ML20058P287

Forwards Licenses Issued on 931216,per 930915 Prehearing Conference

ML20058P287
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	12/17/1993
From:	Hodgdon A NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	Cole R, Cotter B, Lam P Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#493-14549 OLA, NUDOCS 9312270037
Download: ML20058P287 (62)

Text

.

Eco

.,f

'o 4

UNITED STATES e[

}

}

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. [-

I!F f

WASHINGTON. D.C. 205664001

\\ p*.. * /

l December 17, 199A DG 17 P3 :58

~

i ii' liv > f,,, <

e

'N Peter S. Lam

• B. Paul Cotter, Jr.*

Administrative Judge'a u Chairman Administrative Judge Atomic Safety Atomic Safety and Licensing Board l

and Licensing Board Mail Stop:

EW-439 l

Mail Stop:

EW-439 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulator /

Commission i

Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Washington, D.

C.

205S5 Richard F. Cole

• Administrative Judge Atomic Safety l

~

and Licensing Board Mail Stop:

EW-439 I

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.

C.

20555 In the Matter of GULF STATES UTILITY COMPANY,.et al.

(River Bend Station, Unit 1)

Docket No.

50-458-OLA

Dear Administrative Judges:

At the prehearing conference on September 15, 1993, the Licensing Board expressed an interest in the schedule for the Staff's issuance of the River Bend license amendments that were addressed at the prehearing conference.

Tr. 68.

By this letter, the NRC Staff is forwarding the licenses, which were issued on December 16, 1993.

Sin erely, p

~

.1

-__jOc4 W

Ann h.y %.

Hodgdon Counsel for NRC Staff

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/encls:

Service List i

P b]'

9312270037 931217 0

PDR ADOCK 05000458 C

PDR

usuq k

UNITED STATES f

j j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e

r WASHINGTON, D.C. 20065-0001

/

December 16, 1993 Docket No. 50-458 Gulf States Utilities ATTN: Mr. John R. McGaha Vice President - River Bend Nuclear Group Post Office Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775

SUBJECT:

RIVER BEND STATION, UNIT I - AMENDMENT NO. 70 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 (TAC NO. M85673)

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 70 to facility Operating License No. NPF-47 for the River Bend Station, Unit 1.

The amendment consists of changes to the license in response to your application dated January 13, 1993, as supplemented by letter dated June 29, 1993.

The amendment revises the Rivet send Station, Unit 1 operating license'to include as a licensee, Entergy Operations, Inc. (E01), and ta authorize E01 to use and operate River Bend and to possess and use related licensed nuclear materials.

The transfer of any right under the operating license is subject to NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80(a). Such approval is given in the enclosed Order Approving Transfer of License, which is being forwarded to the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

A copy of our Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Reoister notice.

Sincerely, M

Edward T. Baker, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1.

Amendment No. 70 to NPF-47 2.

Safety Evaluation 3.

Order cc w/ enclosures:

See next page

\\

Mr. John R. McGaha,

cc w/ enclosures:

Winston & Strawn Mr. Harold W. Keiser ATTN: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.

Executive Vice President and 1400 L Street, N.W.

Chief Operating Officer Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 Entergy Operations, Inc.

P. O. Box 31995 Mr. Les England Jackson, Mississippi 39286 Director - Nuclear Licensing Gulf States Ut!11 ties Company Mr. Michael B. Sellman St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 Plant Manager River Bend Station Mr. Philip G. Harris Post Office Box 220 Cajun Electric Power Coop, Inc.

St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 10719 Airline Highway P. O. Box 15540 Mr. James J. Fisicaro Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70895 Manager - Safety Assessment and Quality Verification Senior Resident Inspector Gulf States Utilit es Company P. O. Box 1051 Post Office Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 President of West Feliciana Police Jury P. O. Box 1921 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Mr. J. David McNeill, III William G. Davis, Esq.

Department of Justice Attorney General's Office P. O. Box 94095 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804-9095 Ms. H. Anne Plettinger 3456 Villa Rose Drive Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806 Administrator Louisiana Radiation Protection Division P. O. Box 82135 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2135

E i

j#"4 4

j g

k UNITED STATES j

.j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

e WASHINGTON. D.C. 3554001 l

8 GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY **

j

\\..... p CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE

. l DOCKET N0. 59.::lig RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT 1 8MfNDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 70:

. License No. NPF-47 1.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A.

The application for amendment by Gulf States Utilities

• deted

)

January 13, 1993, as supplemented by letter dated June 29, 1993, I

complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy j

Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.

The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission;-

C.

There is reasonable assurance:

(i)'that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii)- that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Consission's regulations; D.

The issuance of this license amendment will not be inimical.to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E.

The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all wplicable requirements have i

been satisfied.

1 2.

Accordingly, Facility Operating License No. NPF-47 is hereby amended to read as follows:

)

• Gulf States Utilities Company under the present 1....nse is authorized to act

)

as agent for Cajun Electric Power Cooperative and has exclusive responsibility and control over the physical construction, operation and-maintenance of the facility.

• • Gulf States Utilities Company, which owns a 70 percent undivided interest in River Bend, has merged with a wholly owned subsidiary:of Entergy Corporation. Gulf States Utilities Company was the surviving company in the merger.

- - - - +

-- +

-y-y p p yy w-gg

.e.

rp

-9w+

g v eyg p=,

-<-m-e

(a) The Title on page 1 of the license shall read:

Gulf States Utilities Comotm Ca.iun Electric Power Coonerative and Enterav Operations. Inc.

Docket No. 50-458 River Bend Station. Unit 1 Facility Doeratino License (b) Paragraph 1.E of the license shall read:

Entergy Operations Inc. (E01) is technically qualified to angage in the activities authorized by this operating license in accordance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I:

(c) Footnote

• on page 1 of the license shall read:

• E01 is authorized to act as agent for Gulf States Utilities Company, which has been authorized to act as agent for Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, and has exclusive responsibility and control over the physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.

(d) Paragraph 1.F of the license shall read:

Gulf States Utilities Company, Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, and E01 have satisfied the applicable provisions of 10 CFR Part 140, " Financial Protection Requirements and Indemnity Agreements," of the Commission's regulations; (e) Paragraph 2 of the iicense shall read:

Based on the foregoing findings and approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at a meeting on November 15, 1985, the License for Fuel Loading and Low Power Testing, License No.

NPF-40, issued on August 29, 1985, is superseded by Facility Operating License NPF-47 hereby issued to E01, Gulf States Utilities Company and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative (the licensees), to read as follows:

(f) Paragraph 2.A of the license shall read:

This license applies to the River Bend Station, Unit 1, a boiling water nuclear reactor and associated equipment, owned by Gulf States Utilities Company and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative and operated by E01. The facility is located approximately 2 miles east of the Mississippi River in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana, approximately 2.7 miles southeast of St. Francisville, Louisiana and approximately 18 miles j

northwest of the city limits of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and is 1

?

a

-3_

i described in the " Final Safety Analysis Report," as supplemented and_ amended, and in the Environmental Report-l Operating License Stage,-as supplemented and amended.

j (g) Paragraph 2.B.(2) of the license shall. read:

E01, pursuant to Section 103 of the Act and 10 CFR Part 50, to-possess, use and operate the facility at the above designated-location in accordance with the procedures.and limitations set forth in this license; i

(h)

Paragraphs 2.B.(3), 2.B.(4), 2.B'.(5), 2.B.(6), 2.C.(1),'and l

?

l 2.C.(2) shall each be modified by substituting "EDI" for "GSU" wherever the latter appears.

(1) Paragraph 2.C.(3) of the license shall read:

Antitrust Conditions a.

GSU shall comply with the antitrust license conditions' set forth in Appendix C, attached hereto which.is hereby incorporated in this license.

b.

E01 shall not market or broker power or energy from River-Bend Station, Unit.1. GSU is responsible and. accountable for the actions of its agent, EDI, to.the extent said i

agent's actions affect the marketing or brokering of power-or energy-from River Bend-Station, Unit I and, 'in any way, i

contravene the antitrust conditions of this. paragraph or Appendix C of this license.

l l

(j)

Paragraphs 2.C.(4) and 2.C.(5) shall be modified by t

substituting "E01" for "GSU" wherever the latter appears.

I (k)

Paragraph 2.C.(5)b. of the license shall. read:

b.

Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, GSU* shall furnish the outstanding information identified in Appendix K of SSER 2 addressing the Mark III containment related issues.

(1) Footnote

• on page 4 of the license shall read:

• The original licensee authorized to possess, use and operate the facility was GSU. Consequently, historica1' references to certain obligations of GSU remain in the license conditions.

(m) Paragraphs 2.C.(8), 2.C.(10), 2.C.(11), 2.C.(14), 2.C.(15),-

2.D, and 2.E shall be modified by substituting "E01" for "GSU" wherever the latter appears.

l L-

~

(n) The last page of the license shall be marked " Revised:

December 16, 1993."

3.

This license amendment is. effective as of its date issuance, and shall be.

implemented within 180 days.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gkl SuzannV C. Black, Director Project Directorate IV-2 j

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Facility Operating License No. NPF-47 1

Date of Issuance: December 16, 1993 l

l-ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 70 i

TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 DOCKET NO. 50-458 Replace the following pages of the License with the attached pages. The revised paEes contain vertical lines indicating the areas of change.

Femove Paae Inset-t Paae 1

I 2

2 3

3 4

4 5

5 6

6 7

7 8

l Replace Attachments 2, 3, 4, and 5 to License No. NPF-47 in their entirety.

Replace cover page of Appendix B - Environmental Protection Plan.

1 I%

UNITED STATES

[#.. W ) )

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.k e

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20666-0001

%.'.v /

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY.**

CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE AND ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.

l DOCKET NO. 50-458 RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT 1 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE j

License No. NPF-47 1.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or the NRC) has found that:

A.

