ML20210N462
| ML20210N462 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1987 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210N468 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#187-2486 OLA, NUDOCS 8702130127 | |
| Download: ML20210N462 (11) | |
Text
. - '
C-2-Yf6 i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM4ISSION yl'j,7-COMMISSIONERS:
'87 FEB -9 P 2 :05 Lando W. Zech, Jr., Chainnan Thomas M. Roberts James K. Asselstine OFT :.
Frederick M. Bernthal 80caE g"d,f-> !
Kenneth M. Carr In the Matter of SERVED FEB 101937 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation Docket No. 50-271 (Amendment to Facility (Vennont Yankee Nuclear Power
)
Operating License)
Station)
ORDER Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 2.772(j), the Secretary refers to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel the following Requests for Hearing and Petitions to Intervene:
(1) Request For Hearing And Petition To Intervene Submitted By New England Coalition On Nuclear Pollution, dated January 29, 1987; (2) State of Vermont's Petition to Intervene, dated January 29, 1987; and l
(3) Attorney General [Connonwealth of Massachusetts] James M.
Shannon's Request For A Hearing And Petition To Intervene With Respect To Vennont Yankee's Spent Fuel Pool Expansion Request, dated February 5,1987.
l It is so ORDERED.
F the C a ission 0M 1
wt i
V3AMUEL J. 'ptH.K h
Secretary 4f the Connission Dated at Washington, DC this day of February,1987.
6 pg2186?K 87888?n N
3 PDR g
1
e o*
CO.; CME TED ync UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
'87 JAN 29 PS :19 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ui!.
)
In the Matter of
)
)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear
)
Power Co rporation
)
Docket No. 50-271
)
(Vermont Yankee Nuclear
)
Power Station)
)
)
REQUEST FOR HEARING AND PETITION TO INTERVENE SUBMITTEC BY NEW ENGLAND COALITICN ON NUCLEAP POLLUTION On June 18, 1996, the NRC published notice of the request of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation to amend the operat-ing license for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station to permit storage of 2,870 f uel assemblies in the plant's spent fuel pool.
51 Fed. Fec. 22,246.
Yankee's license currently permits storage of 2,000 assemblies.
This latest request, if granted, would almost quintuple the amount of spent fuel permitted to be stored on-site by the terms of Vermont Yankee's original license and would allow the storage in the pool of almost eight full core loads.
The June 18, 1986, notice contained the NRC's proposed determined that this amendment involved "no significant hazards considerations."
97 n?nb On> A
~7(f '
2-The New England Coalition on Nuclear -Pollution ("NECNP")
made three (3) filings in response to the June 18 notice.1 These filings generally presented information raising safety issues concerning the proposed amendment, argued that the proposed action requires an Environmental Impact Statement and disputed
'the Commission's proposed finding that the amendments raises no significant hazards considerations.
NECNP requested the opportunity to make a full submission in writing on these issues and argued that they must be considered and resolved by the Com-mission before authorizing any further expansion of Vermont Yankee's spent' fuel pool.
On December 31, 1986, 51 Fed. Reg. 47,324, the NRC published a new notice stating that "[dl ue to oversight", its original notification had failed to state, as required by 10 CFR S 2.1107, that Yankee's request f alls within Section 134 of the Nuclear wa s te Policy Ac t o f 198 2, permitting any interested party to request a hearing, petition to intervene and, if desired, to invoke the " hybrid" procedure described in 10 C FR Par t 2, Subpart j
K.
The Commission also stated that if a hearing is requested, 1 New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution's Objection to Pro-posed Finding of No Significant Hazards Consideration, Reques t for Compliance with National Environmental Policy Act, and Request For Opportunity to Comment on Application to Increase Spent Fuel Storage Capacity at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, July 21, 1986; New England Coalition on Nuclear Pol-lution's Supplemental Response to Vermont Yankee Spent Fuel Pool Expansion Request, Se p t.
19, 1986; New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution's Second Supplemental. Response to Vermont Yankee Spent Fuel Pool Expansion Request, No v. 19, 1986.
.-.. n
s
. it will make a final determination on the question of whether no significant hazards consideration is presented here.
Pursuant to the Commission's rules and the notice published at 51 Fed. Reg. 47,324, NECNP hereby requests a hearing, peti-tions to intervene and notes that it will invoke the hybrid hear-ing procedures.2 Pursuant to 10 C FR S 2. 714, NECNP states the following:
1.
As is more fully described below, NECNP is entitled to participate as a party to this proceeding on behalf of its mem-bers whose lives, well-being and property would be placed at increased risk should the requested license amendment be granted.
NECNF and its members are parties "whose interest may be affected by the proceeding" and are thus entitled to claim a hearing,.pur-suant to 42 U.S.C. S 2239(a).
2.
NECNP is a nonprofit educational organization incor-porated under the laws of Vermont, with some 4 50 members and sup-2 Although 10 CFR S 2.1109 provides that the hybrid procedures may be invoked by a request filed "within ten (10) days after an order granting a request for hearing," the December 31, 1986, notice seems to require in this case that the original petition for hearing'contain such a request in order to be considered timely:
Requests for hearing or petitions for leave to intervene which did not seek to invoke the hybrid hearing procedures are not authorized by this notice and would be considered nontimely, i
51 Fed. JRe. 47,325, Co l. 2.
While NECNP doubts that the NRC may lawfully condition the J
grant of a request for hearing or petition to intervene upon the party's invoking hybrid procedures (since as the agency admits, its original notice was defective due to its own fault), the j
issue is of little practical significance, since the licensee can l
invoke the hybrid procedures in any case.
a
. porting groups throughout the New England states.
Approximately 100 members of NECNP live in the Brattleboro-Putney area and over 50 members live within ten (10) miles of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.
The health and safety of these members, in particular, would be jeopardized by-the requested amendment.
NECNP was an Intervenor in the operating license proceeding for Vermont Yankee, beginning in 1971, and in the license amend-ment proceeding concerning the licensee's last request to increase spent fuel storage capacity to 2000 fuel assemblies.
NECNP is governed by a Board of Trustees and advised by science advisors from New England colleges and universities.
The organization has worked for many years to educate the public about the hazards of nuclear power, the benefits of alternative energy options and the inextricable link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons.
NECNP also operates the " Great New England Enet y Show", the area's only mobile educational unit on altern.a-tive energy and nuclear waste.
NECNP has participated in numerous NRC rulemaking petitions and in proceedings for other nuclear plants.
3.
An order increasing the spent fuel storage capacity at Vermont Yankee would affect the interest of NECNP and its members by increasing the risk to public health and safety associated with operation of the Vermont Yankee plant and with on-site spent fuel storage and by foreclosing the consideration of other, pos-sibly less hazardous options for spent fuel storage and manage-ment.
- t
. 4.
The specific aspects of the subject ma tter of this pro-ceeding as to which NECNP wishes to intervene include but are not limited to the increased risk to public health and safety associ-ated with more tightly packing the fuel assemblies in the pool, the increased potential for a radioactive release from the pool associated with a reactor accident, and the great increase in potential accident consequences caused by a 40% increase of radioactive inventory, most significantly Ce sium, in the pool.
These safety concerns are particularly significant for a BWR design such as Vermont Yankee's, where the spent fuel pool is above grade, in close proximity to the reactor core, yet outside containment in a building not designed to withstand such forces as hydrogen explosion.
Even a reactor accident which is not suf-ficiently severe to cause a release of fission products from con-tainment could involve the generation of explosive quantities of hyd r og en, threatening the integrity of the pool its cooling sys-tems.
e 6-In addition, NECNP centends that the amendment requires an Environmental Impact Statement, pursuant to the National Environ-mental - Policy Ac t.
NRC has to our knowledge as yet taken no i
steps to comply.with NEPA.
Respectf ully submitted, l
Ellyn R.
We is s Diane J.
Curran HARMON & WEISS
~2001 S Street, N.W.
Suite 430 Washington, D. C.
20009 Counsel for NECNP l
Date:
January 29, 1987 d
5 i
?
i t
.. _ ~ - - _
r___._._.-.
_m,
,_y,-_
._y-.,,,,,,,%.m m
n.r -
- ,y UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
'87 JMi 29 PS :2C, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i.FF. -
80C. i '.
... r 'e
!*:.c-y In the Ma tter of
)
)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear
)
Power Co rporation
)
Docket No. 50-271
)
(Vermont Yankee Nuclear
)
Power Station)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that I have this day served
" Request for Hearing and Petition to Intervene submitted by New England Coalition in Nuclear Pollution" upon the following by deposit in the U.S. ma il, first class prepaid:
Daniel R.
Muller John A.
Pi tscher, Es q.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ropes and Gray Washington, D.C.
20555 225 Fr anklin Street Boston, MA 02110
- Secretary of the Commission Of fice of the General-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Counsel Be thesda Washington, D. C.
20555 U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Attn Docketing and Service Branch Co mmiss ion Washington, D.C.
