Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 27 / Thursday, February 9, 1995 / Notices 7801

Alternative Use of Resources

This action does not involve the use

of any resources not previously

considered in the Final Environmental

Statement for the Millstone Nuclear

Power Station, Unit No. 3.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

In accordance with its stated policy,

the staff consulted with the Connecticut

State official regarding the

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon the environmental

assessment, the Commission concludes

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed action.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated August 16, 1994, as supplemented

by letter dated January 10, 1995, 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

Learning Resource Center, Three Rivers

Community-Technical College, Thames

Valley Campus, 574 New London

Turnpike, Norwich, CT 06360.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Phillip F. McKee,

Director, Project Directorate I–4, Division of

Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–3233 Filed 2–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 50–413]

Duke Power Company, et al.; 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 No. NPF–

35 issued to Duke Power Company (the

licensee) for operation of the Catawba

Nuclear Station, Unit 1, located in York

County, South Carolina.

The proposed amendment request

would propose the renewal for Catawba

Unit 1 Cycle 9 operation of the steam

generator tube inspection bobbin probe

voltage-based interim plugging criteria

that had been previously approved for

Cycle 8. Approval of this amendment

will preclude unnecessary plugging or

repairing tubes by sleeving due to the

occurrence of outer diameter initiated

stress corrosion cracking (ODSCC) at the

tube support plate elevations in the

Catawba Unit 1 steam generators. The

interim plugging criteria approved for

Cycle 8 and contained in the draft

Generic Letter 94–XX, ‘‘Voltage-Based

Repair Criteria for the Repair of

Westinghouse Steam Generator Tubes

Affected by Outside Diameter Stress

Corrosion Cracking,’’ can be

summarized as follows:

Flaw indications with a bobbin coil voltage

less than or equal to 1.0 volt can remain in

service without further action. For flaw

indications in excess of 1.0 volt but less than

2.7 volts, the tube can remain in service

provided an RPC inspection of the indication

does not detect ODSCC or any other

degradation mode. Crack indications above

2.7 volts will be plugged or repaired by

sleeving, and do not require RPC

confirmation.

This amendment request reflects the

‘‘Requested Actions: for a licensee that

chooses to implement a steam generator

tube interim plugging criteria, as stated

in the draft NRC Generic Letter, 94–XX

‘‘Voltage-Based Repair Criteria for the

Repair of Westinghouse Steam

Generator Tubes Affected by Outside

Diameter Stress Corrosion Cracking.’’

The changes being proposed to the

Technical Specification (TS) do not alter

the interim plugging criteria currently

stated in the TS which was approved

and utilized during Cycle 8. The

primary change to the TS is to

incorporate the guidance of draft

Generic Letter 94–XX, ‘‘Voltage-Based

Repair Criteria for the Repair of

Westinghouse Steam Generator Tubes

Affected by Outside Diameter Stress

Corrosion Cracking,’’ which will allow

removal of the cycle-specific limitation

currently in the TS.

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

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) Operation of Catawba Unit 1 in

accordance with the proposed license

amendment does not involve a significant

increase in the probability or consequences

of an accident previously evaluated.

A single tube rupture is not anticipated

during operation of Catawba Unit 1. Based on

the existing data base, the limiting RG

[Regulatory Guide] 1.121 criterion for tube

burst capability of 3 times normal operating

differential is satisfied with 3⁄4′′ diameter

tubing with bobbin coil indications with

signal amplitudes less than 4.54 volts,

regardless of the indicated depth

measurement. This structural limit is based

on a lower 95% prediction bound of the data

and using LTL material properties. A 1.0 volt

plugging criteria compares favorably with the

structural limit considering the previously

calculated growth rates for ODSCC within the

Catawba Unit 1 steam generators. Assuming

a voltage increase of 0.4 volts, and adding a

14% NDE uncertainty of 0.14 volts (90%

cumulative probability) to the interim

plugging criteria [IPC] of 1.0 volt results in

an EOC [end-of-cycle] voltage of

approximately 1.6 volts. This end of cycle

voltage compares favorably with the

Structural Limit of 4.54 volts. The

applicability of assumed growth rates for

each cycle of operation will be confirmed

prior to return to power of Catawba Unit 1.

