[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