20555 s
o Ellyn' R. Weiss
- hand delivered 4
i
.. _ _ =... _ _ _
s.5,,
- FIndeed f WL'st, No; 3at / Wednesday. Deesseber 31; test / Noticae r.
neesd seaseendnmuyteeMueand> der the level of Are protection in the plant IJbrary of Pennsylvania.Edecuties af h asse6 a
a. Compdance wita the regulation would -
Building. Commonwealth andWalnet -
Per the Nasiner jpgemeiselen. -
result la sades hardship or other costs Streets. Harrisburg. Pennsylvania.17.,
nestedT.tessee.
that are signancantly in excese of thme D
~ ~ ~
Mmmait eaa'a= plated whom the regolation aas or Mted Q Y % d " %
mapup m eseseen N Assear adop ed and additional costa For the Nuclear Regulat '
AssedeAler3: r i nm (s.n=ce signifloently in excess of those incurred D mid R.
'"U
[FR Des m.meS70 sets,sesGrassempt,.. by othere edadlerly situated, without a Diesesor. # WA p'roject a.,eso,,,, u 2,
"- increase in the level of f
anaggemes s,e.sg c;* '..Mc :.ao 9
.~
" N D 8" N g,,,,,,,,,g ht Sre protectica fue the facW5es.
[FR Dec. eNeges Filed 12-Jo.am anes eml 00estatethen,OHrF een angrel. Y aume eens pse Knvimamenistimpact of the Propseed P " " Sent'.'." "..
Actiore W E988 D,',,i AmeemmenB W 5 ne proposed action would not tapact (Desesselee e H F1].
the abtifty to effect safe shutdows of the fN Mfelser l
VernmentYankee teosteer PowerCerg
~
-- e-ru%/.4 '.'. P ant la thaevent of a fire and weald oflessense of Es go provide an acceptable level of safety,
-, r--
_m ogdralast to that altsimed isF toPee IFOpereeng q _. --- __ t = 4 complianos wt& Seedom IE.G of -
IJ888888'I EI898EEI30*W
, (~,1; e Consideramen Deessulmuen
' 10Mississie es Appendix R talo CFR Portse,On this.
basis, the halami== coachulerthere and Opportmfly 9er Heartig 3
Egestsassepass M'44e6.maseh r
fue shaliesch Bettees Atomeopetese.
are no significant radiological no U.S.Neclear "M
~
_Commieden(es %= aim..p.le l
Steelassikdge 2 and 3 loogtyd in York, environmental impacts associated with r
l C % Poemsytenein, rg:.:.
this proposed exemption.
g,,,,,,, og.
.a q
With regard to poteadal.
4,,
nonrediologicalimpacts, the 2a.
degIJcease No.DPR to F
..,u_.
.y_
to t Yankee Nacieer
": i.-
-r
.7 M.",- ; ;!j "'
exemption anyolves lestwee tod-Power Corporadas(&e lisenes@ '
l
.Tymiesseewenidbeemaptedteen entirely withis the restricted areae as operados of the.Veement Yankg the to etenesteneas.na ami. denned in 10 GR Part 20.11 does act Nacieer Power Staden, located is, aNect nonrediological plant elDeente Vernos. Vermont.
of Appsedta R toteGR Partse and has u o&er environmentaHapest.
In accordancetwith the licassee's to the'entent that estein spesi8e seessJ cobisees egelpmesa atM hsespassent s nmfm. the Commission conclodse appilcados dated, April 28,19es, es.
that there are no signiBeant proposed amendment would mvise 6e briesmesaeshourreted are borders. nonmdlologleal enytronmental impacts Vermcat Yankae Technical
. asemessesses,suppesosise hystemswtE.
not be seguisodisposenafanestplast ^ - ' *IE d 4 es proped Spedficaticas to authorias thelicensee ar=====d castein stroenmal steel,,
mmpdmt..
tolacesse the storage capeoityof the~
spent fuel pooltrosa the presset.
===h-e foredng a past of sesupporting Afternative Use ofJtesourme.
capacity of 2000 fuel ammblies to 2am Ike barries may how a See sesestance '
nis actfon involves no use of fuel sesemblies.no change would be im &an the barrier.
resources not previously considered in 7,y,,0d DN,g,,,g 8
DeNeedforthe ProposedAction the Final Environmental Statement g,
(construction permit and operadas center clearances between cells of 6.21s nac==== oflow mmbustible loading in ucense o th'. U u 2 inches compared to the current design of A'
I the locations being exempted from po,
a d3' t
l separation. beater protection or 7.0 inches.ne racks would utilus a autommoc fire suppreselon, a fim in one Agencies andPersons Consulted neutron absorbing material between of these areas would be of lowintensitY ne NRC staff reviewed the licensee's cells to assure a subcritical and short duration Furthermore, safe request and did not consult other configuration.
shutdown could be effectedif a fire agencies or persons.
On June 18,1986, the Commission occurred in one of these aroes because issued a Bl. Weekly Notice of of the passive protection afforded by finding ofNo SignificantI:npoct Applications and Amendments to such separation and barriere as exist.
ne Commission has determined not Operating IJcenses involving No and because of the provtsion of -
to prepare an environmentalimpact Significant Hazards Considerations (51 detection systems to alerttbs Bret ststement for the proposed exemption.
m 22225) which included notice brigade.no fire brigade emeld then take Based upon the foregoing concerning the proposed amendment of action to extinguish the fbeiFer all of -
environmental assessment. we conclude the Vermont Yankee license (51 m the requested exemptions;the tiansee that the proposed action will not have a 22246). That Notica contained the has psevided analyses which show that significant effect on the quality of the Commission's proposed determination either the existing protection features, human environment.
that the requested amendment involved i
alternative modifications and mitigating For further details with respect to this no significant hazards considerations, features or compensatory measures action see the request for exemption offered an opportunity for comments on provide adequate fire protection for the dated September 17.1964. March 29, the Commission's proposed maximuns potential combustible loading May 23 lune 6. September 24,1965 and determination and offered an in the area. Application of the Appendix March 7.1986, which are available for opportunity for the applicant to request 1
R regulation in the particular public inspection at the Commission's a hearing on the amendment and for circumstances is not necessary to Public Document Room.1717 H Street, persons whose interest may be affected achieve the underlying purpose of the NW., Washington. DC and at the to petition for leave to intervene.
rule and would not sigmficantly enhance Covernment Publications Section. State Comments on the proposed
Fedusal RsWstee / Vol. 51. No6 2sg / Wednesday. December 31. 1933 / Nocese 47325 l desundseems mesereeersed tem the those procedurve timM ttie time evettetse Board up to fifteen (15) doye petor to the New England Cemetamm an Nhsinar fee dammesey and regem thes se aree firat prehesnng conference scheduled in
- Pehmian, argument be held to determane whether the proceeding. but auch as amendsd Dee to esmadt.Ge $sseet m any contentsans amust be sesabed a as Maanse dhd est preedte messettua this adjudicatery hog If no party to the petitica must natisfy the specificity requirements descnbed above.
apphasesus isussivue s pussemeng ens as proceeding timely regenste essa-appbcaties tura husmusammashment argument. and if all untianely requesta Not later than fiftees (15) days pnor to fallias udshan the esapeef mesamm ise ad for oral argument are denied, then the the first prehearms conference theNestese)SassePubsp Aasof 3mt.
usual procedures in 10 CFR Part 2.
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner Seekasene im emimused by Comedesian Subpart C apply, shall file a empplement to the petation to resdamesm 1tGR 3.23er.
{anuary 30.19s7, the licensee. Ifit intervene which must saMa a tiet of he h=* hauby pseuddme was es to invoke the hybnd heanns the contentions which are sought to b sashamesesthat has de a passadas on procedures, may fue a request for such litigated in the matter and the bases for as application for a licames amendamme haanng with respect to laavance of the each contention set forth with falling witida the seape of session see of proposed amendment or any person 3, *P,'ci y j
ty C tfone sh i
the Nuaname Westa Pensy Amt eilent whose interest may be affected by this gj g
- P (NWPA&,41uar.10ta46 Undersecties proceedaag and who wishes to invde the amendment under considerstio 134 of the NWPA. tha h='=='a= e4 the hybrid hearing procedures and to peM nor who fans to me such a the sagsest of any paret to tha participate as a party in such supplement which sationes these h;- "puissedussa uteh usepose to "any proceeding, must !!!e a wntten petitton
- is ausher6and to ease hphrist
" ""ts with supect M at leest one j for leave to interwns. Request for a conteno"mi wW not be peranted to masser whink the Cammlan6am hearms and petitions for leave to participate es a party.
detetunsaan ta bela canaseveses amans intervene shall be filed in accordance Those pennitted to latervene become the partise."
with the Commission's " Rules of parties to the proceedias. subject to any
% e hgheid n * % la sacsian 134 Practice for Domestic f.icensing limitations in the order granting leave te, provide for ers! assument en mattens la Proceedingsin to CFR Pett 2. If a intervene. and have the opportunity to oestnevassy.proceded by discamery request for a hearms or petition for participate fully in the conduct of the under the Comassaanon's rules and the lean tointervene seeking to irrvoh, hearing. tacinding the opportunity to M t following any=maat of only hybrid hearing procedures in present evidence and cross-examine those factuallamase tant involve a genuine and substantial dispute.
accordance wim this notice la filed by witnesses.