A similar structural margin is anticipated for

subsequent cycles.

In addition, for an EOC voltage structural

limit of 4.54 volts, applying the 40% growth

allowance and the 14% NDE uncertainty

results in a margin between the structural

limit and the alternate repair limit (2.7 volts),

which is well within the structural limit.

This repair limit will be applied for IPC

implementation to repair bobbin indications

greater than 2.7 volts independent of RPC

confirmation of the indication.

Concerning SLB [steamline break] leakage

in support of implementation to the interim

plugging criteria, it will be determined

whether the distribution of cracking

indications at the tube support plate

intersections at the end of a cycle are

projected to be such that primary to

secondary leakage would result in site

boundary doses within the pertinent 10 CFR

100 limits. The SLB leakage rate calculation

methodology * * * will be used to calculate

End of Cycle SLB leakage. Based on EOC 8

projections, it is calculated that leakage

during a postulated SLB event at the EOC 8

will be limited to approximately 1.61 gpm

which is shown to result in acceptable dose

consequences. [An] SLB leakage of 17.5 gpm

in the faulted loop results in dose

consequences which are less than the

pertinent 10 CFR 100 limits. Similar results

are expected for subsequent cycles and

confirmation of leak rates will be performed

prior to placing the [s]team generators in

service.
7802 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 27 / Thursday, February 9, 1995 / Notices

Therefore, renewal of the proposed 1.0 volt

interim plugging criteria does not adversely

affect steam generator tube integrity and

results in acceptable dose consequences. The

proposed amendment does not result in any

increase in the probability or consequences

of an accident previously evaluated within

the Catawba Unit FSAR [Final Safety

Analysis Report].

(2) The proposed license amendment does

not create the possibility of a new or different

kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

Renewal of the proposed steam generator

tube interim plugging criteria does not

introduce any significant changes to the plant

design basis. Use of the criteria does not

provide a mechanism which could result in

an accident outside of the region of the tube

support plat elevations—no ODSCC is

occurring outside the thickness of the tube

support plates. Neither a single or multiple

tube rupture event would be expected in a

steam generator in which the plugging

criteria has been applied (during all plant

conditions).

Upon application of the interim plugging

criteria, no primary to secondary leakage

during normal operation is anticipated

during all plant conditions due to

degradation at the tube support plate

elevations in the Catawba Unit 1 steam

generators. However, additional conservatism

is built into the existing operating leakage

limit with regard to protection against the

maximum permissible single crack length

which may be achieved during operation

due, in large part, to the potential occurrence

of through-wall cracks at locations other than

the tube support plate intersections.

Application of the 1.0 volt interim steam

generator tube plugging criteria at Catawba

Unit 1 is not expected to result in tube burst

during all plant conditions during operation.

Tube burst margins are expected to meet RG

1.121 acceptance criteria. The limiting

consequence of the application of the interim

plugging criteria is a potential for SLB

leakage. The methodology for calculating

SLB leak rate uses a voltage-to-leakage

correlation and this methodology has

previously been reviewed and approved by

the NRC. The SLB leakage value will be

confirmed to be less than allowable levels

prior to return to power of Catawba Unit 1.

No unacceptable leakage is anticipated at

normal operating or RCP locked rotor

conditions.

Therefore, as the existing tube integrity

criteria and accident analyses assumptions

and results will continue to be met, the

proposed license amendment does not create

the possibility at a new or different kind of

accident from any previously evaluated.

(3) The proposed license amendment does

not involve a significant reduction in [a]

margin of safety.

