[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 59 (Friday, March 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14974-14975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-8027]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446]


Texas Utilities Electric; Notice of 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 an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-87 and NPF-89, issued to Texas Utilities Electric Company, (TU 
Electric, the licensee), for operation of the Comanche Peak Steam 
Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas.
    The proposed amendment would provide a temporary Technical 
Specification change for Surveillance Requirements (SRs) 
4.8.1.1.2f.4(b) and 4.8.1.1.2f.6(b) to allow the verification of the 
auto connected shut-down loads through the load sequencer to be 
performed at power for fuel cycle 6 on Unit 1 and fuel cycle 4 on Unit 
2. The temporary change is requested as a result of the discovery that 
some of the safety injection (SI) and blackout (BO) sequencer block 
contacts had not been tested in accordance with the above SRs. These 
surveillances were performed during the last refueling outage for each 
unit as part of the integrative tests. However, it was subsequently 
discovered that some of the sequencer loads had parallel starting paths 
such that it could not be determined, based only on the observation 
that the equipment had successfully started, that the specific contacts 
required to be tested had in fact operated. In addition, verification 
of testing of certain contacts was missing. This was reported promptly 
to the NRC at the time of discovery and prompt action to remedy the 
situation was taken.
    The licensee requested a Notice of Enforcement Discretion (NOED) by 
letter dated March 10, 1998. The NRC orally issued the NOED at 9:25 
a.m. EST on March 11, 1998, to allow the facility to continue operation 
while the TS is processed. Pursuant to the NRC's policy regarding 
exercise of discretion for an operating facility, set out in Section 
VII.c, of the ``General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC 
Enforcement Actions'' (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, the letter 
documenting the issuance of the NOED was dated March 13, 1998. The NOED 
was to be effective for the period of time it takes the NRC staff to 
process the proposed change to the TSs on an exigent bases.
    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:

    1. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Crediting the power performance of the portions of surveillance 
testing necessary to demonstrate the OPERABILITY of the SI and BO 
Sequencer block contacts, will not increase the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The conclusion has 
been reached that the probability of initiating a perturbation in 
the A.C. electrical distribution system is not created via the 
crediting of the tests. As the testing is conducted on only one 
train per unit at a given time, no increase in consequences, other 
than those previously postulated, are considered credible.
    2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Perturbations in the A.C. electrical distribution system have 
been fully considered within the Final Safety Analysis Report. No 
new or different kind of perturbation or accident is deemed credible 
from crediting the performance of the testing.
    3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Crediting the required testing at power does not create any new 
failure scenarios or A.C. electrical distribution perturbations, no 
associated margin is expected to be reduced. As such, there is no 
reduction in any margin of safety.

    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 14 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 14-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 14-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 Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-

[[Page 14975]]

0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this 
Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 
6D59, 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 April 13, 1998, 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 University of Texas at Arlington Library, 
Government Publications/Maps, 702 College, PO Box 19497, Arlington, TX 
76019. 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.
    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 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff, may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
by the above date. 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 George L. Edgar, Esq., Morgan, Lewis 
and Bockius, 1800 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, 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 March 12, 1998, 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 University of Texas at Arlington Library, 
Government Publications/Maps, 702 College, PO Box 19497, Arlington, TX 
76019.

    Dated at Rockville, MD, this 23rd day of March 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas W. Alexion,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects 
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-8027 Filed 3-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P