[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6074]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 16, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-458]

 

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. 
NPF-47 issued to Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee) for operation 
of the River Bend Station, Unit 1, (RBS) located in West Feliciana 
Parish, Louisiana.
    The proposed amendment would revise the technical specifications in 
accordance with the guidance provided by Generic Letter 93-08, 
``Relocation of Technical Specification Tables of instrument Response 
Time Limits.'' Generic Letter 93-08 recommends the removal and 
subsequent relocation of various technical specification tables which 
denote instrument and system response time limits.
    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. The proposed change would not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change deletes and subsequently relocates the details 
of Technical Specification Table 3.3.1-2, ``Reactor Protection System 
Response Times,'' Table 3.3.2-3, ``Isolation System Instrumentation 
Response Time,'' and Table 3.3.3-3, ``Emergency Core Cooling System 
Response Times'' consistent with the guidance provided by Generic 
Letter 93-08, dated December 29, 1993, entitled ``Relocation of 
Technical Specification Tables of Instrument Response Time Limits.'' 
Generic Letter 93-08 recommends the removal and subsequent relocation 
of various Technical Specification tables which denote instrument and 
system response time limits. The response time limits and associated 
footnotes are proposed to be relocated to the RBS Updated Safety 
Analysis Report (USAR). This allows RBS to administratively control 
subsequent changes to the response time limits in accordance with 10 
CFR 50.59. The procedures which contain the various response time 
limits are also subject to the change control provisions in the 
Administrative Controls section of the Technical Specifications. The 
proposed change only relocates the existing response time limits. The 
surveillance requirements and associated Actions are not affected and 
remain in the Technical Specifications. Relocating this information 
does not affect the initial conditions of a design basis accident or 
transient analysis. Since any subsequent changes to the USAR or 
procedures are evaluated in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, no increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated 
is allowed. Therefore, this change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    2. The proposed change would not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the 
plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or 
changes in methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed 
change will not impose any different operational or surveillance 
requirements. The change proposes to relocate these requirements to 
other plant documents whereby adequate control of information is 
maintained. No new failure modes are introduced. Therefore, this 
proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. The proposed change would not involve a reduction in the margin 
of safety.
    The proposed change will not reduce a margin of safety because it 
has no impact on any safety analysis assumption. The proposed change 
does not alter the scope of equipment currently required to be OPERABLE 
or subject to surveillance testing, nor does the proposed change affect 
any instrument setpoints or equipment safety functions. In addition, 
the values to be transposed from the Technical Specifications to the 
USAR are the same as the existing Technical Specifications. Since any 
future changes to these requirements in the USAR or procedures will be 
evaluated per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, no reduction in a 
margin of safety is allowed. Therefore, the change does not involve a 
significant 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 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 P-223, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, 
Bethesda, 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 April 15, 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 the 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 conferences 
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition may 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 Suzanne C. Black, 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, and to Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq., Winston & 
Strawn, 1400 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 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 March 3, 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 the Government Documents Department, 
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Reckley,
Acting Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV/V, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-6074 Filed 3-15-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M