The application for license filed by Gulf States Utilities Company, acting on behalf of itself and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I, and all required notifications to other agencies or bodies have been duly made; B.

Construction of the River Bend Station, Unit 1 (the facility) has been substantially completed in conformity with Construction Permit No. CPPR-145 and the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act and the regulations of the Commission; C.

The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the regulations of the Commission; D.

There is reasonable assurance:

(1) that the activities authorized by this operating license can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will 4

be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; E.

Entergy Operations, Inc.* (E01) is technically qualified to engage l

in the activities authorized by this operating license in accordance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I;

• E01 is authorized to act as agent for Gulf States Utilities Company, which has been authorized to act as agent for Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, and has exclusive responsibility and control over the physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.

• • Gulf States Utilities Company, which owns a 70 percent undivided interest in River Bend, has merged with a wholly owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation. Gulf States Utilities Company was the surviving company in the merger.

Amendment No. 70

- 2_-

lj!

F.

Gulf States Utilities Company, Cajun Electric Power. Cooperative, and E01 have satisfied the applicable provisions of 10 CFR Part 140,

" Financial Protection Requirements and Indemnity Agreements,".of the Commission's regulations, i

i G.

The issuance of this license will not be inimical'to the common' defense and security or to the health and safety of the public;

)

H.

After weighing the environmental,- economic, technical, and other i

benefits of the facility against environmental and other costs and 1

considering available alternatives, the issuance of Facility Operating License No. NPF-47, subject to the conditions for protection of the environment set forth herein, is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable-requirements have been satisfied; and I.

The receipt, possession, and use of-source, byproduct and special nuclear material as authorized by this license will be in accordance with the Commission's regulations in _10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70.

2.

Based on the foregoing findings and approval by the Nuclear Regulatory _-

Commission at a meeting on November 15, 1985, the License for Fuel Loading i

and Low Power Testing, License No. NPF-40, issued on August-29, 1985, is-i superseded by Facility Operating License NPF-47 hereby issued to E01, Gulf

(

States Utilities Company and Cajun Electric Power' Cooperative'(the licensees), to read as follows:

A.

This license applies to the River Bend St'ation, Unit 1, a boiling

'l i

water nuclear reactor and associated equipment, owned _ by Gulf States Utilities Company and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative and operated

.by E01. The facility is located approximately 2 miles east of the l

Mississippi River in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana, approximately 2.7 miles southeast of St. Francisville, Louisiana and approximately_

18 miles northwest of the city limits of Baton Rouge,' Louisiana, and is described in the " Final Safety Analysis ~ Report," as_ supplemented j

and amended, and in the Environmental Report-Operating License Stage, I

as supplemented and amended.

1 B.

Subject to the conditions.and requirements incorporated herein, the

i Comrnission hereby licenses:

1 (1)

Gulf States Utilities Company (GSU) and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative to possess the facility at the designated location in West Feliciana Parish = Louisiana, in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in this license; (2)

E01, pursuant to Section 103 of the Act and 10 CFR Part 50,.to l

possess, use and operate the facility at the above designated location in accordance with the procedures _and limitations set forth in this license; Amendment No. 70-l

(3)

E01, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Part 70, to receive, l

possess and to use at any time special nuclear material' as reactor fuel, in accordance with the limitations for storage and amounts required for reactor operation, as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report, as supplemented and amended; (4)

E01, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70, to l

receive, possess, and use at any time any byproduct, source and special nuclear material as sealed neutron sources for reactor startup, sealed sources for reactor instrumentation and radiation monitoring equipment calibration, and as fission detectors in amounts as required; (5)

E01, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70, to l

receive, possess, and use in amounts as required any byproduct, j

source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components; and (6)

E01, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70, to l

possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.

C.

This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:

(1)

Maximum Power level E01 is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power l

levels not in excess of 2894 megawatts thermal (100% rated power) in accordance with the conditions specified herein. The i

items identified in Attachment I to this license shall be completed as specified. Attachment 1 is hereby incorporated into this license.

i (2)

Technical Soecifications and Environmental Protection Plan j

The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 70 and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, are hereby incorporated in the license.

E01 shall operate the facility in l

accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

Amendment No. 70 1

e 4-r (3)

Antitrust Conditions a.

GSU shall comply with the antitrust conditions in Appendix C, attached hereto, which is hereby incorporated in this

license, b.

E01 shall not market or broker power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit 1.

GSU is responsible and accountable for the actions of its agent, EDI, to the extent said.

agent's actions affect the marketing or brokering of power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit I and, in any way, contravene the antitrust conditions of this paragraph or-Appendix C of this license.

(4)

Seismic and Dynamic Oualification of Seismic Cateaory 1 Mechanical and Electrical Eauipment (Section 3.10. SER and SSER 3)

E01 shall complete the requirements of the seismic and dynamic l

qualification of mechanical and electrical 6,11pment as specified in Attachment 2. is hereby incorporated into this license.

(5)

Mark III Related Issues (Section 6.2.1.9. SER and SSER 21 a.

E01 shall not use the residual heat removal system in the

.l steam condensing mode without prior written approval of the staff.

b.

Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, GSU*

l j shall furnish the outstanding information identified in i

Appendix K of_SSER 2 addressing the Mark III containment related issues.

(6)

Inservice Inspection Proaram (Section 5.2.4.3 and 6.6.3. SIB and SSER 3)

GSU shall submit the inservice inspection program for NRC staff review and approval by September 1,1986.

r

• The original licensee authorized to possess, use and operate the facility was GSU. Consequently, historical references to certain obligations of GSU remain in the license conditions.

Amendment No. 70

1

~.

(7)

Bypassed and Inocerable Status-Indication (Section 7.5.2.2. SER and SSER 3)

I Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, GSU shall implement design modifications to improve the capabilities of existing bypassed and inoperable status indication used to monitor the status of safety related systems. The specific design changes to be implemented are identified in a GSU letter dated December. 3,1984 as clarified in a GSU letter dated March 5, 1985.

(8)

TDI Diesel Enaines (Section 8.3.1. SSER 3)

E01 shall implement the TDI diesel requirements as specified in l. is hereby incorporated into this license.

(9)

Ultimate Heat Sink (Section 9.2.5. SER and SSER 3)

Prior to startup following the first refueling outage GSU shall have installed and operational in the ultimate heat sink a permanent temperature monitoring system acceptable to the NRC staff and Technical Specification modifications as required.

I l

(10)

Fire Protection (Section 9.5.1. SER and SSER 3)-

E01 shall comply with the requirements of the fire protection l

program as specified in Attachment 4. is hereby incorporated into this license.

(11) Operatino Staff Experience Reouirements (Section'13.1.2.1. SSER H

E01 shall have a licensed senior operator on each shift, while.

l in Operating Condition 1, 2 and 3, who has_had at least six months of hot operating experience on a plant comparable to River Bend Station, including at least six weeks at power levels greater than 20% of full power, and who has had startup and shutdown experience.

(12)

Post-Fuel-Loadina Initial Test Prooram (Section 14. SER and SSER 3)

Any changes to the initial test program described in Section 14 of the FSAR made in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 shall-be reported in accordance with 50.59(b) within one month of such change.

Amendment No. 70 q

1 4 (13) Partial Feedwater Heatino (Section 15.1. SER)

The facility shall not be operated with partial feedwater j

heating beyond the end of the normal fuel cycle without prior i

i written approval of the staff. During the normal fuel cycle, the facility shall not be operated with a feedwater heating capacity which would result in a rated thermal power feedwater temperature less than 320*F without prior written approval of the staff.

(14) Emeroency Response Capabilities (Generic Letter 82-33.

Supolement 1 to NUREG-0737. Section 7.5.2.4. SER and SSER 3.

Section 18. SER. SSER 2 and SSER 3) i EDI shall complete the requirements of NUREG-0737 Supplement #1 l

as specified in Attachment 5. is hereby incorporated into this license.

l (15) Salem ATWS Event. Generic Letter 83-28 (Section 7.2.2.5. SSER-U E01 shall submit responses to and implement the requirements of l

Generic Letter 83-28 on a schedule which is consistent with that given in its letters dated August 3, 1984 and May 20, l

1985.

(16) Meraer Related Reports GSU shall inform the Director, NRR:

a.

Sixty days prior to a transfer (excluding grants of security interests or liens) from GSU to Entergy or any other entity of facilities for the production, transmission or distribution of electric energy having a depreciated book value exceeding one percent (1%) of GSU's consolidated net utility plant, as recorded on GSU's books of account.

b.

Of an award of damages in litigation initiated against GSU by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative regarding River Bend within 30 days of the award.

l D.

E01 shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of l

l the Commission-approved physical security, guard training and 1

qualification, and safeguards contingency plans including amendments made pursuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous Amendments and Search Requirements revisions to 10 CFR 73.55 (51 FR 27817 and 27822) and to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The plans, l

which contain Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, are entitled:

" River Bend Physical Security Plan," with revisions Amendment No. 70

b

\\

l I

submitted through November 6, 1987; " River Bend Station Guard Training and Qualification Plan," with revisions submitted through December 16, 1986; and " River Bend Station Safeguards Contingency Plan," with revisions submitted through January 27, 1987. Changes made in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55 shall be implemented in -

accordance with the schedule set forth therein.

E.

Except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications or Environmental Protection Plan, EDI shall report any violations of the l

)

requirements contained in Section 2.0 of this license in the following manner:

initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System with written followup within thirty days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR 50.73(b), (c), and (e).

F.

The licensees shall have and maintain financial protection of such type and in such amounts as the Commission shall require in accordance with Section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as.

amended, to cover public liability claims.

G.

This license is effective as of the date of issuance and shall expire at midnight on August 29, 2025.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Original Signed By '

Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1 1.

Attachments 1-5 2.

Appendix A - Technical Specifications (NUREG-1172) 3.

Appendix B - Environmental Protection Plan i

4.