~
the abow date, the Commuesion or an If a beertng is requested, the together with any remaining questions Atomic Safety and IJcensing Board.
Comadselon will make a final of law, te be reached in en edfodicetery designated by the Ceaunieeica or by the deternumation on the lesse of no hearing. Acasai 1'
, hearsaga Chairman of the Atomic Safety and sigmftcant hasards cxmelderation. %e are to be held on only these immums found ucensing Board Panel, wsil rule on the final determination will serve to decide to meet the ceitens of secades nas and request sod /or petition and the when the hearing is held.
set for heanne aner oral asimsemt.-
Secretary or the designated Atonne ne Commaassen's ruleswya====a%g Safety and Ucensing Board willissue a
!! the final determination is that b section 134 elthe NWPA ass amendla to notice of hearing or en appropeiste amendment request invo}ves no CFR Part 2. Sebpart K. " Hybrid Heartas order. Requests for hearing or petitions s gmficant hazards consideration, the Procedmes for F.xpaamme of Spent Feel for leave to intervene which do not seek Comauasion may tesue the amendment i
Storage Capecity at Civilian Nuclear l
Power Reactors"(published at 50 FR to invoke the hybnd beanns procedures and make it effective, notwithetandmg are not authonzed by this nouca and the request for a hearing. Any hearing l
41862 (October 15,1985). Under those would be considered nontimely, held would take place after issuance of f
rules, any party to the proceeding may As required by 10 CFR 2J14. a the amendment.
invoke the hybrid hearing procedures by petition for leave to intervene shall set If the final determination is that b filing with the presiding officer a written forth with particulanty the interest of amendment involyn a sigmficiant request for oral argument under 10 CFR the petitioner in the proceeding and how hazards consideration, any heanng held 11100. To be timely, the request must be that interest may be effected by the w uld take place before the issuance of filed within ten (10) days of an order results of the proceeding. The petttton any amendment.
granting a request for hearing or petition should specificauy explain the reasons
. Normally, the Comrainsion will not to intervene. ( As outlined above, the why intervention should be permitted issue the amendment until the Commission's rules in to CFR Part 2.
with particular reference to the expiration of the 30 day notice period.
Subpart G continued to govers the filing foHowing factors:(1) ne nature of the However, should circumstances change of requesta for a hearing or petitions to petitioner's nght under the Act to be during the notice period such that failure intervene, as well as the ademise4on of made a party to the proceeding;(2) the to act in a timely way would result. for contentions.) De presiding ofHoer shall nature and extent of the petitioner's example. in derating or shutdown of h grant a timely request for oral argument. property, financial, or other interest in facility, the Commission may issue the The presiding omeer may grant an the proceeding and (3) the ponible license amendment before the untimely request for oral argessent only effect of any order which may be expiration of the 30-day notice period, upon a showtag of good cause by the entered in the proceeding on the provided that its finsi determination is requesting party for the failure to fue on petitioner's interest. The petition should that the amendment involves no time and after providing the other also identify the specific aspect (s) of the sigmficant hazards consideratiorL na parties an opportunity to respond to the subject matter of the proceeding as to final determmation will consider su untimely request. If the prooiding officer which petitioner wtshes to intervene.
public and State comments received.
grants a requeet for oral argument. any Any person who has (Bed a petition for Should the Commission take this action.
hearing held on the appilcation shau be leave to intervene or who has been it will publish a notice of issuance and conducted in accordance with the admitted as a party may amend the provide for an opportumty for a heanns hybrid heanng procedures. In essence.
petition without requesting leave of the after issuance. The Commission expects
,---y-
,,,,------,-,--------,---,--,.-----i-----.--,,,-,, -,. -
,----,----r-w-
e Fedesel Ragleter / Vol. 51. Na 250 / Wsdnssday. D:cembIr i
31.1986 / Notic es that,the esed to take this action wdl ocese very infregnantly.
10eekst pese. 80 300 and 50-2e11 which form the basis for Tabi Virginia samme,ts and #4pwor Co. Surry CFR Part St. remam essentialfyb A request for a heeringera petitton power Stenen. M leo.1 and 2t g
for leave to testervene that scelta to unchanged from those addr 38"""'" E8"e"*"n"eing om
- "8'I invoke the hybrid hearing precedeste in
- **""* " '*"* '"leli a
an accordance with this notteemeet be gagnggeene empeng atinbutable to transponatmn og'4 o
filed with the Secretary of the -
waste to and from the Surry pow,, ett ne U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comenission. Washington. DC 2055s.
considering isevance of an am)endment
$)d Comedeolon. U.S. Nuclear Kagulatory Comadeelen(theComtrussion is
"' " g ansport and es b mpect to nonnel D
in a le.
Attentles:Decketing and Sorytco to Facility Operating Ucenses No. DPR-the impset estrma es$i 4
Br e %eranay bedehvored se else 32 sad No.DPR-37 leaued to Virginia Surry IT.S. In addition. th
_ je public DecamentI%
Electric and Power Company (th*
additionalyears of reactor 1717 N Strust.le w the abog hh Q licensee), for the operation of Surry not incritase the annual pubt
' I'k.
Power Station. Uruts No.1 and 2.
reactor operation.
ofthe located in Surry County, Virgmia.
With regard to normal plant
' 5 fileddueAl noties pers$Abtleet tes(SOf ed,iLis regeseted peneewsomep$asinfers A.
Idenu/icosiortofProposedAction operstion thelicenseecompiles NRC guidance and requireme T
I'y IslepEasemail The amendment would consist of kaping radiation aposurn "nts to Wenesse Onion at 3264eOS(in changes to the operating license is reasonably achinable" asle heisseert (age) 388 4700); The itiustom authorizing an extensson in the occupational exposures an(Aung,,
d for. -
Unies operatorsheeld hegives expiretion date for the Unit 1 Facility redioactivtty in effluents. We liedeen
" ^~ ties Nusaber $737 Operating Ucense DPR-32 from June 25 would continue to comply with theos,,
i and the A$nwteg message addressed to 2006, to May 25. 2012. and for the Unit 2 requirements during any additional Denhd&h6auer: petitleser's name and Facility Operating Ucense DPR-37 from years of facility operation and eies.
number; date pedties was June 25,2006. to lanuary 29,2013.
apply advanced technology where te t neme; and publication The amendment to the licenses is available and appropriate. Acco en l
dest page number of thia Federni responsive to the licensee's application radi logicalimpacts on man, both Raguese nomos. A copy of the petilica dated August 22.19ee, as supplemented and offsite, are not significantly more-should slee be sent to the OfBce of the by letters dated Decaraber S.and.
severe than previously estimated la thy Generdi Causosi.8sthsede. U.S. Nuclear December 10, tees. 'llie NRC staff has t
FES and ot.r previous cost benefit Regulator prepared an Environ'nental Asseaarnard conclusions remain valid.
DC asses.y thl=== Washington, of the Proposed Action." Environmental Non.Rodiologicallmpacts and to John A.Ritcher, Asmsmaat by the Office of Nuclear l
Eespdre. Repos and Gray,235 Franklin Strat. Boston. hemesechoestes estia, Reactor Regulation Relating to the The NRC review identified no attorney for the 16 Change in Expiration Dates of Facility additional degradation of the habitat Operating Ucense Nos. OPR-32 and surrounding Surry Power Stanon with Nonthnely A11ags of poet $ms,for leave DPR-37 Virgmia Electric Power regard to indigenous plant and anunal to intervene. amended pedona.
Company. Surry Power Station. Unita species for the additional years of i
supplemental petitions and/or requests No.1 and No. 2." dated December 24.fac2hty opesetton. In addition, the for bearing will not be entertained 1986.
National Pollutant Discharge absent adetermmation by the Ehmination System permit provides Commisalon. the presiding officer or the Summary of En varonmental Assessment additional environmental protectio presidmg Atomic Safety and ucensmg ne NRC sta!T has reviewed the finding ofNo Sigm/: cost Impact Board. that the petition and/or request pomtial environmentalimpacts of the The staff has reuewed the proposed should be granted based upon a propn.ed change in the expiration dates change to the espiration dates of the balancmg of the factors specified in to of the Operating Ucenses for Surry Surry Power Station. Units 1 and 2 Power Station. Unit Nos. I and 2. This CFR 2.714(a)(1)(iHvl and 2.714(d). evaluation considered the previous the requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part Facihty Operateg Lcenses relatise to For further details with respect to this enuronmental studies. includina the action. see the application for
.. Final Environmental Statements SL Based upon the enuronmental amendment dated Apnl 23.1986, which Related to Operation of Surry Power assessment the staff concluded that is available for public inspection at the Station. Umts 1 and 2". dated May 1972 there are no significant radiological or Commission's Pubhc Document Room, and June 1972 and more recent NRC nonradiologicalimpacts associated with 1717 H Street.NW. Washington. DC.
pobcy the proposed action and that the proposed bcense amendments will not and at the Brooks Memonal Ubrary. 224 Rode /ogico//mpacts have a significant effect on the quality Mam Street. Brattleboro Vermont 05301.
