[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 48 (Monday, March 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13481-13483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6068]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-498]


Houston Lighting and Power Co., City Public Service Board of San 
Antonio, Central Power and Light Co., City of Austin, TX; 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-6, issued to Houston Lighting & Power Company, et al., (the 
licensee) for operation of the South Texas Project (STP), Unit 1, 
located in Matagorda County, Texas.
    The proposed amendment would change Technical Specification 3/
4.4.5, Steam Generators, and the associated Bases to allow the use of 
an alternate plugging criteria (known in the industry as F*) on steam 
generator tubes that are defective or degraded within certain areas 
within the tubesheet.
    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. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes to the Steam Generator section of Technical 
Specifications do not affect any accident initiators or precursors 
and do not alter the design assumptions for the systems or 
components used to mitigate the consequences of an accident. The 
requirements approved by the NRC will not be reduced by this 
request. Since F* utilizes the ``as rolled'' tube configuration that 
exists as part of the original steam generator design, all of the 
design and operating characteristics of the steam generator and 
connected systems are preserved. The F* joint has been analyzed and 
tested for design, operating and faulted condition loadings in 
accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.121 safety factors. At worst 
case, a tube leak would occur with the result being a primary to 
secondary leak.
    Should a tube leak occur, the impact is bounded by the ruptured 
tube evaluation submitted by HL&P [Houston Lighting & Power] for the 
STP Unit 1 operating license. No new or unreviewed accident 
conditions are created by the use of F* criteria. The potential for 
a tube rupture is not increased from the original submittal, thus 
there is no impact on accidents evaluated as the design 
[[Page 13482]] basis. Therefore use of the F* criteria will not 
increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The use of the proposed F* alternate plugging criteria will not 
introduce significant or adverse changes to the plant design basis. 
The failure of a tube which remained unplugged in accordance with 
the F* criteria would result in a tube leak, which is a previously 
analyzed condition. Since this leak would occur below the secondary 
face of the tubesheet, its leak rate would be limited by the tube-
to-tubesheet interface. Qualification testing and previous 
experience indicates that normal and faulted leakage would be well 
below the technical specification limits creating no threat 
associated with tube rupture type leakages. This conclusion is 
consistent with previous F* programs approved and used at other 
operating plants.
    However, in the unlikely event the failed tube severed 
completely at a point below the F* region, the remaining F* joint 
would retain engagement in the tubesheet due to its length of 
expanded contact within the tubesheet bore, preventing any 
interaction with neighboring tubes. If the tube severs at a point 
above the F* region, then it is covered by the tube rupture event as 
a part of the UFSAR [updated final safety analysis report]. Thus, 
the possibility of a new or different type of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated is not credited.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    Based on previous responses (above), the protective boundaries 
of the steam generator are preserved. A tube with degradation can be 
kept in service through F* criteria which provided an un-degraded 
expanded interface with the tubesheet and which satisfies all of the 
necessary structural and leakage requirements per Reg. Guide 1.121 
and the Technical Specifications. Since the joint is constrained 
within the tubesheet bore there is no additional risk associated 
with tube rupture. Since the UFSAR analyzed accident scenarios 
remain bounding the use of an F* criteria does not reduce the margin 
of safety.
    Thus, these changes do not involve a significant reduction in 
the margin of safety. Therefore, based on the above evaluation, 
Houston Lighting & Power has concluded that these changes do not 
involve any 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 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.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By April 12, 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 Wharton County Junior College, J.M. Hodges 
Learning Center, 911 Boling Highway, Wharton, Texas 77488. 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 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 [[Page 13483]] 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, 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, Director, Project Directorate 
IV-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 Jack R. Newman, Esq., Newman & Holtzinger, 
P.C., 1615 L 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 1, 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 Wharton County Junior College, J.M. Hodges 
Learning Center, 911 Boling Highway, Wharton, Texas 77488.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of March 1995.

    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. 95-6068 Filed 3-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M