Appendix C - Antitrust Conditions Date of Issuance: November 20, 1985 Revised:

December 16, 1993 i

Amendment No. 70

ATTACHMENT 2 TO NPF-47 SEISMIC AND DYNAMIC OUALIFICATION OF SEISMIC CATEGORY I MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL E0VIPMENT E01 shall complete the following requirements for seismic and dynamic

]

qualification on the schedule noted below:

1.

E0I shall complete the seismic qualification of. the in-vessel rack l

prior to its use.

l Amendment No. 70

i ATTACHMENT 3 TO NPF-47 TDI DIESEL ENGINES REOUIREMENTS E01 shall comply with the following requirements related to the TDI diesel l

engines.

1.

Change to the maintenance and surveillance program for the TDI diesel engines, as identified and approved by the NRC staff in Supplement 3 to the SER, shall be subject to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59.

The frequency of the major engine overhauls referred to in the license conditions below shall be consistent with Section IV.1, " Overhaul Frequency" in revision 2 of Appendix II of the Design Review / Quality Revalidation report which was transmitted by letter dated May 1,1986, from J. George, Owners Group, to H. Denton, NRC.

2.

Crankshafts shall be inspected as follows:

SD IB: During the first refueling outage, inspect the fillets and oil holes of the three most heavily loaded crankpin journals (Nos. 5, 6, and j

7) with florescent liquid penetrant and ET as appropriate.

i i

SD 1A and IB: During the second and third refueling outages, inspect the fillets and oil holes of two of the three most heavily loaded crankpin j

journals in the manner just mentioned.

SD 1A and IB: At approximate 5 year intervals subsequent to the third refueling outage, inspect the fillets and oil holes using florescent liquid penetrant and ET as appropriate, of the:

a) three most heavily loaded crankpin journals (Nos. 5, 6, and 7), and b) main journals located i

between crankpin journals 5, 6, and 7.

One engine may be inspected at the refueling outage closest to 5 years, and the other engine at the next refueling outage.

If cracks are found during inspections of crankshafts, this condition shall be reported promptly to the NRC staff and the affected engine shall be considered inoperable. The engine shall not be restored to " operable status" until the proposed disposition and/or corrective actions have been approved by the NRC staff.

3.

Cylinder blocks shall be inspected for " ligament" cracks, " stud-to-stud" cracks and " stud-to-end" cracks as defined in a report

• by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. (FaAA) entitled, " Design Review of TDI R-4 and RV-4 Series Emergency Diesel Generator Cylinder Blocks" (FaAA report no.

FaAA-84-9-11.1) and dated December 1984.

(Noted that the FaAA report specifies additional inspections to be performed for blocks with "known"

• This report was transmitted to H. Denton, NRC, from C. L. Ray, Jr., TDI Owners Group, by letter dated December 11, 1984.

Amendment No. 70

.i l

l i

.. f an,

or " assumed" ligament cracks). The inspection intervals -(i.e., frequency) shall not exceed the. intervals calculated using the cumulative damage index model in the subject FaAA report.. In addition, inspection method' shall be consistent.with or equivalent to those identified in the subject l

FaAA report.

j In addition to' inspections specified in the aforementioned FaAA report, blocks with "known" or " assumed ligament cracks" (as defined in the FaAA

'I report) should be inspected at each refueling outage to determine whether or not cracks have initiated on the top surface exposed by the removal of two or more cylinder heads. This process should be repeated over.several refueling outages until the entire block top has been inspected.

Liquid-penetrant testing or a similarly sensitive nondestructive testing -

technique should be used to detect cracking, and eddy current should be used as appropriate to determine the depth of any cracks discovered.

If inspection reveals cracks in the cylinder blocks between stud' holes of adjacent cylinders (" stud-to-stud" cracks) or " stud-to-end" cracks, this condition shall be reported promptly to the GC staff and the affected engine shall be considered inoperable. Thr. engine shall not' be restored to " operable status" until the proposed disposition and/or correctine actions have been approved by the NRC staff.

4.

The following air roll test shall be performed as specified below,.except when ',he plant is already-in an Action Statement of Technical:

Specification 3/4.8.1, " Electric Power Systems, A.C. Sources":

The engines shall be rolled over with'the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open prior to each planned. start, unless the start -

occurs within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of a shutdown. The engines shall also be rolled over with the airstart system and with the cylinder stopcocks open after 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, but no more than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />, after engine shutdown and then rolled over once again approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after each shutdown.

(In the event an engine is removed from service for any reason other than the rolling over procedure prior to expiration of the 8-hour or 24-hour periods noted above, that engine need not be rolled over while it is out of service.

The licensee shall air roll the engine over with the stopcocks open at the time it is returned to service.) The origin of any water detected in the cylinder must be determined and any cylinder head which leaks due to a crack shall be replaced. The above. air roll test may be discontinued following the first refueling outage subject to the following conditions:

All cylinder heads are Group III heads (i.e., cast after September-1980).

Quality revalidation inspections, as identified in the Design Review / Quality Revalidation report, have been completed for all cylinder heads.

Amendment No. 70 l

\\

~

(.,

s Group III heads continue to demonstrate leak free performance. This should be confirmed with TDI before air roll tests are discontinued.'

5.

The following actions are required if SD 1A or SD IB is operatedlin excess of 3130 KW"):

period less than two hours',in the range of 3130 KW to 3200 KW for a For indicated engine loads a)

) no additional action shall be.-

required.

b)

For indicated engine loads in the rangg of 3130 KW to 3200 KW for a period equal to or exceeding tuo hours

), a crankshaft inspection pursuant to Item d below shall be performed at the next refueling outage.

period less than I hour',d,s in the range of 3200 KW to 3500 KW for a For indicated engine loa c)

, a crankshaft inspection pursuant to item d below shall be performed for the affected engine at the next refueling outage, d)

For indicated engine loads in the rangg2of 3200 KW to 3500 KW for periods equal to or exceeding one hour and for engine. loads exceeding 3500 KW for any period of time, (1) the engine shall be removed from service as soon as safely possible,- (2) the engine shall be declared inoperable, and (3) the crankshaft shall be-inspected.

The crankshaft inspection shall include crankpin journal l numbers 5, 6, and 7 (the most heavily loaded) and the two main journals inbetween using florescent liquid penetrant and eddy current as appropriate.

6.

Periodic inspections of the turbochargers shall include the following:

The turbocharger thrust bearings should be visually inspected for 4

excessive wear after 40 non-prelubed starts since the previous visual inspection.

Turbocharger rotor axial clearance should be measured at each refueling outage to verify compliance with TDI/Elliott I

specifications.

In addition, thrust bearing measurements should be compared with measurements taken previously to determine a need for 1

1 further inspection or corrective action.

(1) Momentary transients (not exceeding 5 seconds) due to changing of bus loads need not be considered as an overload.

(2) If there are multiple overload events within a given load range since the previous crankshaft inspection, then the time period criterion ~ applies to the total accumulated time in that load range.

Amendment No. 70,

~

i 1

- Spectrographic and ferrographic engine oil analysis shall be performed quarterly to provide early. evidence of bearing degradation.

Particular attention should be paid to copper level and particulate i

size, which could signify thrust bearing degradation.

j The nozzle ring components and inlet guide vanes should be visually inspected at each refueling outage for missing parts or parts showing distress on a one-turbocharger-per-refueling-outage basis.

In addition, these inspections should be performed for all turbochargers at each turbocharger overhaul (i.e., at approximately 5-year intervals).

If any missing parts or distress is noted, the entire ring assembly should be replaced and the subject turbocharger should be reinspected at the next refueling outage.

1 7.

Operation beyond the first refueling outage is subject to NRC staff approval based on the staff's final review of-the Owners Group generic findings and of the overall design review and quality revalidation program at River Bend.

Amendment No. 70

ATTACHMENT 4 TO NPF-47 FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM REOUIREMENTS EDI shall comply with the following requirements of: the fire protection l

program:

1.

E01 shall implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the l

approved fire protection program as described in' the Final. Safety Analysis Report for the faci' ity through Amendment 22 and as approved in the SER dated May 1984 and Supplement-3 dated August 1985 subject to provisions 2 and 3 below.

2.

E01 may make no change to the approved fire protection program which l

would significantly decrease the level of fire protection ir. the plant without prior approval of the Commission. To make such a change E01 must submit an application for license amendment pursuant l

to 10 CFR 50.90.

3.

E01 may make changes to features of the approved fire protection l

program which do not significantly decrease the level of fire protection without prior Commission approval provided (a) such changes do not otherwise involve a change in a license condition or.

technical specification or result in an unreviewed safety question (see 10 CFR 50.59), and (b) such changes do not result in failure to complete' the fire protection program approved by the Commission prior to license issuance. E01 shall maintain, in an auditable form, a l

current record of all such changes, including an analysis of the effects of the change on the fire protection program, and shall make such records available to NRC inspectors upon request. All changes to the approved program shall be reported to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, along with the FSAR revisions i

required by 10 CFR 50.71(e).

j i

Amendment No. 70

j l

i ATTACHMENT 5 TO NPF-47 i

DiERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITIES E01 shall complete the following requirements of NUREG-0737 Supplement No I on l

the schedule noted below:

1.

Actions and schedules for correcting all human engineering discrepancies (HEDs) identified in the " Detailed Control Room Design Review Summary Report" dated October 31, 1984 and Supplements dated May 14, June 12, 1985, and July 31, 1985, shall be implemented in accordance with the schedule committed to by GSU in the summary report and supplements and accepted by the NRC staff in Section 18.1 i

of SSER 3.

2.

Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, GSU shall implement modifications (installation or upgrade) for those items listed below consistent with the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 unless prior approval of an alternate design of these items is granted by the NRC staff. These items as listed in GSU's letter of June 24, 1985 are:

a) coolant level in the reactor; b) suppression pool water level; c) drywell atmosphere temperature; d) primary system safety relief valve position; e) standby liquid control system storage tank level; f) emergency ventilation damper posithn; and g) airborne radiohalogens and particulates.