Althou of the human enuronment. Therefore.
of Surry gh the population m the ucmity the Commission has determmed.
Dated at Bethesda. Maryland. this 23rd day Units 1 and 2 has mcreased shghtly. the site requirements of 10 CFR pursuant to 10 CFR 5131. not to prepare of December.1986.
part 100 are still met with regard to an environmentalimpact statement for For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Exclusion Area Boundary. Low the proposed amendments.
Daniel R. Muller, Populat:on Zone. and nearest population For further detatis with respect to this Directoe. S WR Pro /ect Grectorate No J.
center distances, and such changes do adion. see (!l the retaest for Dmsson o/8WR lscenset not seficantly merease any amencmer ts da'ed August 22,1986 a s (FR Doc. 86 29384 Fded 12-30-e6; 8 45 emi enuronmental impacts. The net supple nemed by le"ers dated ename coon rsee.es-a annt.ahted enuronmentalimpacts Decem5er 5. and Dece rber 10. 1 % 6 (21 the Fmal Enuronmental Stitements attnbutable to the uramum fue! c le.
Related to the Operation of Surry Power i
l E.
Federal Register / Vol. 51 No.117 / Wednesday June 18
.1988 / Notices 9"!'!!!!!!!!!n!!p ]1-proposed amertat would 22245 o, 72
. isvogve a segmftcant mervese in the The proposed amendment would 1 ty er consequences of en replace the I.imiting Condition for n accordance with the proposed ut %
previously evaluated smco the Operation (LCOI 3.6 C of the Browns amendment would not:(tlinvolve a
,tyof occurrence of any Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Umts 1. 2 ands.gmftcant meresse m the probability o
,,4 accident does not depend on 3 TS. page numbers 183 and 196 consequences of an accident previously h
beens operable and the respectrvely to expand applicability to evaluated; or 12) create the possibthty o include not only the pnmary coolant a new or different kind of accident from ces of any accident which boundary but also the balance of ASME any accident previously evaluated; or (3) ver, es he dependent on the operability i
del,,,g 53, would be fesa severe dunna Code Class 1. 2 and 3 equivalent ble involve a sigmficant reduction in a i
systema.
or refueling mode than a margm of safety.
accident in the startup or run The regulations for inservice The proposed changes wdl not j
inspection (10 CR 50.55afgl) were sigmficantly increase the probabdity or of operation which already have changed on February 27.1976. to require consequences of an accident previously to 8 pour allowance to perform repair or
,nent of the SRSS.
that facdity mservice mspection (ISL)evaluated or create the possibdity of a cg programs be penodically updated to new or different kind of accident from
-h 3, proposed amendment does not the Possibdity of a new or later editions of the ASME. Boiler and any accident previously evaluated Pressure Vessel Code.Section XI. In because no operabdity or surveillance e
t kind of accident from any order to ehminate conflicts between ISI requirements for systems. structures or ev,ee.
t previously evaluated because requirements in the TS and those components used to terminate or
@gange does not remove any specified by regulation.10 CFR mitigate accidents would be reduced t
pment or affect the performance of 50.55afgl(iil requirss that TS be changed and no equipment changes are involved.-
i.,g anFequipment m ways not previously to reference 10 CFR 50.55a rather than The proposed changes will not involve m
contain details of a specific ISI program. a sigmficant reduction in a margin of i ne proposed amendment does not The survedlance requirement for ISI hassafety since the changes conform to Icco
,,olve a sigmficant reduction in the already been revised to include this NRC guidance in STS and actually in earyn of safety for the same reasona as reference by BFN amendment numbere increase the requirements for structural dse because the prop)osed TS isscnbod in items (1 cnd (2) above, and 98,92, and 65. Revismg the LCO se integnty over the current TS lF gasstent with the guidance provided in desenbed here will provide additional requirement.
he an ca on a ms e" Since the application for amendment e STS and finally because n g O6 hhk nvolve8 proposed changes that are ln servedlance requirements would be to Standard Technical Specifications enc rnpassed h h enana for Wch d
enged. Therefore. the licensee (STS). The proposed change should not sigmf cant hazards c nsideration n
'd poposed to determine that the proposed amendment does not involve sigmficant compmnuse nuclear safety sMce it exists and are encompassed by the
" 's n an "
haurds considerations.
above examples, the licensee proposed r, s an determine that the proposed The staff has reviewed the licensee's STS a e ns tent with t
amendments do not involve a sigmficant kermmation and finds it acceptable, gg,,,yo,p,,po,,g,,,,,,,(7,,,,
hazards consideration.
terefore. the staff proposes to haratt/s considerution determination, The staff has reviewed the licensee's Mermine that the proposed amendment The Commission has provided guidance pr p sed determmations and finds it kes not mvolve a sigmficant hazards for the application of cntena for no wasideration.
acceptable therefore. the staff proposes sigmficant hazards consideration I
to determme that the proposed l>calPubhc Document Roo,n determmation by providing examples of amendments do not mvolve a sigmficant
' beation: Athens Public Library. South g
amendments that are considered not hazards consideration.
' ed Forrest. Athens. Alabama 35611.hkely to involve sigmficant hazards Loco / Pubhc Document Room Attorney for heensee: H S. Sanger.
considerations. Two of these examples location: Athens Pubhc Library. South Esquire. General Coun sel. Tennessee [r,
are:(ii) A change that constitutes an Mey Authonty. 400 Commerce additionallimitatron restnction.or and Forrest. Athens. Alabama 35611.
benue. E 11B 33C. Knoxvdle-control not presently included in the TS.
Esquire. General C'ounsel. Tennessee AUmf Dr hC8c'ee: H S. Sanger. Jr.,
hnnessee 37902.
and (vii) A change to make a heense Valley Authonty. 400 Commerce ARC Pro /cet Director-Daniel R. conform to changes in the regulations Asenue. E 118 33C. Knoxvdle.
M'f-where the license change results in very Tennessee 37902.
Tennessee Valley Authority. Docket minor changes to facihty operations
.VRC P ofect Ozrector: Daniel R.
% 56-239,50-240 and 50-298. Browns clearly in keeping with the regulations.
Afuller.
The proposed amendments concemmq Terry Nuclear Plant. Units 1,2 and 3,the mclusion of ASME Code Class 1,2 lanestone County, Alabama Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power and 3 equivalent systems is in response Corporation. Docket No. 50-2?1,
', Date of amendment request: February to an NRC request regarding a change m Vermont Ya to CFR 50 55aig) which required a TS y** "* y""nkee Nuclear Power Station, Desertption of amendment request;change. Also the change wdl result in b Technical Specifications (TS) ton Droposed amendment wculd change Date otopphcation for amendment:
simdar to STS and are therefore Apnl 25.198s Martd the structuralintegnty encompassed by the above examples.
Description o/ amendment request: B
'D'etfications to include the balance of The Commission has also provided letter dated Apnl 25.1986, the hcensee.y ASME' Code Class 1 2 and 3 equivalent standards for determinmg whether a Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
'icems Dese spec,ifications address a sigmficant hazards consideration exists Corporation, submitted a proposed
{I Clark to H G. Parns dated Apnl 20.blem discussed in NRC's letter from as stated m to CFR 50 92tc). A proposed license amendment for NRC review an amendment to an operatmg hcense for a approval which would revise the facihty mvolves no sigmficant hazards Vermont Yankee Technical consideration if operation of the facihty Specifications to authonse the licensee to increase the storage capacity of the
_ _ _ _, ___ _ _ _. _ _ - - - ^ ~ - - - ' - - -
,c.--
- - ' - ~ ' ' - *
- 4 m
Federal Regineer / Vol 51. No.117 / Wcdneedzy Jan218.1988 / Notices N'
spent Ibd peal hem the pneumme NRC Prepect Darocaort Demel R.
has made a proposed deterreiner6asii capeety ed aslerhud sammuthms to auro Muller.
the applicatton for amendment fuel m The semW be Wisceneia Pishuc Service Corporation, a signincent hetards considerano,' "
seemaphshed by the ad high Docket No.35-355.Mewamase Nuclear E##'I #8'h/EC UDC2'"'"' Room dansley heelmek modelsselt esser to caste eisereness bedesum euAs ad 062186 Pown Plaat. Kewouns Cmasy*
location: Umversity of Wiscons,n Wisameia
- 1. brary Isermng Center. 2420 Niq hohes Wasapesed to toensus dessem ad 7.0inchen The seeks wedd sailmea Disseafemminentreposse Msy1.
