96-27162. Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments To Facility Operating Licenses and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 23, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 55026-55028]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-27162]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296]
    
    
    Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Consideration of Issuance 
    of Amendments To Facility Operating Licenses and Opportunity for a 
    Hearing
    
        The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) is 
    considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
    DPR-33, DPR-52 and DPR-68 issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA 
    or the licensee) for operation of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 
    (Browns Ferry, BFN), Units 1, 2 and 3, located in Limestone County, 
    Alabama.
        The proposed amendments, requested by the licensee in a letter 
    dated September 6, 1996, would represent a full conversion from the 
    current Technical Specifications (TSs) to a set of TS based on NUREG-
    1433, Revision 1, ``Standard Technical Specifications for General 
    Electric Plants, BWR/4,'' dated April 1995. NUREG-1433 has been 
    developed through working groups composed of both NRC staff members and 
    the BWR/4 owners and has been endorsed by the staff as part of an 
    industry-wide initiative to standardize and improve TS. As part of this 
    submittal, the licensee has applied the criteria contained in the 
    Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specification 
    Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors (final policy statement),'' 
    published in the Federal Register on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132), to 
    the current Browns Ferry TSs, and, using NUREG-1433 as a basis, 
    developed a proposed set of improved TSs for BFN. The criteria in the 
    final policy statement were subsequently added to 10 CFR 50.36, 
    ``Technical Specifications,'' in a rule change which was published in 
    the Federal Register on July 19, 1996 (60 FR 36953) and became 
    effective on August 18, 1995.
        The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the existing 
    TSs into four general groupings. These groupings are characterized as 
    administrative changes, relocated changes, more restrictive changes, 
    and less restrictive changes.
        Administrative changes are those that involve restructuring, 
    renumbering, rewording, interpretation and complex rearranging of 
    requirements and other changes not affecting technical content or 
    substantially revising an operational requirement. The reformatting, 
    renumbering and rewording process reflects the attributes of NUREG-1433 
    and do not involve technical changes to the existing TSs. The proposed 
    changes include: (a) Providing the appropriate numbers, etc., for 
    NUREG-1433 bracketed information (information which must be supplied on 
    a plant-specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant), (b) 
    identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and (c) 
    changing NUREG-1433 section wording to conform to existing licensee 
    practices. Such changes are administrative in nature and do not impact 
    initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or 
    transient events.
        Relocated changes are those involving relocation of requirements 
    and surveillances for structures, systems, components or variables that 
    do not meet the criteria for inclusion in the TSs. Relocated changes 
    are those current TS requirements which do not satisfy or fall within 
    any of the four criteria specified in the Commission's policy statement 
    and may be relocated to appropriate licensee-controlled documents.
        The licensee's application of the screening criteria is described 
    in Enclosure 1 of their September 6, 1996, application titled ``Browns 
    Ferry Nuclear Plant, Application of Selection Criteria.'' The affected 
    structures, systems components or variables are not assumed to be 
    initiators of analyzed events and are not assumed to mitigate accident 
    or transient events. The requirements and surveillances for these 
    affected structures, systems, components or variables will be relocated 
    from the TS to administratively controlled documents such as the Final 
    Safety Analysis Report, the BASES, the Technical Requirements Manual or 
    plant procedures. Changes made to these documents will be made pursuant 
    to 10 CFR 50.59 or other appropriate control mechanisms. In addition, 
    the affected structures, systems, components or variables are addressed 
    in existing surveillance procedures which are also subject to 10 CFR 
    50.59. These proposed changes will not impose or eliminate any 
    requirements.
        More restrictive changes are those involving more stringent 
    requirements for operation of the facility. These more stringent 
    requirements do not result in operation that will alter assumptions 
    relative to mitigation of an accident or transient event. The more 
    restrictive requirements will not alter the operation of process 
    variables, structures, systems and components described in the safety 
    analyses. For each requirement in the current BFN TSs that is more 
    restrictive than the corresponding requirement in NUREG-1433 which the 
    licensee proposes to retain in the ITS, they have provided an 
    explanation of why they have concluded that retaining the more 
    restrictive requirement is desirable to ensure safe operation of the 
    facilities because of specific design features of the plant.
        Less restrictive changes are those where current requirements are 
    relaxed or eliminated, or new flexibility is provided. The more 
    significant ``less restrictive'' requirements are justified on a case-
    by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to provide little or 
    no safety benefit, their removal from the TSs may be appropriate. In 
    most cases, relaxations previously granted to individual plants on a 
    plant-specific basis were the result of (a) generic NRC actions, (b) 
    new NRC staff positions that have evolved from technological 
    advancements and operating
    
    [[Page 55027]]
    
    experience, or (c) resolution of the Owners Groups' comments on the 
    improved Standard Technical Specifications. Generic relaxations 
    contained in NUREG-1433 were reviewed by the staff and found to be 
    acceptable because they are consistent with current licensing practices 
    and NRC regulations. The licensee's design will be reviewed to 
    determine if the specific design basis and licensing basis are 
    consistent with the technical basis for the model requirements in 
    NUREG-1433 and, thus, provides a basis for these revised TSs or if 
    relaxation of the requirements in the current TSs is warranted based on 
    the justification provided by the licensee.
        In addition to the above changes related to conversion of the 
    current TSs to be similar to the ISTS in NUREG 1433, the licensee has 
    proposed three less restructive changes that are not considered within 
    the scope of the normal ISTS conversion process. The first change would 
    allow two Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Low Pressure Coolant Injection 
    ((LPCI) pumps (two in one loop or one in both loops) to be inoperable 
    for 7 days provided other low pressure emergency core cooling system 
    (ECCS) pumps are operable. Current TS requirements allow only one LPCI 
    pump to be inoperable. The second proposed change would require only 
    two ECCS subsystems to be operable during shutdown. The current TSs, 
    which defines subsystems in the same manner as the ISTS, require three 
    subsystems to be operable. The third proposed change would reduce the 
    number of Residual Heat Removal Service Water (RHRSN) pumps required to 
    be operable under certain conditions.
        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. By November 22, 
    1996, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to 
    issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and 
    any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who 
    wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written 
    request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests 
    for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in 
    accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic 
    Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested persons should 
    consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is available at the 
    Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 
    NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at 
    the Athens Public Library, 405 E. South Street, Athens Alabama. 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.
        A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must 
    be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
    Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Docketing and 
    Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
    Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
    by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of 
    the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so 
    inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 
    1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union 
    operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the 
    following message addressed to Frederick J. Hebdon, Director, Project 
    Directorate II-3: petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition 
    was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page number of this 
    Federal Register notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to 
    the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
    Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to General Counsel, Tennessee Valley 
    Authority, 400 West Summit Drive, ET 10H, Knoxville, Tennessee, 37902, 
    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).
        If a request for a hearing is received, the Commission's staff may 
    issue the amendment after it completes its technical review and prior 
    to the completion of any required hearing if it publishes a further 
    notice for public comment of its proposed finding of no
    
    [[Page 55028]]
    
    significant hazards consideration in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and 
    50.92.
        For further details with respect to this action, see the 
    application for amendments dated September 6, 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 the Athens Public Library, 405 E. South 
    Street, Athens, Alabama.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of October 1996.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Frederick J. Hebdon,
    Director, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, 
    Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 96-27162 Filed 10-22-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
10/23/1996
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
96-27162
Pages:
55026-55028 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296
PDF File:
96-27162.pdf