3.

E01 shall implement modifications (installations or upgrade) for l ;

neutron flux monitoring consistent with the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 or the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation Report of the BWR Owners Group Licensing Topical Report (NE00-31558, Position on NRC Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 3, Requirements for Post-Accident Neutron Monitoring System). Modifications, if required, shall be completed before restart from the next refueling outage starting after 18 months from the date of receipt of the NRC Staff Evaluation Report on NED0-31558, but no later than startup from refueling outage No. 4 unless otherwise notified in writing by the NRC staff.

Amendment No. 70

1 i

APPENDIX B TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 i

RIVER BEND STATION i

UNIT 1 1

ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.

1 DOCKET NO. 50-458

)

-l ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN (NONRADIOLOGICAL) l t

l l

l j

Amendment No. 70

jo i

JS UNITED STATES p

j

.}

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s

WASHINGTON, D.C. EMIE4001 g

%...../

I SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 70 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 GULF STATES UTILITIES CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE i

RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT I DOCKET NO. 50-458

1.0 INTRODUCTION

)

By letter dated January 13, 1993, as supplemented by letter dated June 29, 1993, Gulf States Utilities (GSU) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-47 for River Bend Station, Unit 1 (River Bend). The proposed amendment involves a change in the River Bend managing agent from Gulf States Utilities to Entergy Operations, Inc. (E01), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation (Entergy). The ownership of GSU will also be transferred to Entergy resulting in GSU becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy. A separate license amendment has been proposed to accomplish the ownership transfer.

2.0 DISCUSSION River Bend is a nuclear powered electric generating facility which is being operated on behalf of the owners, GSU and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative Inc.

(Cajun), pursuant to a Joint Ownership Participation and Operating Agreement (J0POA), submitted to the 'MC by letter dated October 26, 1979.. In accordance with the J0POA, GSU, S. 9lF JiC utility, has acted as the managing agent for the co-owners, with (p m bility for management, operation, and maintenance of River Bend. This wi+.on has been recognized in the operating license.

In June 1992, GSU and Entergy entered into an agreement providing for the-combination of the businesses of their companies.

In accordance with the merger plan, GSU, following the merger, will continue to operate as an electric utility, but as a subsidiary of a new holding company to be named Entergy Corporation with its electric operations fully integrated with those of the Entergy System. Upon consummation of the proposed business combination and subject to the receipt of all necessary approvals, E01, on behalf of the owners, could assume operational and managerial responsibility for River Bend.

Consummation of the proposed merger between GSU and Entergy would occur prior to and would be a condition precedent to'the effectiveness of the amendment to the River Bend operating license as proposed.

l.

E01's agency responsibilities and the lien lions on E01's agency authority with respect to the operation and maintenanct of River Bend will be set forth in an operating agreement between E01 and GSU substantially identical to the existing operating agreements between E01 and the owners of the Entergy System's nuclear facilities. E01 would assume operational and managerial responsibility for River Bend as agent for GSU and would be solely responsible for the safe operation of River Bend. The operating agreement will be subject to the rights of GSU and Cajun under the J0P0A.

Upon consummation of these arrangements and subject to the Reorganization Agreement, substantially all employees of GSU who are presently dedicated to the operation of River Bend (approximately 890 persons) will be transferred to and become employees of E01. The E0I-GSU operating agreement will not affect the ownership of River Bend, E01's services thereunder will be provided at cost, and GSU will retain control over E01's spending and contracting authority and, pursuant to the J0P0A, continue to provide its allocable share of the funds required for the operation, maintenance and decommissioning of River Bend.

In addition, E01 and GSU propose to enter into a related Support Agreement and a Switchyard and Transmission Interface Agreement. Under these agreements, GSU will provide to E01 (1) necessary personnel, supplies and services to support the operation of River Bend and (2) access to and necessary control over the switchyard facilities at River Bend and necessary personnel, supplies, and services pertaining to the operation and maintenance of the associated transmission equipment.

E01 and GSU contemplate that this transition will be initially accomplished by transferring to E01 the existing GSU nuclear personnel with virtually no organizational changes or disruption.

In the near term, there will be ao organizational or physical location changes to the existing dedicated organization, which includes the engineering, maintenance, quality assurance, and licensing organizations supporting River Bend, as a result of the transfer of operating authority to E01. This will achieve continuity in the management of River Bend by allowing E01 to initially assume the role of operator with the same staff that the NRC has previously evaluated and approved in connection with the technical qualifications of GSU. The longer term consolidation of the GSU nuclear organization into E01 will be an evolutionary process.

EDI has committed to keep the NRC informed of organizational changes, as appropriate.

3.0 EVALUATION j

The staff, in making its evaluation, has applied the criteria and review areas required by 10 CFR 50.80." Transfer of Licenses" as appropriate. The review of the transfer of operation of the facility from GSU to E01 was simplified by the fact that the GSU personnel currently acting in all areas as nuclear operations 1

personnel will transfer to E01.

. ~. - _ -

- 1

~

i Manaaement and Technical Qualifications In its application dated January 13, 1993, GSU stated that a change in the River Bend managing agent will not result in changes to the station's technical support organization. GSU has stated that the present River Bend organization, the Oversight organization, the Business Systems organization, and the Engineering and Administration organization will-be transferred essentially intact from GSU to EDI, sub. ject to the terms of the Reorganization Agreement.

The technical qualifications of the proposed River Bend organization, therefore, will be at least equivalent to those of the existing organization.

The only change ir ihe proposed River Bend organization is that the senior nuclear executhe will report directly to the President and Chief Executive Officer of E01. E01, as an operating company for multiple reactors, has a large repositor, of system nuclear operating expertise and experience.

Consolidation of this talent will permit application of expertise in certain l

specialized areas at River Bend.

Integration of River Bend into the E01 organization will also allow more effective communication and use of E01 nuclear operating experience. E0I, with its expanded responsibilities, will also provide a broader base for management candidates experienced in nuclear generation and will provide greater opportunity to attract and retain highly qualified employees.

Acceptance of this change in managing agent is based on the proposed managing agent, E01, being technically qualified to operate the plant and having the necessary managerial and technical resources to provide assistance to the plant staff during normal and off-normal conditions, and in the event of an emergency.

Based on its review of information given in the amendment request the staff has determined that:

(1) The corporate and plant organizational structure and functions for operation and technical support of River Bend Station are acceptable.

(2) The organizational structure described in the amendment request provides for the integrated management of activities that support the operations of River Bend.

(3) The management controls, lines of authority, and channels of communication between the organizational units involved in the management, operation, and technical support for River Bend are acceptable.

These findings support the staff's determination that the proposed managing agent, E01, will have the necessary managerial and technical resources to provide assistance to River Bend staff during normal and off-normal conditions, including an emergency, as specified in Section 13.1.1 of NUREG-0800, " Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants" i

l i

T-w, w

m-op py

--rr--r mw-g--,*

n-wypsw q

w

_4_

(SRP). Moreover, since all GSU nuclear employees will become E01 employees, the staff concludes that the operating organization is acceptable as specified in SRP Section 13.1.2 - 13.1.3.

Financial Considerations EDI is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy, Inc.'(Entergy). E01.isL responsible for operating Entergy's nuclear plants that it owns through three utility subsidiaries: Arkansas Power and Light Company, Louisiana Power and Light Company, and Mississippi Power and Light Company. Because E01 operates plants for these subsidiaries, but neither owns nor uses power from these plants, E01 has no substantial assets of its own., E0I receives payment. for-operating the Entergy nuclear plants through agrcunents with Entergy's utility subsidiaries. These agreements obligate the utility subsidiaries to pay the operating and capital costs associated with the nuclear plants. A similar arrangement would be instituted bet een E01 and GSU when Entergy and GSU complete their merger.

Because of the E01/GSU operating agreement, the financial qualifications of E0I are dependent on GSU's and Cajun's continued ability to pay operating expenses for River Bend as they are currently doing. As such, there are no financial considerations from the proposed transfer of operating responsibility for River Bend beyond those that would pertain to GSU had it kept such-operating responsibility.

Antitrust Considerations E01 will not acquire any ownership interest in River Bend or-the energy provided by River Bend.

In addition, the licensee has proposed in its June 29, 1993, letter a license condition stating that E0l= will not be involved in the marketing or brokering of power or energy from River Bend. Therefore, this amendment raises no issue with respect to antitrust considerations.

Restricted Data The application for amendment does not contain any restricted data or other defense information, and GSU does not expect that any such information will become involved in the licensed activities. However, GSU has committed and E01 agrees that, should such information become involved, it will safeguard any such information and limit access to it until the Office of Personnel Management can investigate, report to the NRC, and NRC approve or disapprove access of individuals to restricted data. The staff finds this-to be_

acceptable and in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.37.

Offsite Power In its application for amendment, GSU has stated there will be no change _ in the arrangements to provide offsite power to the plant as a result of the' change _in operational control requested by the application. GSU has committed to providing offsite power for River Bend.

Procedures and agreements will provide

1 for the continuation of current arrangements for the operation and maintenance of the switchyard for River Bend and associated transmistion facilities. The agreements will also specify that GSU will coordinate with E01 all activities which will directly affect power supply to River Bend. The staff finds this to be acceptable.

Other Areas l

Upon assumption of operating responsibility, E01 will assume ultimate responsibility in the areas of training, engineering support, quality assurance, and security (including the exclusion areas). EDI will assume authority for functions necessary to fulfill the emergency planning j

requirements and GSU will continue to fulfill selective emergency planning functions. The required support will be assured by.a support agreement that will be entered into between GSU and E01 under which GSU will provide personnel, supplies, and services to E0I necessary to support the River Bend emergency plan. GSU has stated that E01 will manage, operate, and maintain River Bend in these areas in accordance with the conditions and requirements i

established by the NRC with respect to Rive Bend and with the same regard for public and personnel safety as_ heretofore exemplified by GSU.