Dnve. Creen Boy. Wisconsin se3e '
Atrarneyforheensee ste,,,y, neutron absorbing mistertd beausen 19es.
cella to assen e ambesemenL Description of amendmentrequest-Keene. Esqwre. Foley and I.ardner E. Wisconsin Avenue. Milwaukee,'
configsmaaha.
This amendument would delete specdc Wisconsin 53202.
assisforpeepseedme stayisant snubber testing and survelilmes haamsde -- -
" desanmaammeur regmuressunas hem the Tedumami N#t*PW Dfintwe. C*Re P.
g,,,'
The 8'- kne psealdad Speciasselmas (TS6 sevese assadated guidamna -- -
the asphaeales of limituus oundettoes for opere aus in the PREVIOUSLY PUBtJslag g the standantsla1GlFR 38.83 by TS and eclude appropriate amebbers in OF CONSIDERATION OF18acAng.g p
certais examples (Si m 7751), the plant incarvice krW plen.
OF AMENDMENTS TO OPERA 73eg One of emamples of actions nog assasforproposed sastgruficuat 1.ICENSES ADE)PROPQaan No c y'likel to invoies a signiasant hasards horords cenetdesween desanurinetiour SIGNIFICANT HAZARas
- = In:
There are leer afessed D Seemous and CONSIIERATION DgTEmagagg (x) Aa==p===1aa of the sacrags a change to theTableof Contente.M AMD OPPORTUNFFY FOR %*-
capacity of a spent fuel peel when all of 3.14 Shock Seppressors (Saubbers) is g
the !bGowing ass amffaMart.
besag changed to senke it osmeistent pu shed as separate individuel#We p (1) h storage==yamalaa method with to CFR 50.56e(s)(4) and to clanfy consists of efthee replacing existing language of the TS6 TS114(b)is being
- "*'I** **"" *W the .
N wmpuhusheds 8
racks with a dadge widch allows closer tevised to both danfy the language Y
4 becuese um, gig,,,e, i
spacing between stored s t fuel regardais time reqeared to repair a aseemblies or placine a onaltacks snubber and to gain consistency with allow eeCommenom to won get bl. -
of the original design os the pool floor if other Kewaunee H with anda, weeW oeuse.Ny are repeness space penattet provisiana. TS 4.2a.1 is hems changed le beceasees hW noneRue W (f)W storage expansion method both snaka the section canaissent with to amendamsk propend to be w
does not krvnive tod consolidation er CPR 50.56e(s)(4) and to effect an involvingno significant hamnsde double tiesing administrative change. namely, moving considerettoa.
(t)% Reff of the poolle maintained the Anchor-Holth snubber reference
. Fordetails seethehM9tiduala@ ^
less than or squal to 0.sst and from n 4.14b to 4.2a.1.The fourth TS in the Federal Registeron the der sed #
(4) No new sociusology or unproven change is to delete Section 4.14 in order page cited. This notice does out exted- /
technology la utilised in either the to bnns its former requirementa into the notice penod of the ensmalassim construction process or the analytical conestency with 10 CFR 5(L55elg)(4).
Duke Power Company,Dechat Naa3. i techniques rwcessary to justify the The rule requires the adoption of the 3ss and 56-378, McCain Nedmar expansion.
ASMB Boiler and Pressare Vessel Code:
Station. Units 1 and 2, Maal==hy The storage expension method the Code contains a snubber inspection County. North Carolina proposed by Vermont Yankee consists section which the licensee has of replacing existing racks with a design incorporated into his Inservice Date of amendmentrequese Masst a which allows closer spacing between Inspection Plan: thus. making TS 4.14 1986.
stored fool element assemblies. thereby unnecessary. The Table of Contents is Brief description of amendo'ene ne meeting enteria (1) Neitherrod being revised to reflect the above TS amendments would pemut use of consolidation nor doutgle tiering is changes and la an ennrely editorial Transnuclear. Inc.. multielement spent involved thus critena (2)is satisfied.
action.
fuel shipping casks for transpomng The licensee has stated that the Keff of The Commission has provided spent fuel from Oconee Nuclear Stadas j
the pool will be mamtained less than or guidance for the application of to McGuire Nuclear Station.
equal to 0 95, thereby meeting criteria standards for determimng whether a Date o/ publication ofindmduel j
(3). Also, the licensee has stated that no significant hazards consideration eusts notice m Federal Register May 2EL 1819 new or improved technology is utilized by providing examples of amendments (51 FR 19428).
In either the construction process or the that are considered hkely to involve upitation date ofindinduolnoece analytical techniques necessary to sigruficant hazards considerations (48 June 2?.1986.
justify the expansion. All four criteria of FR 14870). Two of these examples are:
Loco /Pubhc Document Room example (x) are therefore satisfied.
(i) a purely administrative change to locat;on: Atkins Lbrary. (Jniversity of Therefore. the change is similar to technical specifications: for example. a North Carolina. Charlotte (UNCC Commission example (x). Accordingly, change to achieve consistency Station). North Carolina 28221 the Commission proposes to determine throughout the technical specifications.
NOTICE OF ISStJANCE OF that this amendment does not involve a correction of an error, or a change in AMENDMENT TO FACiUTY sigmficant hazards consideration.
nomenclature: and OPERATING UCENSE Loco / Pbbhc Document Roots (vii) a change to make a license locatios: Brooks Memonal Library. 224 conform to changes in the regulations, Dunng the pened since publice988,g Main Street. Brattleboro. Vermont 05301. where the license change results in s ery the last bi weekly notice. t Attorneyforlicensee:JohnA.
mmor changes to facility operations Commission has issued the Ritscher. Esquire. Ropes and Cray. 225 clearly in keepmg with the regulations.
amendments. The Commission Frankhn Street. Boston. Massachusetts All of the changes fallinto one or both determined for each of these 02110.
categories As a consequence the staff amendments that the applica
.z.
g g
g V
~
erleseDeP9W
'le'thd plant '
IJbrary of Permeylvaniar.Enedik e
-Compenseg regadation would* Building. 't -
--._.Jth and We J
reemithrandesherdship orotBem Streets, Harrisburg. Pennsylvente.
, y' thatsovsipdheedyla escemof thaer' Dated at Beseeds. Maryland. this 23rd
. hentiesregulationame of Der==har tessi '
-8 w
, "c,. '*J
".'adoptedsadeddelismal.cesesv t.
Fbr the Nacisar Regulatory re i
r
' %dtbewM
~4
..Y$*Y'WLYg
} ~. O oce B
tviestDincsonneN%
, CAW,yy,g DimisoofSWE1.icamam
.c c
.~
,,m,...m
. - (FE Dee, uNeses Piled IMHet tes ea$
am q y...a.... ~..n. g, saassacessanw.e <
Jh octoftAe'PNeposed m.
.s r.
4' W, femmig,i,eldseg
. ;tonesesase.8Hr m,.,
.., a f' Verine tYeWi$80melserPosetCgsph gn 2
, cs::,',':lm;;ig:% %lll%Te2ill'".""r e K.'
4eseptionarwithSometemInsethM, usseemand g AppeedheR toMLCEREsmada;Onthierr>
t l
,(
, besin me -h.. '"d 0FnNF for Hoertus.un%.
.s are no s va*nc== radiaragaras..
3; g, gig,,f,,gg,ggi,jfgffg,h h.
a legh,g environmentalimpacts associate &
thisproposed enempdos: ' " ' t "A t'a-d==ta= She Chduaischr lJa".. ??
g f - --
- 1=====y= etas aw -
~p
., y
- d 4g Withregardtopoesmesak ;. A -
to ' -
uommes Na,lFWQ.
hi e. nonsedialesleelq'"- thepeepened.
.rn 2a, Yankee
'f I
-4
'Whituir """'P'88"8"es'*thereentecedereemas <at Pawar.CarpassiesQhe i.
i~
enticalswitn op ggmigy.,.w y densedlossGRFort30.3h e NacieenpowerSteelen. located A.,
g.
_m
_ gg,g,ggyg,,ggr. aNeot nonradiologisel plaat eElma k n en smaa.
am.'
.Vernon6 Vem.J
. m.
and hee no other enviransmental t=y='
a m
m.
.. - -., herefore, the t'arnrniaalan conclodse.'d in adcordance,wish es M ~
=.
gppsi,aHaa.datadiApre 28,1908 the...
.that there are no signi5 cant :
propoemiampedmont wouldreviseseC
- - a
-u m7
' h" nantediologiset suffreessenski fnipacts Vermont Yankee Tachaarak a-.
' emaAesuphedr r -=~a.
- "ciend with tse pmpowd' ~
SpeancationsL to authertee tip Isosam.
a a ;-
f sinussend3seHW l. exemption.
to increase the storageroepeesty.of thei.
menhmeSummingepeettiestiguppenday-AlfernedtvoUseofJtesourcee -
spee6fuelpooltross the-present.
