Arizona Public Service Company; Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards; Consideration, Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. STN 50-520, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530]

Arizona Public Service Company; Palo Verde Nuclear Generating

Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; 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-41, NPR-51, and NPF-74 issued to Arizona Public Service Company

(the licensee) for operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating

Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 located in Maricopa County, Arizona.

The proposed amendment would implement recommended changes from

Generic Letter (GL) 93-05, ``Line-Item Technical Specification

Improvements to Reduce Surveillance Requirements for Testing During

Power Operation.'' Specifically, the licensee proposed to change their

Technical Specifications corresponding to the following GL 93-05 line

numbers: 4.1.2, 5.8, 5.14, 6.1, 7.5, 8.1, 9.1, 12, and 14.

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:

Standard 1--Involve a significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

This amendment request does not involve a significant increase in

the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated

based on the safety analysis, because the proposed changes to the TS do

not affect the assumptions, design parameters, or results of any UFSAR

accident analysis. The proposed amendment does not add or modify any

existing equipment. The changes to the surveillance requirements will

result in an overall improvement in plant safety by reducing the

frequency of plant trips and subsequent challenges to the safety

systems, decreasing equipment degradation due to excessive testing,

reducing radiation exposure to plant personnel (which is not justified

by the safety significance of the surveillance), and eliminating an

unnecessary burden on plant personnel (time required for testing is not

justified by the safety significance of the testing). Therefore, the

proposed TS changes do not involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

Standard 2--Create the possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously analyzed.

This amendment request does not create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident previously analyzed since

the proposed TS changes do not involve modifications to any of the

existing equipment or affect the operation or design basis of the

equipment. The proposed changes increase the surveillance intervals for

a small fraction of the SR [surveillance requirement], while ensuring

that overall plant safety is improved. Therefore, the proposed TS

changes would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any previously evaluated.

Standard 3--Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The margin of safety presently provided is not reduced by the

proposed changes in surveillance intervals in this TS amendment. The

operability requirements of the affected systems, structures, and

components are not changed by this TS amendment. Although the proposed

changes increase the surveillance intervals for the affected TS, the

reliability and operability of systems, components, and structures

continues to be ensured by periodic testing. Since equipment

reliability and operability will be maintained, the proposed TS changes

will not involve a significant reduction in 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 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

20555.

The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to

intervene is discussed below.

By August 22, 1994, 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 20555 and at the local

public document room located at the Phoenix Public Library, 12 East

McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85004. 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 particularly 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 Services

Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, 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 Theodore R. Quay: 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 Nancy C.

Loftin, Esq., Corporate Secretary and Counsel, Arizona Public Service

Company, P.O. Box 53999, Mail Station 9068, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-

3999, 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 January 4, 1994, which is available for

public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local

public document room located at the Phoenix Public Library, 12 East

McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of July 1994.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Linh N. Tran,

Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor

Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 94-17843 Filed 7-21-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-M