GSU has stated that, except for administrative changes to reflect the role of E0I, the commitments in the River Bend quality assurance program, the River Bend emergency plan, security plan, and training program will'be unaffected, and that this license amendment will not change any of the licensee's regulatory i

4 commitments to the NRC. The staff finds this to be acceptable.

1 License Conditions (a) Administrative Changes Throughout the license, license conditions and other statements are proposed to be modified to reflect E01 as a new licensee and the operator / managing agent for all licensees. These administrative changes, necessary to effect the transfer of operating authority, are acceptable.

(b) Marketing of Energy J

A new license condition (2.C.(3)(b)) relating to the marketing and brokering of energy will be included in the license. This condition results from a commitment from GSU that E01 would not participate in the marketing or brokering of energy. Such a commitment was provided by a letter dated June 2g,1993. The new license condition states:

E01 shall not market or broker power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit 1.

GSU is i

responsible and accountable for the actions of its agent, E01, to the extent said agent's actions affect the marketing or brokering of power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit 1 e

-rmi-

-*-M-f v

W

+-e--+*y?

Taw *p'Jr--'rg-i+'-

%T v- -f wyf*w*

wt7"

. ~

and, in any way, contravene the antitrust conditions of this paragraph or Appendix C of this license.

+

Hearina Contentions on July 7, 1993, the NRC noticed GSU's request for this amendment in'the Federal Reaister (58 FR 36436) and offered an opportunity for interested persons to file petitions to intervene and requests for a hearing. On August 6, 1993, Cajun filed a petition to intervene and request for a hearing.

Cajun supplemented its petition on August 17, 1993. On August 31, 1993, in response to an August 26, 1993 notice in the Federal Reaister that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) had been established for this proposed amendment, Cajun filed seven contentions, which are addressed below. A prehearing conference was held on September 15, 1993, to hear arguments on the petition to intervene and responsive pleadings.

By a filing before the Licensing Board on October 13, 1993, the staff addressed the contentions regarding their admissibility for a hearing. Cajun's contentions and the staff's consideration of their applicability to safety are presented below:

C-1 "The proposed amendments fail to reflect the public interest and interests of co-owners, wholesale customers and customers that may be affected by the outcome of the Cajun and Texas litigation."

Cajun failed to state in its basis what it perceives to be the j

relationship between the proposed amendment and the litigation that it says may bankrupt GSU. While it states that there may be an

" adverse financial impact" from the proposed merger and the litigation, it does not indicate how this alleged impact relates to the safe operation of River Bend.

Based on the information provided i

by Cajun, it appears that the effect of the outcome of the cited litigation would be the same without regard to who owns GSU and who operates River Bend.

C-2 "The proposed amendments may result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety at River Bend."

i Cajun's discussion in support of this contention does not address the margin of safety, but instead discusses funding and the possibility that River Bend might have to shut down because of the unavailability of funds to operate the plant. Cajun's arguments notwithstanding, established safety margins are' contained in the plant technical specifications through the limiting conditions for operation, limiting safety system settings, and safety limits. There will be no change to the technical specifications for River Bend as a result of granting the amendment nor will there be any change to the physical design of the plant. Cajun itself has stated that E01's operation of the plant will enhance safety.

l I

l

_7 l

C-3 "The proposed license amendment cannot be approved without Cajun's consent."

i This particular contention is not one involving safety but one i

involving the contractual ulationship between GSU and Cajun.

Thus, it is not a concern that the NRC staff needs to address in evaluating the effect of the proposed amendment on public health and s

safety.

C-4 "The proposed license amendments will adversely affect Cajun's rights regarding the operation of River Bend."

I With this contention, Cajun listed six " additional detrimental 2

impacts". They are: (1) lack of privity with the operator; (2) right of access to audits and key reporting data; (3) approval of budgets, 1

capital projects, and major undertakings; (4) scheduling of power; (5) administrative, general, and other costs;- and (6). the-assertion that the proposed arrangement. limits liability to actions that-constitute gross negligence or willful misco:ctuct. The rights that Cajun alleges will be adversely affected by EDI operation are a i

combination of economic and contractcal issues not related to any health and safety issues. Thus, the staff-need not consider these concerns in evaluating the'effect of the proposed amendment on public health and safety..

C-5 "The proposed license amendments cannot be approved without certain license conditions."

i i

Cajun offers'no argument to show that granting any of its proposed license conditions will affect the safe operation of the plant.

Rather the proposed license conditions appear to' address economic and contractual concerns of Cajun.

C-6 "The proposed ownership amendment should'be approved only with conditions adequate to remedy its adverse impact on the Cajun /GSU Interconnection Agreement."

The contention is directed toward the transfer of ownership of GSU rather than the change in the operating company for River Bend, which is the subject,of this amendment.

C-7 "The River Bend license conditions must be enforced."

I Cajun specifically identifies License Condition 2.C.(3), Apper. dix C, Condition 10, which requires GSU to transmit power over its system on behalf of utilities engaging in bulk power supply in GSU's service area, and Condition 12, addressing GSU's obligation to' sell power for resale. This contention does not seem to be related to the proposed amendment, but rather requests enforcement of two existing antitrust-l

d i

i s

i l

l.

S~

l i

(-

4 license conditions. An allegation of nonconformance with license-j conditions is properly raised in a petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206.

In summary, the contentions do not address the safe operation of the plant or i

public health and. safety. Thus, there is no need for the ri g f to. discuss f

Cajun's concerns as set forth in its contentions in the st4fDs review of the-3 application.

4.0 FINAL NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION

I GSU's request for this amendment to the operating license for the River Bend, including a proposed determination by the staff of no significant hazards-consideration, was noticed in the Federal Reaister on July 7, 1993 (58 FR 36435). Section 50.92(c) of 10 CFR-includes three standards used by the NRC staff to arrive at a determination that a request for amendment involves no i

significant hazards considerations.

If operation of a facility in accordance l

with the proposed amendment would not-(1) involve a significant increase in the i

probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create :

l 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 i

safety, then the standards for a finding of no significant hazards have been met.

1 GSU addressed the above three standards in the amendment application and determined that the proposed changes do not involve a significant haz4rds i

consideration.

In regard to the three standards, GSU provided the following l

analysis.

i (1) Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amedment would not involve a significant increase in the probability ac consequences of an accident previously eyaluated.

As a result of the proposed license amendment, there will be no physical change to the River Bend facility, and all Limiting

)

i Conditions for Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings, and Safety Limits specified in the Technical Specifications will remain -

unchanged. Also, the River Bend Quality Assurance Program,- Emergency 4

Plan, Security Plan, and Operator _ Training and Requalification Program will be unaffected.

1-i (2) The proposed amendment will not create the possibility' of a-naw or 1

different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated..

i J

The proposed amendment will have no effect on the physical 1

configuration of River Bend or the manner in which-it willsoperate.

The plant design and design basis will remain the same. The current i

l plant safety analyses will therefore remain complete and accurate in addressing the design basis events and in analyzing plant response and consequences. The Limiting Conditions for Operation, Limiting-1 Safety System Settings, and Safety Limits specified in the Technical a

i

-d

--tw-*-

rw- - - -

rr-c-

-w

-ew- * - -sn e-

.- n iv vcw*-

m-v+-ve-+-ev--u-irw ar. w-ow s e-w e e ~ me=

i-wnm-=

ri.g+'.

r eryg ey'wv tv m ~

t I

_g.

.t l

Specifications for River Bend are not affected by the proposed license amendment. As such, the plant conditions for which the design basis accident analyses have been performed will remain valid.

Therefore, the proposed license amendment cannot create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

i l

(3) The proposed amendment will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Plant safety margins are established through Limiting Conditions for Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings, and Safety Limits j

specified in the Technical Specifications. Since there will be no change to the physical design or operation of the plant, there will be no change to any of these margins. Thus, the proposed license amendment will not involve a significant reduction in any margin of-safety.

Comments l

As stated above, by letter dated August 6,1993, as supplemented by letters dated August 17, 1993, and August 31, 1993, Cajun filed comments, a petition to intervene, and a request for a hearing and contentions in response to 'he l

July 7, 1993, notices of consideration and proposed no significant hazards l

determinations.

Four comments on the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination were submitted in the August 6, 1993, letter and the August 17, 1993 letter.

In response to an August 26, 1993, notice in the Federal Reaister that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) had been established for this proposed amendment, Cajun submitted the August 31, 1993, letter, which contained the seven contentions addressed above. To date, the ASLB has not ruled on whether Cajun has standing or whether any of the contentions are admissible.

1 The comments and the staff's evaluation of them regarding applicability to safety and this amendment are presented below:

Comment 1 Cajun raised questions concerning GSU's ability to fund E01's operation of River Bend, the possibility of GSU's having to declare. bankruptcy if a ruling adverse to GSU occurs in pending litigation between GSU and Cajun and the effect of a GSU bankruptucy on GSU's ability to fund River Bend's operation, and the possibility that River Bend may have to be shut down due to-insufficient operating funds. Based on these concerns, Cajun stated that the criteria for a finding of no significant hazards determination have not been met.

These issues are addressed in the responses to Contentions 1 and 2 above.

_ _. _ = _ _

I t

l,.

t Comment 2 1

The proposed amendment transferring operational responsibility to E0I cannot be approved without Cajun's consent.

This comment is addressed in the response to Contention 3 above..

l Comment 3 The proposed amendment transferring operational authority to E01 will adversely '

affect Cajun's rights regarding the operation of River Bend.

This comment is addressed in the response to Contention 4 above.

Coment 4 j

The antitrust license conditions contained in 2.C.(3), Appendix C, Conditions 3

10 and 12 of the River Bend license must be enforced.