.a fhm@.mennmayhaymygge gggggggggy e '
nla hetioninvolves Do uns d capacity of 2000 fuel assemblies to 2870 les then es baner.-.
resources not previously considered in.
fuel assemblies.ne change would be a
p ed a
7Nrple()htthePaqIsoned/cinut..
(c natruction permit and operating the Final Environmental Statement.
g Beammem cd low combuesible loading in center clearances between cells of 6.218 inches compared to the current design of A'
p'w the loaations being exempted frean tauon ts 2 a i 3*
separation, bearter pmtestion oe.
7.0 inches. De racks would utilise a autamahr fire suppression, e fire la one. Aseneies andPenons Consulted neutron absorbing material between of these areas would be oflowintensitF ne NRC staHr viewed the licensee's cells to assure a subcntical and abort duration. itrthermore. amie.
request and did not c.nnsult other conEguradon.
shutdown could be afrectedif a fire agencies or persona.
On June 18.1986, the Commission occurred la one of these areas because issued a Bl. Weekly Notice of of the passive protection afforded by findles ofNo SignificantImpact Applications and Amendments to such sepasation and barriese as exist; no Commission has determined not Operating Licenses Involving No and beoemse of the praetsionate -
to prepare an environmentalimpact Significant Hazards Considerations (51 detection syntesseto abett$s8ser -
statement for the proposed exemptfon.
FR 22228) which included notice brigadmine Are brigaddMeekitthen take Based upon the foregoing concerning the proposed amendment of i
action taesthestab the 8siniPerill of :
environmental assessment, we conclude the Vermont Yankee license (51 FR the requested enemptiones the lionssee that the proposed action will not have a 22248). That Notice contained the has provided analysse whfelt show that significant effect on the quality of the Commission's proposed determination either the existing protectica features, human environment.
that the requested amendment involved alternative moddir=Hans and mitigating For further details with respect to this no sigmficant hazards considerations, features orcompensatory measures action, see the request for exemption offered an opportunity for comments on provide adequate fire protection for the dated September 17.1984. March 29 the Commission's proposed maxinnan potential combustible loading May 23. lune a, September 24,1985 and determmation and offered an in the area. Application of the Appendix March 7.19a8. which are available for opporturuty for the applicant to request R regulation in the particular public inspection at the Commission's a hearing on the amendment and for circumstances is not necessary to Public Document Room.1717 H Street, persons whose interest may be affected achieve the underlying purpose of the NW., Washington, DC, and at the to petition forleave to intervene.
rule and would not sigmficantly enhance Covemment Publications Section. State Comments on the proposed 1
.fe.
y
- susums t vintsat Nas aus / Wire==d=yt December H. 1859 /14heum 47333 t.
', h those pa_ ilisaittothereweifebb Board sple Aftees (19) doyeyster ttr the h-itenair W feedienaceryendsesses shmeasensb first prehearing cesferwice scheduled in 76hstamewoe.<- #
hs aryn=== he beiste desmemos whethest the psocaedias, bat auch as amended t any contentless ammet he sesebud ha met petition must satisfy tha specincity Shahs 4Ad adjudicassey heestaqs Les pasey to aban requirementa damenhed above.
applissema procading timely mesmeseesh.
Not later than fiftasa (151 days prior to argument,andif alluatimely requessa the first preheenns conferense smurhw for oral angiment are denied, them the schaA= tad in the proceedlag, a petitioner
.IN s
"8"*I 'esednes bite CFR Nt &
8 shall film a==pt==aae ta the petitina to d
SubpartGeppfb intervena which amat include a list of j
_2 me.4.s. W ansary so;teer.the Namesse6 ifR.
e the contenti umadam+ -
- * *6aa-a e agetadia. ens whiah are sought to be e matiae.and ebaseafoe
'"CC:sta.tthleimapmemadiuseen I.rocedmen.may fth a requeer fbe,su.ch" eachcomunnon ogrank we
- e..e. - -
a, g wi res, set to -m e o e - n".'OJl::F'r'?;f#dgi
- = m -
- Acte 42ees %
a =<
de-A- - -r -
m hose interest may be a2rcted by this -
w l
,g,,,,,g,,
g_f _. mid who weeminnk the==== hay under ca==id= ation. A g
p the hybrid'headng procedures and ta.
petimmerwh falk to Hle such e-
" ~h asthebe U. 4 participate se a party in end supplanun{ Q eaWsRes Gese
~~
asammM.
procading, mm Sh a wdttom penets -
roeped to at feast one
'w
. _ questsuspepsas7' ass for leave to intervene. RequestfIsr a consen6am weinebe petsfuodtw
" ' "t hearing and petitions fbr lesse to -
' pare $st as a perv. ~ -
detNulsese@het'a-ela ensamouemusaament, intervene shall be fDed in encordancs-30# perinitted b Eihriene become.
-- tbs with the Conenfeenan's "ftales of-parties to the procweding, seblect to any
.y
- - - r= a'actism,13C Practice for Domestic Ucensieg ifmitadone in the artbryanting lasve to Tur eMasemmentsamattesala.
Proceedings"in to CPRPkrtiife-interves, and have Illie opportunity ts
.amacedadh #
-P
' '-fanlee andthe.,.
request fora heermgorpetitionihr participate fuNy in the conduct of the-leave to intervene seeldng to invoksi hearing incinding the opportmitty W r t'
' angementofonig hybrid hearing procedures in present ev6domme andcrese-e==Im P-
- F these issesslat larohea.
accordance wtth this notice is fDed by c witneessa s genulas subetsstialdispada.
the above date, the e===ia=saa oram If a heedntle requested. the r
together with any re=alming questions Atomie Sefetyand Ucensing Board.
Comunission wtllmake's final
~ of law, te be resoleed is as 4_ _1_..,.y designated by the Commoise6es or by the deternimation on the lesseof so headas Asemat =M=='=y heartmet Chairman of the Atomic Safety and significant hasards consideration The
. are tske bald on only these imumme humd ucensing Board Panel, milrule on the final deteruninetion will serve to decide t
. to mestthe esteesesof soallem13aamd. <
request end/or petition and the when the hearing to held.
setImr beenugaamreemi asemmente Secretary or the designated Atomie if the final determination is that the De Caesmisalma's rulesempiamemales Safety and ucensing Board willlesse e amendmem request involva no section18e ed theNWPAassiemedimle notice of hearing or an appropriate significant hazards comelderation, the CFR Part 2. Subpart K,"Hytsid Hansdag order. Requests for hearing or petitione Comnrdanion may taene the ammaA===a Proh for E=p==='a= el Syset Push for leave to intervene which do not seek and make it effective. notwithaundmg Storese Capestty at Cletilan Neeimme to invoke the hybrid hessing procedures the request for a hearms Any heartag Power Reactors"(a=WM at 50 FR are not authorized by this notica and held would take place after issuance of i
41662 (October 15,1985). Under those would be considered nontimely.
the amendment.
l
,f rules, any party to the proceeding may As required by to CF1t 2.714. a If the final determination is that the invoke the hybrid hearing procedures by petition for leave to intervene shall set filing with the presiding officer a written forth with particularity the interest of amendment involves a sigmficiant request for oral argenent under 10 CFR the petitioner in the proceeding and how hazards consideration, any heanng held 2.110s. To be timely, the request must be that interest may be affected by the would take place before the issuance of filed within ten (10) days of an order results of the proceeding.The petition any amendment.
granting a request for hearing or petitles should specifically explain the reasons Normally, the Commission will not to intervene. (As outlined above. the why intervention should be permitted issue the amendment until the Comsnisolon's rules la 10CFR Part 1 with particular reference to the expiration of the 30-day notice period.
l Subpart G continued to genere the filing following factors:(1) The nature of the Ifowever, should circumstances change l
of requests for a heartng er petittoms to petitioner's right under the Act to be during the notice period such that failure intervene, as well es the admisstaa of made a party to the proceeding:(2) the to act in a timely way would result. for contentioneJ he presidlag omeer slea5 nature and extent of the petitioner's example. in derating or shutdown of the grant a timely request for oral argumenst. property, financial, or other interest in facility, the Commission may issue the ne presiding officer may grant as the proceeding: and (3) the possible license amendment before the untimely request for oral erguesent only effect of any order which may be expiration of the 30. day notice period.
upon a showing of good cause by the entered in the proceeding on the provided that its final determination is requesting party for the falhav to file on petitioner's interest. no petition should that the amendment involves no time and after providing the other also identify the specific aspect (s) of the significant hazards consideration. The parties en opportunity to r-pa==4 to the subject matter of the proceedmg as to final determination will consider all untimely request. If the presiding officer which petitioner wishes to intervene, public and State comments received.
grante a request for oral arguesent, any Any person who has flied a petition for Should the Commission take this action, hearing held on the application shall be leave to intervene or who has been it will publish a notice ofissuance and condected in accordance with the admitted as a party may amend the provide for an opportunity fora heartng hybrid hearing procedures. In essence, petition without requestmg leave of the after issuance. The Commission expects l
l
l
- c..
