[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4805-4807]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2701]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-498 AND 50-499]
Houston Lighting and Power Company, City Public Service Board of
San Antonio, Central Power and Light Company, City of Austin, Texas;
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-76 and NPF-80, issued to Houston Lighting & Power Company, et. al.,
(the licensee) for operation of the South Texas Project, located in
Matagorda County, Texas. The original application dated May 1, 1995,
was previously published in the Federal Register on June 6, 1995 (60 FR
29876). That application was supplemented by letters dated June 22,
August 28, November 22, December 19, 1995, January 4, January 8 (two
letters), and January 23, 1996.
The proposed amendment would provide a special test exception that
would allow an extension of the standby diesel generator (SDG) allowed
outage time for a cumulative 21 days on each SDG once per fuel cycle,
and it would also allow an extension of the essential cooling water
(ECW) loop allowed outage time for a cumulative 7 days on each ECW loop
once per fuel cycle. These extended allowed outage times will be used
to perform required inspections and maintenance on the SDGs and the ECW
system during power operation.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated;
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The Standby Diesel Generators are not accident initiators,
therefore the increase in Allowed Outage Times for this system does
not increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The three train design of the South Texas Project ensures that even
during the seven days the Essential Cooling Water loop is inoperable
there are still two complete trains available to mitigate the
consequences of any accident. If the Essential Cooling Water loop is
not inoperable during the 21 days the Standby Diesel Generator is
inoperable, the Standby Diesel Generator's Engineered Safety
Features bus and equipment in the train will be operable. This
ensures that all three redundant safety trains of the South Texas
Project design are operable. In addition the Emergency Transformer
will be available to supply the Engineered Safety Features bus
normally supplied by the inoperable Standby Diesel Generator. These
actions will ensure that the changes do not involve a significant
increase in the consequences of previously evaluated accidents.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed changes affect only the magnitude of the Standby
Diesel Generator and Essential Cooling Water Allowed Outage Times
once per fuel cycle as identified by the marked-up Technical
Specification. As indicated above, the proposed change does not
involve the alteration of any equipment nor does it allow modes of
operation beyond those currently allowed. Therefore, implementation
of these proposed changes does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety.
The proposed changes result in no significant increase in core
damage or large early release frequencies.
Three sets of PSA [probabilistic safety assessment] results have
been presented to the NRC for the South Texas Project. One submitted
in 1989 from the initial Level 1
[[Page 4806]]
PSA of internal and external events with a mean annual average CDF
[core damage frequency] estimate of 1.7 x 10(-4), a second one
submitted in 1992 to meet the IPE requirements from the Level 2 PSA/
IPE with a CDF estimate of 4.4 x 10(-5), and an update of the PSA
that was reported in the August 1993 Technical Specifications
submittal with a variety of CDF estimates for different assumptions
regarding the rolling maintenance profile and different combinations
of modified Technical Specifications. The South Texas Project PSA
was updated in March of 1995 to include the NRC approved Risk-Based
Technical Specifications, Plant Specific Data and incorporate the
Emergency Transformer into the model. This update resulted in a CDF
estimate of 2.07 x 10(-5). When the requested changes are modeled
along with the compensatory actions, the resulting CDF estimate is
2.30 x 10(-5). While this is slightly higher (approx. 11%) than
the updated results, it is still significantly lower (approx. 46%)
than the previous Risk-Based Evaluation of Technical Specification
submitted in 1993. Therefore, it is concluded that there is no
significant reduction in the margin of safety.
Based on the above evaluation, Houston Lighting & Power has
concluded that these changes do not involve any significant hazards
considerations.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing
after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this
action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules Review and
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page
number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be
delivered to Room 6D22, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Copies of written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By March 11, 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 Wharton County Junior College, J.M. Hodges
Learning Center, 911 Boling Highway, Wharton, Texas 77488. If a request
for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above
date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board,
designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety
and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition;
and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner's right under the
Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy
the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to
the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions
which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must
consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be
raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a
brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the
contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the
contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references
to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those
facts or expert opinion. Petitioner must provide sufficient information
to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material
issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within
the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be
one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these
requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-
examine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves
no significant hazards consideration, the
[[Page 4807]]
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, 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 William D. Beckner, Director, Project Directorate
IV-1: 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, and to Jack R. Newman, Esq., Newman & Holtzinger,
P.C., 1615 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, attorney for the
licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended
petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not
be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the
petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the
factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated May 1, 1995, as supplemented by letters
dated June 22, August 28, November 22, December 19, 1995, January 4,
January 8 (two letters), and January 23, 1996, which are 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 Wharton County Junior College, J.M. Hodges
Learning Center, 911 Boling Highway, Wharton, Texas 77488.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of February 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George Kalman,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-2701 Filed 2-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
