[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49636-49638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23804]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-244]


Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power 
Plant; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility 
Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-18, issued to Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (the 
licensee), for operation of the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, 
located at the licensee's site in Wayne County, New York.
    The proposed amendment would represent a full conversion from the 
current Technical Specifications (TSs) to a set of TS based on NUREG-
1431, ``Standard Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants,'' 
Revision 0, dated September 1993, together with approved travellers 
used in the issuance of 

[[Page 49637]]
Revision 1, dated April 1995. NUREG-1431 was developed through working 
groups composed of NRC staff members and industry representatives and 
has been endorsed by the staff as part of an industry-wide initiative 
to standardize and improve the TSs. As part of this submittal, the 
licensee has applied the criteria contained in the Commission's Final 
Policy Statement on Technical Specification Improvements for Nuclear 
Power Reactors of July 22, 1993, to the current Ginna TSs, and, using 
NUREG-1431 as a basis, developed a proposed set of improved TSs for 
Ginna.
    The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the current 
TSs into ten general groupings. These groupings can be characterized as 
administrative changes, relocated changes, more restrictive changes, 
and less restrictive changes.
    Non-technical administrative changes were intended to incorporate 
human-factors principles into the form and structure of the improved 
plant TSs so that they would be easier to use for plant operations 
personnel. Administrative changes are editorial in nature or involve 
the reorganization or reformatting of requirements without affecting 
technical content or operational requirements. The proposed changes 
include: (a) Providing the appropriate numbers, etc., for NUREG-1431 
bracketed information (information which must be supplied on a plant-
specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant), (b) 
identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and (c) 
changing NUREG-1431 section wording to conform to existing licensee 
practices.
    Relocated changes, those current TS requirements which do not 
satisfy or fall within any of the four criteria specified in the 
Commission's policy statement, may be relocated to appropriate 
licensee-controlled documents. In the licensee's application, 
Attachment A as part of their May 26, 1995 letter, the licensee states 
that such requirements are generally relocated to the Updated Final 
Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) and TS Bases. The relocated limiting 
conditions for operation (LCO) portion of the current TS, which 
includes the system description, design limits, functional 
capabilities, and performance levels, will be relocated to the UFSAR. 
Changes made to these documents will be made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 
or other appropriate control mechanisms. These changes reduce the 
number of current TS requirements but the actual commitment to continue 
to perform the requirement will be unchanged upon implementation of 
improved TSs.
    The licensee's proposed improved TSs include certain more 
restrictive requirements that are contained in the current TSs, which 
are either more conservative than corresponding requirements in the 
current TSs, or are additional restrictions which are contained in 
NUREG-1431 but are not contained in the current TSs. Examples of more 
restrictive requirements include: placing an LCO on plant equipment 
which is not required by the present TS to be operable; more 
restrictive requirements to restore inoperable equipment; and more 
restrictive SRs.
    Less restrictive changes are those where current requirements are 
relaxed or eliminated, or new flexibility is provided. The more 
significant ``less restrictive'' requirements are justified on a case-
by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to provide little or 
no safety benefit, their removal from the TSs may be appropriate. In 
most cases, relaxations previously granted to individual plants on a 
plant-specific basis were the result of (a) generic NRC actions, (b) 
new NRC staff positions that have evolved from technological 
advancements and operating experience, or (c) resolution of the Owners 
Groups' comments on the improved STSs. Generic relaxations contained in 
NUREG-1431 were reviewed by the staff and found to be acceptable 
because they are consistent with current licensing practices and NRC 
regulations. The licensee's design was reviewed to determine if the 
specific design basis and licensing basis are consistent with the 
technical basis for the model requirements in NUREG-1431 and thus 
provides a basis for these revised TS.
    These administrative, relocated, more restrictive and less 
restrictive changes to the requirements of the current TSs do not 
result in operations that will alter assumptions relative to mitigation 
of an analyzed accident or transient event.
    In addition to the changes described above, the licensee proposed 
certain changes to the current TSs that are both less restrictive and 
are not within the scope of application for conversion to the guidance 
of NUREG-1431. All of the differences will be reviewed by the NRC staff 
and a determination will be made regarding the approval or disapproval 
of each item as a part of this licensing action. Specifically, the 
licensee identified the following instances where their submittal 
varied from the provisions of NUREG-1431.
    (1) All refueling interval surveillance were changed from 18 months 
to 24 months consistent with the guidance of Generic Letter 91-04, 
``Changes in Technical Specification Surveillance Intervals to 
Accommodate a 24-Month Fuel Cycle, dated April 2, 1991.''
    (2) Allow both post-accident charcoal filters to be removed from 
service at the same time, provided both containment spray trains are 
operable (proposed Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.6.6).
    (3) Require only one component cooling water (CCW) heat exchanger 
to be operable when the system is required to be operable (proposed LCO 
3.7.7).
    (4) Allow both motor driven auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pumps to be 
removed from service for up to 72 hours (proposed LCO 3.7.5).
    (5) Increase the allowed outage times for certain reactor trip 
system and engineered safety feature actuation system functions up to 
72 hours (proposed LCO 3.3.1 and 3.3.2).
    (6) Allow an additional 48 hours to restore an inoperable reactor 
trip breaker or automatic trip logic train in reactor operating modes 
3, 4, and 5 (Hot Standby, Hot Shutdown, Cold Shutdown) after exiting 
mode 2 (Startup) with this condition (proposed LCO 3.3.1).
    (7) Allow the use of a closed system to isolate a containment 
penetration with a failed containment isolation valve (proposed LCO 
3.6.3).
    (8) Require only one offsite power source to be operable during 
reactor operating mode changes (proposed LCO 3.8.1).
    (9) Allow 72 hours to reduce the power range neutron flux trip 
function setpoint when the heat flux hot channel factor (Fq) or nuclear 
enthalpy rise hot channel factor (F delta h) is not within limits 
(proposed LCO 3.2.1 and 3.2.2).
    (10) Remove the requirement to test certain reactor coolant system 
pressure isolation valves when the plant has been in reactor operating 
mode 5 (cold shutdown) for greater than 7 days (proposed surveillance 
requirement (SR) 3.4.14.1).
    (11) Remove the requirement to test the motor driven AFW pump 
cross-over motor operated isolation valves (proposed LCO 3.7.5).
    (12) Remove the requirement to verify that the AFW pumps and valves 
can actuate within 10 minutes (proposed 3.7.5).
    (13) Increase the allowed tolerances for the pressurizer safety 
valves setpoint (proposed LCO 3.4.10).
    (14) Increase the allowed fuel enrichment limit from 4.25 weight 
percent to 5.05 weight percent (proposed Specification 4.3.1.1.a).
    (15) Relocate the following parameters and setpoints to the core 
operating limits report (COLR): 