- .Q:., _ ~ ~
i MfedaandaywDesembwe 3h tests ( Nesee-a
. pas.shass{,,..
which form the basis feeTdg s
., [
anyy.
CR Past $1.remiam mesma/Tand4.w, unchanged from those addie
. -- a FES, De annual g
msusestussyet1g attnbutebie to transportation of
~
,_ _ -*-, m.-
weste to and from the Susry Ststion, mth respect to mese ab i
m.,.
p conditionsof transpoet eecidenteis transport, i-the isspect estmassee
,- Sorry.FES.In maaname addietammtyeseratenester
(
Mnne s not facigues theanseel r
t: senatosaparetfew. -j 2 ;
' f**
4 upMWieProgedtlidtmal
. s w.
opeeWem the Beenhe w-W natteesesand
' ~ ~
2a operatingkubeencm mrd sonarag g ?.Is,WT.h
(
geno an ' " f= 2e egg
.f espeitMa
'fas thedfd1 FaciMay ~'. mdMw E esteem OberstiasUcanos DUN;at Anne %
would==ammaio'
' ^~ 2cm toMay 2sw 201% and foe the Unie
lonumeannateg any p
PaciHty tWI.frasian N ye of facall Wee 4 lune to a
a an ama}9mmary29,2018.["
t Flod nt to h.
avet ble and appropuls,m noe
'"!** res td the Wa radiologicalimpacts ourman, bedr
- syp 4 dated 22, Ism.as se*
ando# site, am not stWHcantly for8 l
Aappg byletterp Decessbees h 7 severethan preslausly estimated Elec stf ^
W Coneed
'_ Desisasbes 10L lass: nefSO sta4 hos-]
FES and our previous cost-benefit
_ Joh an h 4-
- conclusions remain valldr R
of DC Proposed Actiort "Envisonnesiss[ Non Radiologicallmpacts
' Con
. :., ; Aasenessent by the OfBee ef Nuclear *:
The NRC reviewidentafled no v.a.
2naptosReedstionSglattagto the. u t
Strwet, Begasus y ChangeinExpirationDetee4fSendify.
addinonal degradation of the habitsW e
Operating uesmesNos.DPR-334nd -
surrounding Serry Power Station sne-:
N' attc- " " -'
s,
- t C PW m DPb37 Virginia.Electria Powee.
regard to inAgneous plant and aM==M (1/'
to 6 = r a gg., Compeay.Surry Power Station,IJnHe species feedstadditional years of
,gp,g,,mgiiiggg g.
No.1 and No. 2." dated December 24.
facdsty eyessiton. In addstion. the T
,o,
Nettenal Pothetent Dtscharge foe homengwtBnot be entertained.:! -
SummaryofEnvironmene/ Assessment addldonal environmental protection.
1988.
Elimine6esi system permit provides uc, 1 absent adrewsminatten by ther w,
Commission, the presiding officer or the res,
ne NRC staf'has reviewed the findu g of No Sigmbcont /mpact loc presiding Atomic Safety and ucensmg potential environmentalirapacts of the The staff has reviewed the proposed Board, that the pention and/or request should be granted based upon a proposed change in the expiranon dates change to the expiration dates of the g;
balancing of the factors specified in to of the Operating Ucensea for Surry Surry Power Station. Umts 1 and 2
]
sa Power Station. Umt Nos.1 and 2. This Facility Operating Lcenses relative to CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d),
evaluation considered the previous the requ:rements set forth in to CFR Part D"
For further details with respect to this environmental studies. including the
- 51. Based upon the enuronmental R"' 'i action. see the application for "F nal Environmental Statements assessment. the staff concluded that i
amendment dated Apnl 25,1986, which Related to Operation of Surry Power there are no sNnificant radiolos: cal or Re is avadable for public inspection at the Station. Units 1 and 2". dated May 1972 nonradiologicalirnpacts associated with U!
Commission's Public Document Room, and lune 1972 and more recent NRC the proposed action and that the by policy.
i 1717 H Street.NW., Washington. DC, proposed license amendments will not P
and at the Brooka Memonal Ubrary. 224 Radiological /mpact' have a significant effect on the quality du of the human enuronment. Therefore.
Main Street Brattleboro, Vermont 05301.
Although the population m the ucinity the Commission has determined.
0(C l Dated et Bethesda. Maryland. ihis 23rd day of Surry. Umts 1 and 2 has mcreesed of December.19a6.
slightly. the site requirements of 10 CFR pursuant to 10 CR 51 J1. not to prepare an environmentalimpact statement for b !
Part 100 are stdl met with regard to the proposed amendments.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Exclusion Area Boundary. Low For further detads with raspect to this dC (fI Daniel R. Mullee, Populat:on Zone. and nearest population avion. see (11 the request for Dacoe. BlvR Prvicct Dwetorate No 2.
ceMer distances, and such changes do amendments dated August 22.1960 as
'j Dmsran o/BlVR Licensmg NI smricantly increase any supplemented by letters dated enuronmental impacts. The net December 5. ind December 10 196121
[ML Doc 86-29384 Fded 12-30-% 5.45 ami annt.aiized enuronmental impacts the Fin.si Ensircnmeatal Stitements I
sume coon rsew.es attnbutable to the uramum fuel cy cle.
Related to me OperaMn of Surry Power i
I i
i
r.
~
Federd Register / Vol 56. No.11T / Wednesday. June 18 1986 / N tio ces 22243 2-if.
y~
^"_ i hather Theproposedamendment would
^
replace the Limiting Condition for in accordance with the proposed Operation (LCO) 3.6.G of the Browns amendment would not:(1) Involve a utden,g,,
gessisualyesehneedtimes ther-woes denoussemos efesy, Ferry Nuclear Pfant (BFN) Units 1. 2 andsigmficant increase in the probability or hoe %
dose aos depend es" 3 TS. page stumbers 183 and 190 ta consequences of an accident previously include not only the primary coolanty.to expand applicability to evaluated; or(2) create the possibility of ss e, aparable and the w respc W.
e a new or diffemnt kind of accident from afsay accident whicir -
ourthe op% - Code Clase1. 2 and 3 equivalentboundary but also the ba any accident previously evaluated: or (3) vegg ble involve a significant reduction in a holesssenesederher -
delsgeg systema marginpf safety.
anode then a, The regulations forinservim The proposed changes will not to ths stortop er tua~
inspection ties which already have changed on(10 CPR 50.55afg)) were significantly increase the probability or t,
February 27.1976, to require consequences of an accident previous ansevance to perfone repair or oftha>SA83..
that facility inservice inspection (ISI) ang,,
evaluated orcreate the possibility of a amendment doe programs beperiodically updated to new or different kind of accident from eh
- d-
_Mey of a new er. s not later editions of the ASME. Boiler and any accident previously evaluated Pressure VesselCode, Section XL in because no operability or surveillance o
of accident from suty order to eliminate conflicts between ISI
- sweeg, requirements for systems, structures or
'"..S, evaluated because.
- dose not remove any.
requirements in the TS and tho**
components used to terminate or
@ or affect the performanceof specified by regulation to CFR mitigate accidents watdd be reduced t
50.55afs)(li) requires that TS be changed and no equipment changes are involved.
peensin ways not previously to reference to CFR Sa55a rather than The proposed changes will not involve
,g, is contain details of a specific ISI program. a significant reduction in a margin of 3,11w propseed amendment does not The surveillance requirement forISIhassafety since the changes conform to.
I co
'hvelve a slydficant reduction in the already been revised to include this NRC guidance in STS and actually t
'in
,,,gio el selety foe the same reescas as reference by BFN amendment numbemincrease the requirements for structurel siss beonese the prop)osed TS ispribedlaitems (1 and (2) above, and
- 96. 92, and 65. Revising the LCO as integrity over the curant TS desenbed here will provide additional ths requirement.
ly
,ssesent with the gufdance provided in clanfication and broaden the Since the application for amendment ca b STS and finally because no sendlance requirements would be mquimments of LCO 3.8.G to be similar involves proposed changes that are d
densed. Therefore, the licensee -
to Standard Technical Specificatione encompassed by the enteria for which (STS). The proposed change should notno significant hazarda consideration poposed to determine that the proposed
.d c mpmmise nuclear safety sistce it mendment does not involve significant exists and are encom assed by the usuhs ist an incmase in TS above examples, the bcensee proposed hasards considerations.
The staff has reviewed the licensee's 3girements and is consistent with re to determine that the proposed determmation and finds it acceptable, go,,,yn,p,,po,,ggg,,y,7;,,,,
amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration.
serefore, the staff proposes to hozords considerot on determinationi determme that the proposed amendment The Commission has provided guidance The staff has reviewed the license s does not involve a significant hazards for the application of criteria for no proposed determinations and finds it mr. sideration.
acceptable, therefore, the staff proposes significant hazards consideration loco /Public DocumentRoom determination by prov' ding examples of amendments do not involve a significant to determine that the proposed
,ocotion: Athens Public Library. South g,
amendments that are considered nothazards consideration.
andForrest. Athens. Alabama 35611.
likely to involve sigmficant hazards Attorney for licensee: H S. Sanger. Jr.,
considerations. Two of these examples I.oco/ Pub //c Document Room bquire. Ceneral Counsel. Tennessee
/0 cot /on:
are:(ii) A change that constitutes an Athens Public Library. South Valley Authority. 400 Commerce additionallimitation restnetton,or and Forrest. Athens. Alabama 35611.
tenue. E 118 33C. Knoxville, control not presently included in the TS.
