in mitigating

consequences of previously analyzed accidents. Therefore, the proposed

changes will have no impact of the consequences of any previously

evaluated accidents.

2. Will the changes create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

In all of the changes described above, the answer is ``no.'' The

proposed changes would not lead to any design or operating procedure

change. Hence, no new equipment failure modes or accidents from those

previously evaluated will be created.

3. Will the changes involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety?

In all of the changes described above, the answer is ``no.'' Margin

of safety is associated with confidence in the design and operation of

the plant. The proposed changes to the CTS do not involve any change to

plant design, operation, or analysis. Thus, the margin of safety

previously analyzed and evaluated is maintained.

Based on the analysis, it appears that the three standards of 10

CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied for each of the proposed changes. Therefore,

the NRC staff proposes to determine that the requested amendments

involve 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 amendments 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 amendments before the expiration

of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is

that the amendments involve 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

[[Page 58796]]

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 Chief, Rules and

Directives Branch, Division of Administrative 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 6D59, 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 2, 1998, the licensee may file a request for a hearing

with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility

operating licenses 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: for Byron, the Byron Public Library District,

109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; for Braidwood,

the Wilmington Public Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street, Wilmington,

Illinois 60481. 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 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and

Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,

by the above date. 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 Michael I. Miller, Esquire; Sidley

and Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60603, attorney

for ComEd.

Non-timely 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 13, 1996, 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: for Byron, the Byron Public Library

District, 109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, Byron, Illinois 61010; for

Braidwood, the Wilmington Public Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street,

Wilmington, Illinois 60481.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of October 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Ramin R. Assa,

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

Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98-29265 Filed 10-30-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P