[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18431-18432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8846]
[[Page 18431]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-382]
Entergy Operations Inc.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity For a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
NFP-38, issued to Entergy Operations Inc. (the licensee), for operation
of the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3, located in St. Charles
Parish, Louisiana.
The proposed amendment would remove a footnote tied to MODE 1 of
Technical Specification (TS) Limiting Condition for Operation 3.1.1.3,
moderator temperature coefficient (MTC). The deleted footnote was only
valid for Cycle 2 and its removal is purely administrative. A new
footnote is added to surveillance 4.1.1.3.2.c that proposes a one time
deviation not to perform the specified two-thirds end-of-cycle (EOC)
MTC test for Cycle 7. TS 3.1.1.3 requires that the most negative MTC
value for this cycle to be less negative than the Core Operating Limits
Report (COLR) specified a value of -3.3 x 10-4 delta k/k deg.F.
Waterford 3 has determined that the most negative MTC value for the
current cycle is -2.88 x 10-4 delta k/k deg.F. The MTC for
Waterford 3 Cycle 7 has been determined to be well within the TS limit
including applicable uncertainties.
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:
Waterford 3 is currently analyzed for a EOC limiting value of
-3.3 x 10-4 delta k/k/ deg.F. Under the proposed change,
compliance with this TS Limit is assured by supporting data and
analysis. The analysis demonstrates that the predicted EOC 7 best
estimate MTC value is -2.88 x 10-4 delta k/k/ deg.F. This is a
conservative value because it includes a 26 EFPD extension beyond
the actual end of full power reactivity. The margin to the TS limit
is thus 0.42 x 10-4 delta k/k deg.F.
The probability and consequences of an accident previously
evaluated will not be increased because this change does not modify
any assumptions used in the input to the safety analyses. The
current safety calculations will remain valid because the allowed
range of MTC values will not change. Therefore, the proposed change
will not involve any increase in the probability or consequences of
any accident previously evaluated.
Plant operation and plant parameter TS limits will remain
unchanged. There are no new changes in plant design nor are any new
failure modes introduced. Therefore, the proposed change will not
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from
any accident previously evaluated.
Margin of safety will not be reduced because the range of
allowed temperature coefficients will not be changed. The
surveillance program consisting of beginning-of-cycle measurements
was not affected. Explicit End-of-Cycle 7 MTC predictions have
ensured that the MTC is and will remain within the range of
specified values. Therefore, the proposed change will not involve
any reduction in a 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 15 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 15-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 15-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 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, 11455 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 May 11, 1995, 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 New Orleans Library,
Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New Orleans, LA 70122. 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
[[Page 18432]] 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 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, 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: 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 N. S.
Reynolds, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., Washington DC
20005-3502, 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 April 4, 1995, as supplemented by
letter dated April 5, 1995, 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 University of New Orleans Library, Louisiana Collection,
Lakefront, New Orleans, LA 70122.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of April 1995.
Chandu P. Patel,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-8846 Filed 4-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