A torneyforlicensee: H.S. Sanger. fr..
Tennessu 37902.
Esquire General Counsel. Tennessee and (vii) A change to make a license NRCProject Dimctor-Daniel R.
conform to changes in the regulations Valley Authonty. 400 Commerce Mr.
Avenue. E 118 33C. Knoxville.
where the license change results in very Tennessee 37902 minor changes to facility operations Tenneseee Valley Authority. Docket
% 3s.259. 5 Net and 36-298. Browns clearly in keeping with the regulations.
NRC Project Director-Daniel R.
.\\ fuller.
The proposed amendments concerning ferry Nucleae Plant. Unita 1. 2 and 3, the inclusion of ASME Code Class 1. 2 Imestone County, Alabama Vermont Yankee Nuclear Powse and 3 equivalent systems is in response Corporation. Docket No. 50-271.
gte ofamendment request: February to an NRC request regarding a change in Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power St
- M986, la CFR $0.55afg) which required a TS Vernon. Vermont Deser960n of amendment request; change. Also the change will result in h Droposed amendment would change additional requiremenis which are Date ofopp/icationfor amendment he Technical Specifications (TS) to similar to STS and are therefore Apnl 25.1986 "P:nd the structuralintegnty encompassed by the above examples.
Description of amendment mquest: B WE* Code Class 1Weifications to include the balance of The Commission has also provided letter dated Apnl 25,1986, the licensee.y standards for determining whether a Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power 81 stems.These spec 2 and 3 equivalent ifications address a sigmficant hazards consideration exists Corporation. submitted a proposed fl Clark to H.G. perns dated Apnl 20.Weblem discussed in NRC's letter from as stated in to Cl R 50.92(c). A proposed license amendment for NRC review and N
amendment to an operating license for a approval which would revise the facility involves no sigmficant hazards Vermont Yankee Technical consideration if operation of the facility Specifications to authorize the licensee to increase the storage capacity of the l
_,%,.w.-,.-we"um"'F-"N*
, _, _, _ _, _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ - - - - - ' ' ^ ^ ^ ^
)
^n o
n i
[w"P vel Ss; No.117' / C -
'-f, serigen NoqWiry 8this l
NRCMuglestIMissaarrDemseilt' has mede'e pseyesed dseernessig,,,-
spout' hisutem
,m capaesigs
- Muller the appliennem farsamensment no signint:asdhasards cons % y wi,,,g, y,,gg,'Esrvice fid a
m c_-
pads:Nm.ss-seE.Mewammas Nuclean feceMMeDbenmutRoo,n paimin Fland, h Couady location: Univoreny of Wineeng, l.ibrary Imerning Center. seN Nlsel,eW win
=.a.
Drive.GreerrBoy.Wisconsk seseg, d
'AIA8de'ud8m8885medrh8mit1..
A fa,,,,y 7,,fje,,,,,, 3,,,,,,,
av Desenybur'ef tregasse E.'
A' 7
His===h woud6 dmise,specise Wisconsin 53ess.
g anubbertmedagandsussedimmen.-
gygg,j,,,gg,,,,,,,,r reesimummerheettheT=di se-4 w.,
g,,,5
~
- c....
o
^^y
.a "r ""
(TSEsovienamamedment.
o i
aman
_.shh limiting ammemous for spesseum hLthe:
PREVIOUSLY PIM T3~and m pinopssos ammbtuse ha. Of CONSEERATION OfIggg J.;
s r
OFAMBiDMENTS10 3r51k the pimattamurvise kmsyncabamffaut -
l Ainsferjurupesadaesugumq5mmet - -
IJCENSES Atmpagpgggb4En.%
^,,
SIGNIFICANT14AIAangg#~'
W~ b.',,..
hasards smasidsseelsehaaranusseinme-Here are tsur mfeuesshT5 SeesensamL CONSEMBATIOtt a shange totheTableefCentemem13 AREhef90RgtBary Egm d
,inla eD 3.14 Shoek e ty======e tWh."-
Theit8ewingaseseequer ca
-a the beamschanged es make a cammiseemt..
publisheif as sepenteindividual
~~~
Daiam#
wiele is CFR 5&ase(sWel and to cierdy.
neelsom ne nodes eeneseswas 3.
camelets" g languags si the 75. TS 1140p) is baksp u:. samees1 Anna Daywon (1}
retti iqticiaRows revised to bede slanfy the langsage r imhedenthemheaummyasse species between s
regardingmasinquredtorepaire.
aseemtdies or piadas" pent Essi.
alleurderCaminutse towas
_n 'reckat snubber and to gata consiseemsywitis -
of Sd6 Assigsce116ipoof Soarif other Kewammoe'E5waili simmaar wahly asetum Mayare M ""ame
~ -
prmetsions 15 4.2sL11e beams changed to-space
(
seerugs expensiemimethod both anska the seetlem===istums with18 amh pepedes be f
does nottsadverodconsolidstion er CPR 58.50eig)(4) and to effect anr..
lavolitigueasynsme==a considerseem -
r.
administrettve change mammely,surving dombis thedag *ftbe poolis maintained (st%e MadF9 the Anchor.Holth enubber reference Fordetmast seethirestedenal tess them eregemitoeserand from T54Mb to 4.2at.The fourth TS in the Ptdsreiangisem sege (47Nemew tushmology to unprotur change is to delete Section 4.14 in order page cited. This nedaedoessur i
technology la utiHeadla ettbar the -
to bring He foneerreqmrements into thenoticeperledof the construedom praeses or the analytical conostency with 10 CFR SIL58e(s)(4).
Duke Powes Conspany.Dodies j
techadgees necessary to justify tne The rule requires time adoptfom of the 3ee ami so-a>a.McGuiss Nudase, expens6on.
ASMB Bouer and Pressere V sselCode' Station. Unital and a.lWshiambus ne storage expanmen asethod the Code contains a snubber inspection County, North Carolina w - _ by Vennant Yankee consists section which the licensee has of replacing existing rocks with a design incorporated into his Inservice Date of amendmentreguese 198&
which allows doser between Inspection Ptart thus, making TS 4.14 Briefdescriptionofamendmenelts#..
stored fool elassent seeemb thereby unnecessary. The Table of Contents is meeting criterte (1)6 Neitherrod being revised to reflect the above TS amendments would permit use of consohdation nor double tiering is changes and is an entirely editorial Tra nsnucirar. Inc., multielement spuP' fuel shipping casks for transportser
involved thus criteria (2) is satisfled.
action.
The licensee has stated that the Keff of The Commission has provided spent fuel from Oconee Nuclear 54sesf'*
the pool will be maintained less than or guidance for the application of to McGuire Nuclear Station.
l equal to 0.95, thereby meeting cnteria standards for determining whether c.
Date ofpublication ofindividual (3). AlsoL the licensee has stated that no significant hazards consideration exists notice in Federal Register May 29618eb
-l new or improved technology is utilised by providing examples of amendments (51 FR 19428).
In either the construction process or the that are considered hkaly to involve E.rpiration date afindividuo/nosiesLe.,
analytical techniques necessary to significant hazards considerations (48 June 27,1986.
I les are:
I.ocalPublic Document Boons justify the expansion. AII four criteria of FR 14870). Two of these examhange to location: Atkins f.ibrary. University of +
(i) a purely administrative c example (x) are therefore satfafled.
Therefore, the change Is similar to technical specdicatione: for example, a North Carohna. Charlotte (UNCC Commission example (x). Accordingly.
change to achieve consistency Station). North Carchna 28221 73 l
- -L the Commission proposes to determine throughout the technical specifications.
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OP
^
that this amendaient does not involve a correction of an error, or a change in AMENDMENT TO FACILITY
- k' significant hasards consideration.
nomenclature: and OPERATING IJCENSE y
Loco / FtablicDocument Roots (stil a change to make a license Dunng the penod since publicaties,g p location-Brooks Memortal I.ibrary. 224 conform to changes in the regulations.
l Main Street. Brattleboro. Vermont 05301. where the license change results in very the last bf. weekly notice. I g
Commission has issued the
,y AttorneyforlicenseerJohn A.
mmor changes to facility operations Ritscher. Esquire. Ropes and Gray 225 clearly in keeping with the regulations.
amendments. The Commisswa i
Frankhn Street. Boston Massachusetts All of the changes fallinto one or both determined for each of thew y
02110L catesones As a consequence the staff amendments that the apphcst on i
-