[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-15267]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 22, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-348]
Southern Nuclear Operating Co.; 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.
NPF-2 issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee) for
operation of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, located in
Houston County, Alabama.
The proposed amendment would change Technical Specification 3/4.2.3
to change the nuclear enthalpy rise hot channel factor (F delta H) from
equal to or less than 1.65 [1 plus .3(1-P)] to equal to or less than
1.70 [1 plus .3(1-P)] where P is a fraction of rated power. The
amendment would also revise the action statement to reflect guidance
contained in the improved standard technical specifications.
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. Will the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
The proposed increase in [F delta H] for Vantage 5 fuel does not
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an accident previously evaluated in the Farley Final Safety Analysis
Report. No changes in the mechanical design of the fuel are
necessary for this [F delta H] increase. No new performance
requirements are being imposed on the fuel or any system or
component because of this change. Vantage 5 fuel contains several
features that provide increased margin to core limits. The proposed
increase in [F delta H] is utilization of this margin with no
violation of any acceptance criteria. Subsequently, overall plant
integrity is not reduced. [F delta H] is not an accident initiator.
Therefore, the probability of an accident has not significantly
increased.
The radiological consequences of all accidents, including the
fuel handling accident, remain within the previous appropriate
acceptance limits as well as those included in 10CFR100. Therefore,
the radiological consequences to the public resulting from any
accident previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report
has not significantly increased.
2. Will the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
The proposed specification change to the [F delta H] limit does
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report.
No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting single
failures are introduced as a result of the increase in [F delta H].
Any accident using the revised analytical assumption has been
evaluated or reanalyzed and it has been determined that there is no
adverse effect on, or do not challenge the performance of, any
safety-related system. Therefore, the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident, is not created.
3. Will the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
The Vantage 5 technical specification change for increasing [F
delta H] does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of
safety. The margin of safety for the Vantage 5 fuel parameters are
defined by the accident analyses that are performed to
conservatively bound the operating conditions defined by the
technical specifications and to demonstrate that the regulatory
acceptance limits are met. Performance of analyses (including the
LBLOCA [large break loss-of-coolant accident]) and evaluations for
the proposed inclusion of an increased [F delta H] for Vantage 5
fuel type confirmed that the operating envelope defined by the
technical specifications continues to be bounded by the revised
analytical basis, which in no case exceeds the acceptance limits.
Therefore, the margin of safety provided by the analyses in
accordance with these acceptance limits is maintained and is not
significantly reduced.
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, 11555 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
20555.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By July 22, 1994, 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 20555 and at the local
public document room located at Houston-Love Memorial Library, 212 W.
Burdeshaw Street, Post Office Box 1369, Dothan Alabama 36302. 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 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 20555, 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 H. Bateman: 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 James H. Miller, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555, and to James H. Miller, III, Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
P.O. Box 1295, Birmingham, Alabama 35201, 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 June 17, 1994, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local
public document room located at Houston-Love Memorial Library, 212 W.
Burdeshaw Street, Post Office Box 1369, Dothan Alabama 36302.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of June 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William H. Bateman,
Director, Project Directorate II-I, Division of Reactor Projects I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-15267 Filed 6-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