The use of the voltage based bobbin probe

interim tube support plate elevation plugging

criteria at Catawba Unit 1 is demonstrated to

maintain steam generator tube integrity

commensurate with the criteria of Regulatory

Guide 1.121. [Regulatory Guide] 1.121

describes a method acceptable to the NRC

staff for meeting GDCs [General Design

Criteria] 14, 15, 31, and 32, by reducing the

probability or the consequences of steam

generator tube rupture. This is accomplished

by determining the limiting conditions of

degradation of steam generator tubing, as

established by inservice inspection, for

which tubes with unacceptable cracking

should be removed from service.

Implementation of the bobbin probe voltage

based interim tube plugging criteria of 1.0

volt is supplemented by enhanced eddy

current inspection guidelines to provide

consistency in voltage normalization, a 100%

eddy current inspection at the tube support

plate elevations, and rotating pancake coil

inspection requirements for the larger

indications left in service to characterize the

principle degradation as ODSCC. Even under

the worst case conditions, the occurrence of

ODSCC at the tube support plate elevations

is not expected to lead to a steam generator

tube rupture event during normal or faulted

plant conditions.

Based on the analyses for Cycle 8, the

expected leakage values and the leakage

conditions required to be confirmed during

accidents creating high differential pressures

across the steam generator tubes (e.g. SLB),

dose analysis confirm the maximum

permissible leakage will result in offsite dose

consequences within the guideline values.

[An] MSLB accident with assumed leakage

growth in the faulted generator results in the

EAB and LPZ doses remaining within 10%

of the 10 CFR 100 values of 25 Rem whole

body and 300 Rem thyroid for the accidentinitiated iodine spike, and 10 CFR 100 values

for the pre-accident iodine spike.

The distribution of crack indications at the

tube support plate elevations will be

confirmed to result in acceptable primary to

secondary leakage during all plant conditions

and that radiological consequences are not

adversely impacted.

Renewal of the tube support plate elevation

plugging criteria for operation at Catawba

Unit 1 will decrease the number of tubes

which must be repaired by sleeving or taken

out of service by plugging. The installation of

steam generator tube plugs reduce the RCS

flow margin. Thus, implementation of the

alternate plugging criteria will maintain the

margin of flow that would otherwise be

reduced in the event of increased tube

plugging.

Based on the above, it is concluded that the

proposed license amendment requested does

not result in a significant reduction in margin

with respect to plant safety as defined in the

Final Safety Analysis Report or any Bases of

the plant Technical Specifications.

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 on 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 takes 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

the Federal Register notice. Written

comments may also be delivered to

Room T–6 D22, 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 March 13, 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

Buidling, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and at the local public

document room located at the York

County Library, 138 East Black Street,

Rock Hill, South Carolina. If a request

for a hearing or petition for leave to

intervene is filed by the above date, the
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 27 / Thursday, February 9, 1995 / Notices 7803

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

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 Service 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 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 Mr. Albert Carr, Duke

Power Company, 422 South Church

Street, Charlotte, North Carolina,

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 November 29, 1994,

as supplemented January 12 and 27,

1995, 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 New York County Library,

138 East Black Street, Rock Hill, South

Carolina.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert E. Martin,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 94–3234 Filed 2–8–94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 50–245]

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company;

Withdrawal of Application for

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request of Northeast Nuclear

Power Company (the licensee) to

withdraw its October 15, 1993,

application for proposed amendment to

Facility Operating License No. DPR–21

for Millstone Nuclear Power Station,

Unit 1, located in New London County,

Connecticut.

The proposed amendment would

have modified the Unit 1 technical

specifications to provide a maximum

duration that radioactive effluent

monitoring instrumentation could be

out-of-service for the purpose of

maintenance, performance of required

tests, checks, calibrations, or sampling

before the applicable action statement

was entered.

The Commission had previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment published in

the Federal Register on December 8,

1993 (58 FR 64611). However, by letter

dated January 19, 1995, the licensee

withdrew the proposed change.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated October 15, 1993, and

the licensee’s letter dated January 19,

1995, which withdrew the application

for license amendment. The above

documents are available for public