This comment is addressed in the response to Contention 7.

l The NRC has considered Cajun's coments and has' concluded that there is nothing in them that would cause the staff to change the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.

Having considered Cajun's coments,.the staff continues to agree with Gulf

~

States Utilities' analysis regarding the no significant hazards consideration determination, and therefore has made a final determination that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

l

5.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Louisiana State official l

was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had t

no comments.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21. 51.32, and 51.35, an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact was published in the Federal Reaister on October 29, 1993 (58 FR 58201). Accordingly, based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has determined that issuance of this amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

i i

\\

I

7.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the J

public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, s

i and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor: Edward T. Baker, PDIV-2/NRR Date: December 16, 1993 l

i 1

l

. ~

r -

l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of

)

)

GULF STATES UTILITIES

)

Docket'No. 50-458 ENTERGY CORPORATION

)

(License No. NPF-47)

ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.

)

)

(River Bend Station, Unit 1)

)

ORDER APPROVING TRANSFERS AND NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF LICENSE AMENDMENTS 1.

On November 20, 1985, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50, License No. NPF-47 was issued, under which Gulf States Utilities Company (GSU) is authorized to operate and hold a 70 percent ownership share in River Bend Station, Unit 1 (River Bend), which is located in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana.

II.

In June 1992, GSU and Entergy Corporation (Entergy) entered into an agreement providing for the combination of the businesses of their companies.

In accordance with the merger plan, GSU, following the merger, will continue l

to operate as an electric utility, but as a subsidiary of a new holding company to be named Entergy Corporation, with its electric operations fully integrated with those of the Entergy System. Upon consummation of the proposed business combination and subject to the receipt of the necessary approvals, Entergy Operations Inc. (EDI), on behalf of the' owners, will assume operations and managerial responsibility for River Bend.

w

1 III.

To implement the business combination, G.iU applied to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for two license amendments to license NPF-47, by two letters dated January 13, 1993, as supplemented by later filings. Under these requested license amendments, the license would reflect the transfer of ownership of GSU to become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy as a result of a merger between GSU and Entergy, and control over the operation of River Bend would be transferred from GSU to E01, another wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy. Notice of.these applications for transfer and proposed no significant hazards consideration determinations were published in the Federal i

Reaister on July 7, 1993 (58 FR 36435 and 58 FR 36436).

IV.

The transfer of rights under license NPF-47 is subject to the NRC's l

approval under 10 CFR 5 50.80. Based on information provided by GSU and' Entergy, and other information before the Commission, it is determined that

{

the proposed transfer of the control of operations of River Bend from GSU to E01, and the proposed transfer of ownership of GSU to Entergy, subject to the conditions set forth herein, are in the public. interest and are consistent-with the applicable provisions of law, regulations and orders issued by the Commission. These actions were evaluated by the staff as documented in Safety 4

Evaluations, dated ~ December 16, 1993, which contain final no significant hazards consideration determinations. The conditions of the transfer, to which GSU has not objected, are:

,o 2.C.(3)

Antitrust Conditions a.

GSU shall comply with the antitrust license conditions set forth in Appendix C, attached hereto and incorporated in this license.

b.

E01 shall not market or broker power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit 1.

GSU is responsible and accountable for the actions of its agent, E01, to the extent said agent's actions affect the marketing or brokering of power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit I and, in any way, contravene the antitrust conditions of this paragraph or Appendix C of this license.

I 2.C.(16)

Mercer Related Reports GSU shall inform the Director, NRR:

a.

Sixty days prior to a transfer (excluding grants of security interests or liens) from GSU to Entergy or any other entity of facilities for the production, transmission or distribution of electric energy having a depreciated book value exceeding one percent (1%) of GSU's consolidated net utility plant, as recorded on GSU's books of account.

1 i

-4 b.

Of an award of damages in litigation initiated against GSU by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative regarding River Bend within 30 days of the award.

V.

Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 103, 105, 161b, 1611, and 187 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2201 et seq. and 10 CFR Part 50, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the transfers to Entergy Corporation and Entergy Operations Inc., discussed above, are approved, and NOTICE IS GIVEN that license amendments providing for the transfer of control of operation of River Bend to E01, subject to the license conditions set out and herein, and the transfer of ownership of GSU to Entergy are issued, and both amendments being subject to the further conditions that should both of these transfers not be completed by June 14, 1994 this order will be null and void, except that for good cause shown, the date upon which the transfers are to be completed may be extended for a short period beyond June 14, 1994 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

%^^ T AU Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 16th day of December 1993

p*"%

m, i

UNITED STATE 3 i

i y

i j

j-

,j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~*

WASHINGTON. D.C. 3DUIE4001 a,'

\\...../

December 16, 1993 Docket No. 50-458 Gulf States Utilities ATTN: Mr. John R. McGaha Vice President - River Bend Nuclear Group Post Office Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775

SUBJECT:

RIVER BEND STATION, UNIT 1 - AMENDMENT NO. 69 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 (TAC NO. M85673) l The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 69 to 1

Facility Operating License No. NPF-47 for the River Bend Station, Unit 1.

The l

amendment consists of changes to the license in response to your application dated January 13, 1993, as supplemented by letter dated October 18, 1993.

I l

The amendment revises the River Bend Station, Unit 1 operating license to l

reflect a change in ownership of Gulf States Utilities (GSU). GSU, which owns a 70 percent undivided interest in the River Bend Station, will become a wholly-owned subsidiary company of Entergy Corporation.

The transfer of any right under the operating license is subject to NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80(a). Such approval is given in the enclosed 1

Order Approving Transfer of License, which is being forwarded to the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

In addition to the changes requested in your applict, tion, the amendment corrects an error the staff found during the review of the requested changes.

At the time Amendment No. I was issued, Cajun Electric Power Cooperative was mistakenly not included as a licensee and the footnote stating GSU is t

authorized to act as agent for Cajun was also not included. A review of the docket failed to reveal a basis for removing this information from the license. Therefore, this amendment corrects that error.

Mr. John R. McGaha.

l A copy of our Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Comission's biweekly Federal Reaister notice, i

i Sincerely, j

Edward T. Baker, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1

Enclosures:

1.

Amendment No. 69 to NPF-47 i

i 2.

Safety Evaluation 3.

Order cc w/ enclosures:

See next page I

l i

Mr. John R. McGaha l cc w/ enclosures:

Winston & Strawn Mr. Harold W. Keiser ATTN: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.

Executive Vice President and 1400 L Street, N.W.

Chief Operating Officer i

Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 Entergy Operations, Inc.

P.- 0. Box 31995 i

Mr. Les England Jackson, Mississippi 39286 Director - Nuclear Licensing Gulf States Utilities Company Mr. Michael. B. Sellman St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 Plant Manager River Bend Station i

Mr. Philip G. Harris Post Office Box 220 i

Cajun Electric Power Coop, Inc.

St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 j

10719 Airline Highway P. O. Box 15540 Mr. James J. Fisicaro Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70895 Manager - Safety Assessment and Quality l

Verification Senior Resident Inspector Gulf States Utilities Company P. O. Box 1051 Post Office Box 220 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 i

i President of West Feliciana i

Police Jury P. O. Box 1921 St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775 i

Regional Administrator, Region IV I

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j

611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Mr. J. David McNeill, III William G. Davis, Esq.

Department of Justice Attorney General's Office j

P. O. Box 94095 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804-9095 Ms. H. Anne Plettinger 3456 Villa Rose Drive i

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806 1

Administrator i

Louisiana Radiation Protection Division

-l P. O. Box 82135 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2135 i

M i

causg l

k UNITED STATES f

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

g w AsMiwoTom p.c.mus u oot g

+*****/

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE l

DOCKET NO. 50-458 t

RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT 1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE i

Amendment No. 69 License No. NPF-47 l

1.

The Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) has found that:

A.

The application for amendment by Gulf States Utilities * (GSU) dated January 13, 1993, as supplemented by letter. dated October 18, 1993, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic. Energy l

Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Comission's rules and l

+

regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I;-

B.

The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission, C.

There is reasonable assurance:

(i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health i

and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be 4

conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulationsi l

D.

The issuance of this license amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the i

public; and E.

The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have teen satisfied.

2.

Accordingly, Facility Operating License No. NPF-47 is hereby amended to read as follows:**

l

• Gulf States Utilities Company is authorized to act as agent for Cajun Electric Power Cooperative and has exclusive responsibility and control over

'a the physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.

• • Pages 1, 6, and 7 are attached, for convenience, for the composite license to reflect these changes. Please remove pages 1 and 6 of the existing license and replace with the attached pages and add page 7.

(a) Add footnote ** on page 1 of the license to read:

" Gulf States Utilities Company, which owns a 70 percent undivided interest in River Bend, has merged with a wholly owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation. Gulf States Utilities Company was the surviving company in the merger."

(b) Paragraph 2.C.(16) shall be added as a new condition.

(16) Meraer Related Reports i

GSU shall inform the Director, NRR:

(a) Sixty days prior to a transfer (excluding grants of security interests or liens) from GSU to Entergy or any other entity of facilities for the production, transmission or distribution of electric energy having a depreciated book value exceeding one percent (1%) of GSU's consolidated net utility plant, as recorded on GSU's books of account.

l (b) Of an award of damages in litigation initiated

+

against GSU by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative regarding River Bend within 30 days of the award.

l (c) The last page of the license shall be marked " Revised:

December 16, 1993."

3.

This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance, and shall be implemented within 180 days.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e.h4 Suzanne. Black, Director Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Pages 1, 6, and 7 of Facility Operating License No. NPF-47 Date of Issuance: December 16, 1993

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 69 l

TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 DOCKET NO. 50-458 Replace the following pages of the License with the attached pages. The revised pages contain vertical lines indicating the areas of change.

t Remove Pace Insert Pace t

1 1

l 6

6 7

s h

r 1

i i

i l

j i

,a

i

wun,

~

4 UNITED STATES y

y j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I

f WASHINGTON, D.C. M

%,,, g +

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY **

CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE DOCKET NO. 50-458 l

RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT 1 l

FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE License No. NPF-47 1.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or the NRC) has found i

that:

A.

