[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 59 (Friday, March 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14974-14975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-8027]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446]
Texas Utilities Electric; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-87 and NPF-89, issued to Texas Utilities Electric Company, (TU
Electric, the licensee), for operation of the Comanche Peak Steam
Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas.
The proposed amendment would provide a temporary Technical
Specification change for Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
4.8.1.1.2f.4(b) and 4.8.1.1.2f.6(b) to allow the verification of the
auto connected shut-down loads through the load sequencer to be
performed at power for fuel cycle 6 on Unit 1 and fuel cycle 4 on Unit
2. The temporary change is requested as a result of the discovery that
some of the safety injection (SI) and blackout (BO) sequencer block
contacts had not been tested in accordance with the above SRs. These
surveillances were performed during the last refueling outage for each
unit as part of the integrative tests. However, it was subsequently
discovered that some of the sequencer loads had parallel starting paths
such that it could not be determined, based only on the observation
that the equipment had successfully started, that the specific contacts
required to be tested had in fact operated. In addition, verification
of testing of certain contacts was missing. This was reported promptly
to the NRC at the time of discovery and prompt action to remedy the
situation was taken.
The licensee requested a Notice of Enforcement Discretion (NOED) by
letter dated March 10, 1998. The NRC orally issued the NOED at 9:25
a.m. EST on March 11, 1998, to allow the facility to continue operation
while the TS is processed. Pursuant to the NRC's policy regarding
exercise of discretion for an operating facility, set out in Section
VII.c, of the ``General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC
Enforcement Actions'' (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, the letter
documenting the issuance of the NOED was dated March 13, 1998. The NOED
was to be effective for the period of time it takes the NRC staff to
process the proposed change to the TSs on an exigent bases.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated;
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Crediting the power performance of the portions of surveillance
testing necessary to demonstrate the OPERABILITY of the SI and BO
Sequencer block contacts, will not increase the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The conclusion has
been reached that the probability of initiating a perturbation in
the A.C. electrical distribution system is not created via the
crediting of the tests. As the testing is conducted on only one
train per unit at a given time, no increase in consequences, other
than those previously postulated, are considered credible.
2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Perturbations in the A.C. electrical distribution system have
been fully considered within the Final Safety Analysis Report. No
new or different kind of perturbation or accident is deemed credible
from crediting the performance of the testing.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Crediting the required testing at power does not create any new
failure scenarios or A.C. electrical distribution perturbations, no
associated margin is expected to be reduced. As such, there is no
reduction in any margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to
take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-
[[Page 14975]]
0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this
Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room
6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,
from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of written
comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the
Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By April 13, 1998, 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 University of Texas at Arlington Library,
Government Publications/Maps, 702 College, PO Box 19497, Arlington, TX
76019. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is
filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board, designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/
or petition; and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner's right under the
Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy
the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to
the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions
which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must
consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be
raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a
brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the
contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the
contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references
to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those
facts or expert opinion. Petitioner must provide sufficient information
to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material
issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within
the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be
one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these
requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-
examine witnesses.
If the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is
requested, the final determination will serve to decide when the
hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves
no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place
before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, may be delivered to the Commission's Public
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,
by the above date. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the
Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to George L. Edgar, Esq., Morgan, Lewis
and Bockius, 1800 M 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 March 12, 1998, 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 University of Texas at Arlington Library,
Government Publications/Maps, 702 College, PO Box 19497, Arlington, TX
76019.
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 23rd day of March 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas W. Alexion,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-8027 Filed 3-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
