[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 21, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-23332]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: September 21, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-458]
River Bend Station; 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-47 issued to Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for operation
of the River Bend Station, located in West Feliciana Parish.
The proposed amendment would revise the formula for calculating the
average power range monitor (APRM) flow biased simulated thermal power-
high reactor trip and flow biased neutron flux-upscale control rod
block trip setpoints T-factor specified in Technical Specification (TS)
3/4.2.2. The proposed changes are necessary to support implementation
of recommendations contained in NRC Generic Letter 94-02, ``Long-Term
Solutions and Upgrade of Interim Operating Recommendations for Thermal-
Hydraulic Instabilities in Boiling Water Reactors.''
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), a licensee has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
1. The request does not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
This change only redefines the APRM setpoints T-factor. The
modified APRM setpoints T-factor does not change or affect operator
required actions in relation to the APRM setpoints T-factor and is
only applied at different power peaking for given reactor power.
Therefore, this change only affects the precursors to events that
can be initiated as a result of different power peaking. The only
event affected is the formation of coupled thermal-hydraulic and
neutronic oscillations (reactor stability). Since the modified APRM
setpoints T-factor allows power distributions which permits the
application of stability controls to increase stability margin, the
probability for initiation of reactor instability is significantly
reduced. Therefore, this change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability of any event previously evaluated.
The consequence of a reactor instability event is minimized
since the initial reactor conditions are associated with very stable
power distributions. These stable conditions are established using
stability controls which are permitted with the modified APRM
setpoints T-factor. Since the initial reactor conditions are very
stable, the severity of a postulated reactor instability event is
significantly diminished. In addition, the modified APRM setpoints
T-factor is confirmed to provide adequate LHGR [linear heat
generation rate] protection at off-rated conditions for other
anticipated events. Protection of other thermal limits for all
previously analyzed events is accomplished by specific limits that
are independent of the APRM setpoints T-factor. These are the power
and flow dependent MCPR [minimum critical power ratio] Operating
Limits which provide protection from fuel dryout and the rated
MAPLHGR [maximum average planar linear heat-generation rate] limit
which provides protection of the peak clad temperature for the DBA
[design-basis accident] LOCA [loss-of-coolant accident]. Therefore,
the proposed changes does not involve a significant increase in the
consequences of any event previously evaluated.
The proposed change in APRM setpoints T-factor permits
implementation of appropriate reactor stability controls and
maintains adequate off-rated LHGR margin for all operating
conditions. This change, therefore, does not involve a significant
increase in the probability and consequences of any event previously
evaluated.
2. The request does not create the possibility of occurrence of
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
This change only redefines the APRM setpoints T-factor. The
proposed changes do not involve any new modes of operation or any
plant modifications. The ability to implement reactor stability
controls do not result in any new precursors to an accident.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a
new or different type of accident from any accident previously
analyzed.
3. The request does not involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety.
The change in the APRM setpoints T-factor definition allows the
implementation of reactor stability controls during reactor
operation at off-rated conditions which significantly improve the
reactor stability performance. This is accomplished by achieving
very stable power distributions outside the stability excluded
region. Since the initial reactor conditions are very stable, the
severity of a postulated reactor instability event is significantly
diminished.
The modified APRM setpoints T-factor accommodates higher power
peaking to support the required stability controls. The modified
APRM setpoints T-factor has been confirmed to provide adequate LHGR
protection. Operation with higher peaking without APRM gains or flow
bias trip setpoints adjustment does not involve a reduction in a
margin of safety because the higher power peaking resulting from the
APRM setpoints T-factor modification are below applicable LHGR
limits. For power peaking conditions that result in APRM setpoints
T-factor less than one, an adjustment to the APRM gains or trip
setpoints is made to provide additional LHGR protection.
Additionally, an upper bound is placed on power peaking by the
modified APRM setpoints T-factor definition. Therefore, the modified
APRM setpoint T-factor does not involve a reduction in a margin of
safety because the higher power peaking resulting from the APRM
setpoints T-factor modification is below applicable LHGR limits.
Protection of other thermal limits for all previously analyzed
events is accomplished by specific limits that are independent of
the T-factor. These are the power and flow dependent MCPR Operating
Limits which provide protection from fuel dryout and the rated
MAPLHGR limit which provides protection of the peak clad temperature
for the DBA LOCA. The proposed change does not result in an increase
in core damage frequency. Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety evaluated.
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 the 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
20555.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By October 21, 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 Government Documents Department,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803. 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 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 Mark Wetterhahn, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20005, 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 September 12, 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 Government Documents Department,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of September 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ramon V. Azua,
Acting Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-23332 Filed 9-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