The application for license filed by Gulf States Utilities Company

• I (GSU), acting on behalf of itself and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Comission's j

regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I, and all required i

notifications to other agencies or bodies have been duly made; B.

Construction of the River Bend Station, Unit 1 (the facility) has been substantially completed in conformity with Construction Permit No. CPPR-145 and the application, as amended, the provisions of the l

Act and the regulations of the Comission; C.

The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the regulations of the Commission; j

D.

There is reasonable assurance:

(1) that the activities authorized i

by this operating license can be conducted without endangering the

{

health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will i

be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations set i

i forth in 10 CFR Chapter I-E.

Gulf States Utilities Company is technically qualified to engage in i

the activities authorized by this operating license in accordance l

with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I, F.

Gulf States Utilities Company and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative have satisfied the applicable provisions of 10 CFR Part 140,

" Financial Protection Requirements and Indemnity Agreements," of the Commission's regulations; G.

The issuance of this license will not be inimical'to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; i

i

• Gulf States Utilities Company is authorized to act as agent for Cajun i

Electric Power Cooperative and has exclusive responsibility and control.

over the physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.

• • Gulf States Utilities Company, which owns a 70 percent undivided interest in River Bend, has merged with a wholly owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation.

i Gulf States Utilities Company was the surviving company in the merger.

Amendment No.-69 I

- l f

~

(16) Mercer Related Reoorts GSU shall inform the Director, NRR:

a.

Sixty days prior to a transfer (excluding grants of i

security interests or liens) from GSU to Entergy or any other entity'of facilities for the production, transmission or distribution of electric energy having a depreciated book value exceeding one percent (1%) of GSU's consolidated net utility plant, as recorded on GSU's books of account.

b.

Of an award of damages in litigation initiated against GSU' by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative.regarding River Bend

-i within 30 days of the award.

l D.

GSU shall fully implement' and main' tain in effect all provisions of the Commission-approved physical security, guard training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans including l amendments j

made pursuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous Amendments.and Search j

-Requirements revisions to 10 CFR 73.55-(51 FR 27817 and 27822) and to~

the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The. plans, which I

contain Safeguards Information protected under 10'CFR 73.21, are i

entitled:

" River Bend Physical Security Plan," with revisions i

submitted through November 6, 1987; " River Bend Station Guard Training j

and Qualification Plan," with revisions submitted through December 16, 1986; and " River Bend Station Safeguards Contingency Plan," with-revisions submitted through January 27, 1987. ' Changes made in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55 shall be implemented in accordance with the schedule set forth therein.

E.

Except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications or 4

Environmental Protection Plan, GSU shall-report any violations of the requirements contained in Section 2.C of this. license in the following manner:

initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System with written followup within thirty days in accordance with the procedures described'in 10 CFR 50.73(b), (c), and (e).

F.

The licensees shall have and maintain financial protection of such type and in'such amounts as the Commission shall require in accordance with Section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to cover public liability claims.

i Amendment No. 69

_,,.....,_,,,j

't i G.

This license is effective as of the date of issuance and shall expire at midnight on August 29, 2025.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION Original Signed By Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1.

Attachments 1-5 2.

Appendix A - Technical Specifications (NUREG-1172) 3.

Appendix B - Environmental Protection Plan 4.

Appendix C - Antitrust Conditions j

Date of Issuance: November 20, 1985 Revised: December 16, 1993 l

l i

Amendment No. 69

g afog k

UNITED STATES.

y 4

S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E

WASHINGTON. D.C. 200EHOO1 N.....]

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 69 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 GULF STATES UTILITIES RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT I-DOCKET NO. 50-458

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated January 13, 1993, Gulf States Utilities Company (GSU) submitted a request for an amendment to the operating license for River Bend Station, Unit 1 (River Bend). The proposed amendment reflects a transfer of ownership of GSU to become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation (Entergy) as a result of a merger between GSU and Entergy. A second license i

amendment has been proposed to accomplish the transfer of operating authority from GSU to another Entergy subsidiary, Entergy Operations, Inc. (E01).

GSU is currently a publicly traded company, the common stock of which is widely held.

Following consummation of the merger, Entergy will be the sole holder of GSU's common stock, with GSU's current common shareholders receiving cash or common stock of the new holding company. GSU will retain its 70 percent ownership in River Bend and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative Inc.

(Cajun) will retain its 30 percent ownership share.

2.0 EVALUATION The proposed license amendment would add a footnote to paragraph 1.A of the operating license to reflect the merger of GSU and a subsidiary of Entergy.

The amendment does not involve a request for any_ change to the design or operation of the facility, nor to the. existing Technical Specifications. -The~

requested license amendment will introduce no change in the: numbers; qualifications, or organizational affiliation of personnel who operate River q

Bend.

Under the terms of the proposed merger, GSU would continue to operate as a utility, but by transfer of its common stock to Entergy, GSU will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy. Ownership of River Bend will remain unchanged, with GSU retaining its 70 percent undivided ownership interest in the facility and Cajun retaining its 30 percent undivided ownership interest.

Financial Oualifications Review Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80(a), "No license for a production.or utilization facility, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, assigned, or.in any manner disposed of either voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license to any person, unless

the Commission shall give its consent in writing " Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80(b), an application for transfer of a license should include, among other things, information on the financial qualifications of the transferee.

The transferee, Entergy, is a public utility holding company with four operating utility subsidiaries: Arkansas Power and Light Company, Louisiana Power and Light Company, Mississippi Power and Light Company, and New Orleans Public Service, Inc. Through these subsidiaries, Entergy generates, transmits, and distributes electricity for wholesale and retail sale to more than 1.7 million customers in parts of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Missouri. GSU, the transferor, generates, transmits, and distributes electricity for wholesale and retail customers. Combining GSU's service territory with Entergy's would create a large contiguous area with opportunities for bulk power transfers and a potential to reduce overhead and increase efficiency within the combined system.

Enterav's Financial Oualifications Entergy is in stable but average financial condition compared to other electric utilities.

In 1992, Entergy realized electric operating revenues of

$4.04 billion, an increase from $3.97 billion in 1991 and $3.89 billion in 1990. After expenses, Entergy realized net income of $438 million in 1992, a decrease from $484 million in 1991 and $478 million in 1990.

Entergy's " times interest earned" ratio has remained steady at approximately 2.4 during the past three years. This ratio is used by financial analysts to evaluate the ability of a company to pay interest on long-term debt. Any ratio above 1.5 is generally considered acceptable.

Entergy's return on common equity was 9.8 percent in 1993, down from 10.9 percent in 1991 and 11.6 percent in 1990.

This is below the average return for most financially healthy utilities but is not seriously deficient.

F Since 1990, Entergy has improved its capital structure.

In 1992, its capital structure consisted of 41.5 percent common equity and 51.7 percent long-term debt. This improved from 38 percent and 56 percent for equity and long-term debt, respectively, in 1990. Although Entergy's proportion of equity is relatively weak, it is adequate and does not indicate excessive leverage (i.e., reliance on debt).

Moody's has rated Entergy's long-term debt through its subsidiaries: Arkansas Power and Light Company - Baa2; Mississippi Power and Light Company - Baa3; and Louisiana Power and Light Company - Ba3. These ratings are in the lowest category of investment-grade except for Louisiana Power and Light, which is i

below investment grade but is not apparently adversely affecting Entergy's overall financial health.

For cash flow, Entergy generated $842 million in 1992, $856 million in 1991, and $870 million in 1990. Although this indicates a downward trend in cash i

flow, Entergy continues to generate substantial funds to pay nuclear-related expenses beyond those currently covered and after cash payments of up to $250 million related to the merger are made.

[

1 In summary, Entergy has average financial health. This conclusion is-consistent with The Value Line Investment Survey (July 16, 1993, p.714) that rated Entergy average for financial safety.

GSU's Financial Qualifications 1

~

GSU's financial situation remains below average compared to other utilities, although it has improved over the last three years.- GSU realized electric j

operating revenues of $1.69 billion in 1992, $1.62 billion.in 1991, and $1.60 billion in 1990. GSU's net income rose to $128 million.in 1992 from $102 million in 1991 and a $44 million loss in 1990.

GSU's " times interest earned" ratio was 1.7 in 1992, which exceeds the generally minimally acceptable level of 1.5.

GSU's return on common equity was 4.0 percent in 1992, 1.9 percent in 1991, and -2.3 percent in 1990. -These returns are well below the utility average and have:probably caused GSU difficulty in attracting equity capital.

Since 1990, GSU has maintained an essentially constant position in equity as 40.3 percent of total capital. Long-term debt has' increased as a percentage of total capital from 45.8 percent in 1990, to 47.9 percent in 1991, to 51.7 percent in 1992. Although GSU relies more than the electric utility average on long-term debt with its corresponding interest obligations, these percentages do not indicate excessive leverage.

t GSU's latest long-term debt rating from Moody's Public Utility News Reports (July 6,1993) was Baa2. This is the middle of Moody's lowest investment-grade rating category and remains satisfactory.

For cash flow, GSU generated $158.5 million in 1992, $257.8 million in 1991,.

I and $275.6 million in 1990. Although this represents a decline over the 3-year period, GSU has adequate cash flow to pay nuclear-related expenses beyond 1

those currently covered.

A major contingent expense could result from litigation initiated against GSU

]

by Cajun, a 30 percent owner of River Bend. Cajun is seeking recovery of $1.6 billion in River Bend investment costs from GSU.

If a court finds GSU liable for this amount, or a substantial portion of it, GSU would have insufficient assets to pay the judgement. GSU then would most likely be forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

Filing for bankruptcy protection is a potentially serious development that '

could adversely affect GSU's financial qualifications to own River Bend.

