96-23195. Arizona Public Service Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed no Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 11, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 47963-47965]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-23195]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530]
    
    
    Arizona Public Service Company; 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 amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
    NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74 issued to Arizona Public Service Company 
    (the licensee) for operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating 
    Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, located in Maricopa County, Arizona.
        The proposed amendment would modify the technical specifications 
    (TS) to change (1) The reference method for calculating dose conversion 
    factors (DCFs) to be used in dose calculations, and (2) the upper and 
    lower limits for operating pressurizer pressure to account for new 
    instrument uncertainties and to reduce the allowed operating band.
        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
    
    [[Page 47964]]
    
    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. The NRC staff's analysis is presented below.
        1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in 
    the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
        The proposed amendment does not involve any change in the method of 
    operation of any plant equipment or modify any plant equipment. The 
    proposed change to the allowed pressurizer pressure operating band does 
    not add any operating range not previously allowed, nor does it affect 
    the nominal operating pressure. Thus the proposed change does not 
    represent a new or more frequent initiating event or transient. Based 
    on a review of historical plant operating data for pressurizer 
    pressure, limiting the allowed operating band for pressure will not 
    require additional operator action or create additional burden on the 
    operators. Nominal operating pressure is approximately 2250 psia, and 
    pressure deviates only approximately 10 psi from this pressure during 
    normal operation. Additionally, the reactor trip setpoints remain 
    unchanged, thus the proposed change will not affect the probability of 
    a reactor trip. The proposed change to the DCFs would allow use of a 
    more accurate method for determining thyroid dose consequence resulting 
    from postulated accident conditions. This portion of the proposed 
    change does not involve any changes to plant operation or equipment. 
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase 
    in the probability of an accident.
        The proposed change to the allowed pressurizer pressure band would 
    be used in transient and accident analyses for each core reload. The 
    proposed change does not affect the acceptance criteria for the 
    analysis results, thus this portion of the proposed change would not 
    affect the consequences of accidents previously analyzed.
        The proposed change to DCFs does not affect the calculated off-site 
    doses to postulated accidents. The new DCFs would only provide more 
    accurate estimates of the potential effects to the thyroid based on the 
    calculated off-site doses.
        Based on the above, the proposed changes do not result in a 
    significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
    previously evaluated.
        2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or 
    different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
        The proposed amendments do not modify the configuration of the 
    units, involve any change to plant equipment, or change the methods of 
    plant operation. Thus, the proposed changes do not result in any new 
    failure modes for any plant system or component. Therefore, the 
    amendment 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 change associated with operating pressurizer pressure 
    limits will implement more restrictive acceptance criteria in 
    surveillance procedures to ensure that safety analysis assumptions are 
    maintained. The more restrictive range of operation has been analyzed 
    and is bounded by the existing safety analyses. The use of new DCFs in 
    dose effects calculations do not change any of the safety limits for 
    existing analyses. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a 
    significant reduction in a margin of safety.
        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 Chief, Rules 
    Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and 
    Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear 
    Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 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 October 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 Phoenix Public Library, 1221 N. Central 
    Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004. 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
    
    [[Page 47965]]
    
    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 20555-0001, 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 William H. Bateman, Director, Project 
    Directorate IV-2: 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 Nancy C. Loftin, Esq., Corporate 
    Secretary and Counsel, Arizona Public Service Company, P.O. Box 53999, 
    Mail Station 9068, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999, 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, 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 Phoenix Public Library, 1221 N. Central 
    Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of September 1996.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    James W. Clifford,
    Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 96-23195 Filed 9-10-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
09/11/1996
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
96-23195
Pages:
47963-47965 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530
PDF File:
96-23195.pdf