[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 180 (Monday, September 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-23141]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: September 19, 1994]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328]

 

Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2; 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 amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
DPR-77 and DPR-79 issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (the 
licensee) for operation of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, 
located in Soddy Daisy, Tennessee.
    The proposed amendments, submitted by the licensee's letter dated 
September 8, 1994, would incorporate a clarification to separate the 
portion of the steam generator tubing from the end of the tube up to 
the start of the tube-to-tubesheet weld from the remainder of the tube 
for the purposes of sample selection and repair when defects are found 
in this section of a steam generator tube.
    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 amendments 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:

    TVA has evaluated the proposed technical specification (TS) 
change and has determined that it does not represent a significant 
hazards consideration based on criteria established in 10 CFR 
50.92(c). Operation of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) in accordance 
with the proposed amendment will not:
    1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    This change will clarify the requirements for indications found 
in the region of the steam generator (S/G) tube, which protrudes 
below the tubesheet. This region of the tube does not affect the 
structural integrity of the reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure 
boundary, since it is not part of the pressure boundary. This 
revision will exempt this portion of the tube from being considered 
under the result and action required sections of Table 4.4-2 in 
SQN's TS. Therefore, indications in this region will not require 
repairs and will not be used for the purpose of expanding the sample 
of tubes to be inspected under the requirements of the TS.
    The condition described in this evaluation results in tube 
integrity considerations commensurate with Regulatory Guide 1.121 
criteria both analytically and empirically. If the indications are 
hypothetically considered as cracks, the Row 1 tube end indications 
neither adversely affect S/G tube integrity or any other component, 
nor does the presence of the indications alter the function of the 
S/G or any other component. Continuing the hypothetical scenario, 
even if the crack propagated beyond the weld, the only consequence 
of an accident that could be caused by plant operation or by the 
occurrence of a faulted condition event with the tube end 
indications, would be negligible leakage from the primary to 
secondary system. Such leakage is expected to be insignificant at 
both normal and faulted conditions. Therefore, plant operation with 
the tube end indications present in the Row 1 tubes does not 
increase the probability of an analyzed accident such as a S/G tube 
rupture event,
    2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any previously analyzed.
    Any hypothetical accident as a result of plant operation with 
the Row 1 tube end indications would be bounded by the consequences 
of a postulated S/G tube rupture. Therefore, this change does not 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from 
any previously analyzed.
    3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The locations of the axial indications observed are below the 
tube-to-tubesheet weld. Consequently, it is concluded that the axial 
indications do not affect the structural and leakage integrity of 
the primary pressure boundary. Should the indications be single or 
multiple axial cracks on the tube ends, the effect of crack 
propagation was evaluated. Tube burst is precluded for cracks within 
the tubesheet by the constraint provided by the tubesheet. 
Therefore, crack lengths do not need to be limited by burst 
considerations and operating leakage limits are not required to 
detect crack lengths associated with the tube burst. However, 
primary to secondary leakage must be shown to remain within 
acceptable limits during all plant conditions. Leak-rate testing 
shows that such leakage would be negligible during all plant 
conditions. Since the pressure boundary integrity, acceptable leak 
rate, and function of the S/G are not affected by the presence of 
the tube end indications, the margin of safety is not 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 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 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 required. 
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 19, 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 Chattanooga-Hamilton County 
Library, 1101 Broad Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402. 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 
particularly 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 Mr. Frederick J. Hebdon: 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 General Council, Tennessee Valley Authority, ET 11H, 400 West Summit 
Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902, 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 8, 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 Chattanooga-Hamilton County 
Library, 1101 Broad Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of September 1994.

David E. LaBarge, Sr.
Project Manager, Project Directorate II-4, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-23141 Filed 9-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M