[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 11, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47971-47973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-23192]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[DOCKET NO. 50-415]


Entergy Operations, Inc.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
Amendment to Facility Operating License and Proposed No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination and Opportunity for Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-29 issued to Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee) for operation 
of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS) located in Claiborne 
County, Mississippi.
    The proposed amendment would allow the licensee to perform the 
surveillance of the relief mode of operation of each of the 20 safety/
relief valves (S/RVs) on the four main steam lines without physically 
lifting the disk of the valve off the seat at power. The proposed 
changes are to Surveillance Requirements (SRs) 3.4.4.3, Safety/Relief 
Valves, 3.5.1.7, Automatic Depressurization System Valves, and 
3.6.1.6.1, Low-Low Set Valves, of the Technical Specifications, and the 
changes would state that the required operation of the valve to verify 
is that the relief-mode actuator strokes when the valve is manually 
actuated and the frequency of the SRs would be in accordance with the 
inservice testing program for the valves.
    Each S/RV is a Dikkers, 8  x  10, direct-acting, spring loaded, 
safety valve with attached pneumatic actuator for relief-mode 
operation. Eight of the S/RVs use the relief mode to perform the 
Automatic Depressurization System (ADS) function. Also, six S/RVs, two 
of which are also ADS S/RVs, use the relief mode to perform the Low-Low 
Valve set function.
    The licensee submitted an application for amendment dated May 9, 
1996, as supplemented by letter August 27, 1996. A Notice of 
Consideration of Issuance of an Amendment to the license was issued in 
the Federal Register on June 19, 1996 (61 FR 31177), for the letter of 
May 9, 1996. The modification to the application in the letter of 
August 27, 1996, is to (1) state that the frequency of performing the 
SRs will be ``in accordance with the inservice testing program'' for 
the valves and (2) delete the word ``required'' for SRs 3.5.1.7 and 
3.6.1.6.1.
    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 request 
for amendment 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:

a. No Significant Increase in the Probability or Consequences of an 
Accident Previously Evaluated Results From This Change

    Each refueling outage, a test sample of the population of S/RVs 
is removed from the plant to perform testing as required by ASME 
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI. These S/RVs will be 
stroked in the relief mode during as-found testing, and are 
therefore verified to operate properly when each S/RV stem is raised 
by the relief-mode pneumatic actuator. This proposed surveillance 
verifies proper S/RV relief-mode operation of all installed S/RVs 
based upon this test sample. This testing, in conjunction with 
replacement of each S/RV prior to the end of its expected service 
life, provides reasonable assurance that the installed S/RVs will 
perform as well as the test population of S/RVs.
    After the S/RVs have been replaced in the plant, and after all 
controls are reconnected, the relief-mode actuator on each newly-
installed S/RV will be uncoupled from the S/RV stem, and stroked. 
This actuator stroke will verify that no damage has occurred to the 
relief-mode actuator during S/RV transportation from its storage 
location to its operating location. The direct coupling of the valve 
stem to disk provides assurance that proper relief actuation will 
occur when the actuator is operated. The safety-mode components are 
completely encased within the valve body and bonnet, which provides 
a rugged structure to prevent damage to these components. The 
remaining installed S/RVs will continue to be tested for proper 
control system function as previously required by Technical 
Specifications. The direct coupling of the S/RV stem to disk 
provides assurance that proper relief-mode actuation will occur when 
the actuator is operated. The safety mode of the GGNS S/RVs is not 
affected by a malfunction of the relief-mode components.
    Blockage of each S/RV discharge line will be prevented by the 
same Foreign Material

[[Page 47972]]

Exclusion (FME) controls that exist for other reactor vessel and 
support systems. These FME controls, combined with the horizontal 
orientation of the S/RV discharge piping mating surfaces, provide 
reasonable assurance that discharge line blockage will not occur.
    Therefore, no significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated results from this 
proposed change.

b. This Change Would Not Create the Possibility of a New or Different 
Kind of Accident From Any Previously Analyzed

    The proposed change demonstrates that each S/RV will perform its 
intended relief-mode function, which is the intent of the present 
surveillance. The relief mode of S/RV operation is demonstrated to 
be operable based upon successful performance of a test population, 
S/RV component service life, and existing Technical Specification 
surveillances. No new failure mechanisms to the relief-mode of 
operation are introduced, as the proposed surveillance verifies 
relief actuator operability. Plant FME controls, combined with the 
horizontal orientation of the S/RV discharge piping mating flange, 
provides reasonable assurance that discharge line blockage will not 
occur.
    This proposed change does not add any new systems, structures, 
or components, nor does it introduce new S/RV operating modes.
    Therefore, this change would not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed.

c. This Change Would Not Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin 
of Safety

    This proposed change will verify that the relief mode of all 
installed S/RVs will operate properly based upon demonstrated relief 
mode performance of a sample of S/RVs. The failure mode of the S/RV 
relief function would require a failure of either the pneumatic 
actuator, lifting linkage, or solenoid block. Each of these items 
has been verified to have a service life exceeding the replacement 
cycle of each S/RV. Therefore, proper operation of a sample 
population of S/RVs provides reasonable assurance that the remaining 
S/RVs would perform identically, within the original margin of 
expected S/RV operability. In addition, each S/RVs solenoid block 
and control functions will continue to be tested and cycled each 
refueling outage. The removal of the valve stroke surveillance for 
all S/RVs does not increase the possibility of valve malfunction, 
since valve stroke is verified during the as-found testing of the 
sample population of S/RVs. This proposed surveillance test reduces 
the number of S/RV actuations, and therefore, reduces challenges to 
the system both mechanically and thermally. Also, the proposed 
alternative method of testing reduces the possibility of a stuck-
open S/RV, since this proposed method will not stroke the S/RVs with 
the reactor pressurized during reactor power operations.
    Therefore, this change would not involve a significant reduction 
in the margin of safety.
    Based on the above evaluation, Entergy Operations, Inc. has 
concluded that operation in accordance with the proposed amendment 
involves no significant hazards considerations.

    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 Chief, Rules 
Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and 
Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 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.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By October 11, 1996, 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 Judge George W. Armstrong Library, 220 S. 
Commerce Street, Natchez, Mississippi (39120). 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 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

[[Page 47973]]

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 20555-0001, 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 William D. Beckner: 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 20555-0001, 
and to Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esquire, Winston and Strawn, 1400 L 
Street, N.W., 12th Floor, Washington, DC (20005-3502), 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 May 9, 1996, as supplemented by letter 
dated August 27, 1996, which are 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 Judge George W. Armstrong Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, Natchez, 
MS 39120.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of September, 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack N. Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-23192 Filed 9-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P