[[Page 49638]]

    Overpower delta temperature and overtemperature delta temperature 
(proposed LCO 3.3.1).
    Refueling water storage tank boron concentration (proposed LCO 
3.5.4).
    Accumulator boron concentration (proposed LCO 3.5.1). Shutdown 
margin (proposed LCO 3.1.1).
    (16) Relocate the containment integrity requirements during 
refueling reactor operating mode 6 (Refueling) from the TSs.
    (17) Relocate the reactor coolant pump underfrequency trip function 
from the TSs.
    (18) Relocate the AFW and standby AFW system manual initiation 
functions from the TSs.
    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.
    By October 26, 1995, 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, and at the local public 
document room located at the Rochester Public Library, 115 South 
Avenue, Rochester, NY 14610. 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 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.
    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, 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 Ledyard B. Marsh, Director, Project Directorate I-
1: 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 Nicholas S. Reynolds, Winston & Strawn, 
1400 L St. 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).
    If a request for a hearing is received, the Commission's staff may 
issue the amendment after it completes its technical review and prior 
to the completion of any required hearing if it publishes a further 
notice for public comment of its proposed finding of no significant 
hazards consideration in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and 50.92.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated May 26, 1995, which is available for 
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public 
document room located at the Rochester Public Library, 115 South 
Avenue, Rochester, NY 14610.

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

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ledyard B. Marsh,
Director, Project Directorate I-1, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-23804 Filed 9-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P