[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 140 (Friday, July 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-17984]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: July 22, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-366]

 

Georgia Power Co., et al.; 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 an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPR-5, issued to the Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Power 
Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, 
Georgia (the licensee), for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 
Plant, Unit 2, located in Appling County, Georgia.
    The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS) 
3.3.6.6 for Hatch Unit 2 to permit the traversing incore probe (TIP) 
system to be considered operable with less than four operable TIP 
machines. The TIP system is used to periodically determine the power 
distribution in the core, for the calibration of the local power range 
monitor (LPRM) detectors, and for monitoring core thermal limits: the 
average planar linear heat generation rate (APLHGR), the linear heat 
generation rate (LHGR), and the minimum critical power ratio (MCPR).
    The proposed amendment will also allow the utilization of 
substitute TIP data for the inaccessible locations from either 
symmetric TIP locations or from normalized TIP data as calculated by 
the online core monitoring system.
    In the July 19, 1994, submittal, the licensee stated that, on July 
11, 1994, with Hatch Unit 2 operating at 100% rated thermal power, 
Plant Hatch shift personnel were performing the procedure for the TIP 
normalization required to be performed every 31 effective full power 
days. Nearing completion of the procedure, personnel were unable to 
place the ``D'' TIP into channel 9. It had apparently stuck in channel 
8, indicating a problem with the indexing mechanism. The indexing 
mechanism is located inside the primary containment (drywell), access 
to which is not possible at the present power level. Based on the last 
successfully performed LPRM calibration, the next one is to be 
completed no later than August 9, 1994. If the surveillance is not 
performed by that time, it will be necessary to declare the APRMs 
inoperable and, thus, enter an immediate reactor shutdown in accordance 
with TS 3.3.1.b, Action 3.
    The problem with the ``D'' TIP could not have been foreseen, 
although Plant Hatch has had problems with the indexing mechanism in 
the past. However, each problem is unique and has a different root 
cause. Subsequent to the discovery of the problem, efforts to return 
the ``D'' TIP to operable status were initiated. These efforts were led 
by the licensee's engineering staff with vendor representatives on-site 
as well. The licensee has performed several tests which included 
verification of proper voltage to the indexer motor, verification of 
proper motor winding resistance as well as over-voltage tests on the 
indexing mechanism, and also conducted a reverse motor test in an 
attempt to free the indexer; however, this attempt was unsuccessful. 
All the licensee's efforts to repair the TIP, without drywell access, 
were exhausted on Friday, July 15, 1994.
    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:

    The change does not involve a significant hazards consideration 
for the following reasons:
    (1) The proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    The TIP system is not used to prevent, or mitigate the 
consequences of, any previously analyzed accident or transient, nor 
are any assumptions made in any accident analysis relative to the 
operation of the TIP system. No other safety related system is 
affected by this change.
    The use of substitute values from symmetric TIP locations or 
from calculations performed by the on-line computer core monitoring 
system does not affect the consequences of plant transients 
previously evaluated in the FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report], 
because the total core TIP reading (nodal power) uncertainty is less 
than 8.7%. Thus, the MCPR safety limit is not affected.
    (2) The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve the installation of any new 
equipment, or the modification of any equipment designed to prevent 
or mitigate the consequences of accidents or transients. Therefore, 
the change has no effect on any accident initiator, and no new or 
different type of accidents are postulated to occur.
    (3) The proposed amendment does not result in a significant 
reduction in the margin of safety.
    The total core TIP reading uncertainties will remain with the 
assumptions of the licensing basis, thus, the margin of safety to 
the MCPR safety limits is not reduced. The ability of the computer 
to accurately represent nodal powers in the reactor core is not 
compromised. The ability of the computer to accurately predict the 
LHGR, APLHGR, MCPR, and its ability to provide for LPRM calibration, 
is not compromised. Therefore, the margin of safety 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 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 Publication 
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 August 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 the Appling County Public Library, 301 
City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia 31513. 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 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 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 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 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 Herbert N. Berkow: 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 Earnest L. 
Blake, Jr., Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, 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 July 19, 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 Appling County Public Library, 301 
City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia 31513.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kahtan N. Jabbour,
Project Manager, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-17984 Filed 7-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M