# Detroit Edison 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%3A99-25578

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Notice
- **Published:** October 1, 1999
- **Citation:** 64 FR 53421

## Text

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-341]

Detroit Edison 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) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
NPF-43, issued to Detroit Edison Company (the licensee), for operation
of the Fermi 2 Plant located in Newport, Michigan.
The proposed amendment would modify current Technical Specification
(TS) 3.6.1.8 by adding footnote ``**'' to Action b. The footnote allows
continued operation of Fermi 2 with the leakage of penetration X-26
exceeding the limit in TS 4.6.1.8.2, provided certain compensatory
measures are taken. Operation would be allowed to continue until the
next plant shutdown. Because the NRC staff expects to issue the Fermi 2
improved standard TSs (ITS) in the near future, the licensee has also
provided a version of the TS amendment that would be compatible with
the ITS. This version adds a new special operations TS, ITS 3.10.8, to
address the compensatory actions and other requirements associated
penetration X-26.
Detroit Edison is requesting that this license amendment request be
processed in an exigent manner in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6)
because the plant is currently operating under a Notification of
Enforcement Discretion (NOED) with respect to TS 3.6.1.8, Action b. In
accordance with NRC procedures described in the NRC Inspection Manual,
Part 9900, Notices of Enforcement Discretion, dated June 29, 1999, the
licensee applied for this license amendment within 48 hours after the
NRC staff issued the NOED on September 23, 1999. The NRC staff will
process this amendment in an exigent manner, as described in the
Inspection Manual, in order to minimize the time the plant is operated
under the NOED.
In its application, the licensee explained why it could not have
foreseen the need for this amendment. The amendment is needed to allow
continued plant operation after penetration X-26 unexpectedly failed
its local leak rate test on September 22, 1999. Based on the data it
collected, the licensee believes the high leakage is passing through
inboard containment isolation valve T4803F601. The results of previous
local leak rate tests had not indicated any adverse trend in the leak
tightness of this penetration.
The staff has determined that the licensee used its best efforts to
make a timely application for the proposed changes and that exigent
circumstances do exist and were not the result of any intentional delay
on the part of the licensee.
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 change does not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change revises the acceptance criteria for Drywell
Air Purge Penetration X-26 to allow continued operation with inboard
isolation valve T4803F601 exceeding the leakage rate. The T4803F601
is not an initiator of an event or involved in accident initiation
sequence. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an
increase in the probability of an accident.
The T4803F601 or the outboard isolation valves must close to
isolate penetration X-26. With the penetration isolated by the
outboard isolation valves, failure of the T4803F601 would involve no
significant increase in consequences of an accident since the
containment function is preserved. Therefore, failure of the
T4803F601 does not involve an increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The T4803F601 is an inboard containment isolation valve. The
safety function of the valve is to provide for containment
penetration X-26 post accident isolation. T4803F601 and two outboard
isolation valves T4800F407 and T4800F408 comprise the penetrations
isolation. The valves safety function is to close and remain closed.
The outboard isolation valves are normally closed isolation valves
that will be closed and deactivated. Therefore, no new or different
types of failures or accident initiators are introduced by the
proposed change.
3. The change does not involve a significant reduction in the
margin of safety.
Operating with excessive leakage on T4803F601 places additional
reliance on T4800F407 and T4800F408, as they would be the single
containment barrier. The change includes closing and deactivating
the outboard containment isolation valves that are normally closed
to provide assurance the penetration is isolated. Closing and
deactivating these valves eliminates the potential that any active
failure could lead to loss of function. Past leak performance and
ongoing periodic leak testing minimize the potential that passive
failures would occur for these valves. The change does not involve a
new mode of operation or change to the UFSAR [Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report] transient analyses. Therefore, the proposed change
does not involve a significant reduction in the 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 14 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 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely
way would

[[Page 53422]]

result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the
Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the
14-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 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 November 1, 1999, 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 Monroe County Library System, Ellis
Reference and Information Center, 3700 South Custer Road, Monroe,
Michigan 48161. 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.
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 20555-0001, 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 John Flynn, Esq., Detroit Edison
Company, 2000 Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48226, 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 September 24, 1999, 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 Monroe County Library System,
Ellis Reference and Information Center, 3700 South Custer Road, Monroe,
Michigan 48161.

[[Page 53423]]

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of September 1999.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew J. Kugler,
Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-25578 Filed 9-30-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-25578. Public record. Not legal advice.