However, a judgement in favor of Cajun covH occur whether or not the proposed merger is consummated. Under the terms M the merger, GSU would continue to own its 70 percent share of River Bend and would also continue to operate as an electric utility. Although Entergy, as parent to GSU, would lose much of the value of its investment in GSU if Cajun's suit were successful, it is not clear that other Entergy assets would become vulnerable in a GSU bankruptcy 1

proceeding. Although Entergy would be hurt financially, it should be able to survive and adequately support the safety of its reactor operations (i.e.,

.7

,r,,

m..

y r,,,,,,,

-n ews.y,,-,,n.,,,,.ir._,,,,.,.,

~

l 4-j

~

Entergy would lose its maximum $250 million cash investment in GSU and'its i

stockholders would suffer equity dilution). For these reasons, the staff does i

i not consider the potential for a large judgement against GSU as a result of the Cajun litigation to be a substantial factor in the financial qualifications review of the merger application.

Conclusion Both GSU and Entergy are financially qualified to own or operate the River Bend unit. As Entergy has indicated, GSU will remain a broad-based electric utility with generation,. transmission, and distribution capabilities.

l However, because the staff finding is based on GSU retaining its asset base,

~

this conclusion would be subject to re-review if either GSU's financial situation changes significantly as a result of.the Cajun litigation or if l

Entergy transfers significant assets from GSU to itself or other subsidiaries.

1 The staff, therefore, has imposed a license condition which requires GSU to inform the NRC if adverse results cccur from either situation.

l l

License Condition A new license condition (2.C.16) relating to. reporting changes.in the financial qualifications of GSU results from an NRC staff request. A

~

commitment from the licensee was provided in a letter dated October 18, 1993.

The new license condition states:

j (c) Mercer Related Reports

.GSU shall inform the Director, NRR:

(a) Sixty days prior to a transfer (excluding' grants of security I

interest or liens) from GSU to Entergy or.any other entity of facilities for the production, transmission or distribution of electric energy having a depreciated book value exceeding one percent (1%) of GSU's consolidated net utility plant, as l

recorded on GSU's books of account, and l

(b) Of an award of damages in litigation initiated against GSU by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative regarding River Bend within 30 i

days of the award.

3.0 HEARING CONTENTIONS On July 7,1993, the NRC noticed GSU's request for this amendment in the Federal Reaister (58 FR 36435) and offered an opportunity for interested l

persons to file petitions to intervene and requests for a hearing. On

'l August 6, 1993, Cajun filed a petition to intervene and request for a hearing.

Cajun supplemented its petition on August 17, 1993. On August 31, 1993, in response to an August 26, 1993 notice in the Federal Reaister that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB)' had been established for this proposed l

l 1

-~

~.

t t

amendment, Cajun filed seven contentions, which are addressed below. A prehearing conference was held on September 15, 1993, to hear arguments on the petition to intervene. and responsive pleadings.

By a filing before the Licensing Board on October 13, 1993, the staff l

addressed the contentions regarding their admissibility for a hearing.

l Cajun's contentions and the staff's consideration of their applicability to safety are presented below:

l C-1 "The proposed amendments fall to reflect the public interest and interests of co-owners, wholesale customers and customers that may be affected by the outcome of the Cajun and Texas litigation."

Cajun failed to state in its basis what it perceives to be the relationship between the proposed amendment and the litigation that it says may bankrupt GSU. While it states that there may be an

" adverse financial impact" from the proposed merger and the litigation, it does not indicate how this alleged impact relates to the safe operation of River Bend. Based on the.information provided by Cajun, it appears that the effect of the outcome of the cited litigation would be the same without regard to who owns GSU and who operates River Bend.

C-2 "The proposed amendments may result in a significant reduction in~

the margin of safety at River Bend."

Cajun's discussion in support of this contention does not address.

margin of safety, but instead discusses funding and the possibility that River Bend might have to shut down because of the unavailability of funds to operate the plant. Cajun's arguments notwithstanding, established safety margins are contained in the plant technical specifications through the limiting conditions for l

operation, limiting safety system settings, and safety-limits.

t There will be no change to the technical specifications for River Bend as a result of granting the amendment nor will there be any change to the physical design of the plant. Cajun itself has stated that the merger with Entergy and E01's operation of the plant will enhance safety.

C-3 "The proposed license amendment cannot be approved without Cajun's consent."

This particular contention is not one involving safety but one involving the contractual relationship between GSU'and Cajun. Thus, it is not a concern that the NRC staff needs to address in evaluating the effect of the proposed amendment on public health and safety.

-y y

pg-+p-,-w

-qp 9

9 et-,--%

w

l t

i i

C-4 "The proposed license amendments will adversely affect Cajun's

-i rights regarding the operation of River Bend."

l With this contention, Cajun listed lx " additional" detrimental I

impacts. They are:

(1) lack of-prsvity with the operator; (2).

right of access to audits and key reporting data;-(3) approval of

.i budgets, capital projects, and major undertakings;-(4) scheduling of power; (5) administrative, general, and other costs; and (6) the assertion that the proposed arrangement limits liability to actions i

that constitute gross negligence or willful misconduct. -The rights j

that Cajun alleges will be adversely affected by E0I operation are a i

combination of economic and contractual issues not related to any health and safety issues. Thus, the staff need.not consider these concerns in evaluating the effect of the proposed amendment on public health and safety.

[

C-5 "The proposed license amendments cannot be approved without certain l

license conditions."

Cajun offers no argument to show that granting any of its proposed-license conditions will affect the safe operation of the plant.

Rather the proposed license conditions appear to address economic and contractual concerns of Cajun.

C-6 "The proposed ownership amendment should be approved only with j

conditions adequate to remedy its adverse impact on the Cajun /GSU Interconnection Agreement."

This particular contention is not one involving safety but one involving the contractual relationship between GSU and Cajun. Thus,

[

it is not a concern that the NRC staff needs to address in evaluating the effect of the proposed amendment on public health and i

j safety.

l C-7 "The River Bend license conditions must be enforced."

Cajun specifically idertifies License Condition 2.C.(3), Appendix C, j

condition 10 which requires GSU to transmit power over its system on i

behalf of utilities engaging in bulk power supply in GSU's service i

area, and Condition 12 addressing GSU's obligation to sell power for resale. This contention does not seem to be related to the proposed amendment, but rather requests enforcement.of two existing antitrust i

license conditions. An allegation of nonconformance with license l

conditions is properly raised in a petition pursuant to 10 CFR

.j 2.206.

i

?

1

J..

In summary, the contentions do not address the safe operation of the plant or public health and safety. Thus, there is no nerJ for the staff to discuss Cajun's concerns as set forth in its contentions in the staff's review of the application.

4.0 FINAL NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION

The licensee's request for this amendment to the operating license for River Bend, including a proposed determination by the staff of no significant hazards consideration, was noticed in the Federal Recister on July 7, 1993 (58 FR 36435). Section 50.92(c) of 10 CFR includes three standards used by the NRC staff to arrive at a determination that a request for amendment involves no significant hazards considerations.

If operation of r. 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, then the standards for a finding of no significant hazards have been met.

GSU addressed the above three standards in the amendment application and determined that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration.

In regard to the three standards, GSU provided the following analysis.

(1) Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

As a result of the proposed license amendment, there will be no physical change to the River Bend facility, and all Limiting Conditions for Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings and Safety Limits specified in the technical specifications will remain unchanged. Also, the River Bend Quality Assurance Prograth, i

Emergency Plan, Security Flan, and Operator Training and Requalification Program will be unaffected.

(2) The proposed amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

The proposed amendment will have no effect on the physical configuration of River Bend or the manner in which it will operate.

The plant design and design basis will remain the same. The current plant safety analyses will therefore remain complete and accurate in addressing the design basis events and in analyzing plant response and consequences. The Limiting Conditions for Operation, limiting Safety System Settings and Safety Limits specified in the technical specifications for River Bend are not affected by the proposed license amenc e.t.

As such, the plant conditions for which the design basis accident analyses have been performed will remain l

i i

valid. Therefore, the proposed license amendment cannot create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident l

previously evaluated.

l (3) The proposed amendment will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

j Plant safety margins are established through Limiting Conditions for I

Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings and Safety Limits j

4 specified in the technical specifications. Since there will be no change to the physical design or operation of the plant, there will be no change to any of these margins. -Thus, the proposed license amendment will not involve a significant reduction in any margin of l

i safety.

i By letter dated August 6,1993, as supplemented by a letter dated August 17, 1993, Cajun filed four comments in response to the July 7, 1993, notices of consideration and proposed no significant hazards determinations.

l The comments and the staff's evaluation of them regarding applicability to safety and this amendment are presented below i

Comment 1 Cajun raised questions concerning GSU's ability to fund E01's operation of_-

River Bend, the possibility of GSU having to declare bankruptcy if a ruling i

adverse to GSU occurs in pending litigation between GSU and Cajun and its i

effect on GSU's ability to fund River Bend's operation, and the possibility that River Bend may have to be shutdown due to insufficient operating funds.

Based on these concerns, Cajun stated that the criteria for a finding of no significant hazards determination have not been met.

j I

These issues are addressed in the responses to contentions 1 and 2 above.

Comment 2

.l The proposed amendment transferring operational responsibility to E01 cannot be approved without Cajun's consent.

The transfer of operational responsibility is not the subject of this amendment.

Comment 3 The proposed amendment transferring operational authority to EDI will adversely affect Cajun's rights regarding the operation of River Bend.

The transfer of operational authority is not the subject of this ' amendment.

. -. -~..

1

1

_g.

i Comment 4 The antitrust license conditions contained in 2.C.(3), Appendix C, Conditions i

10 and-12 of the River Bend license must be enforced.

This comment is addressed in the response to Contention 7.

]

In addition to the four comments, in the August 6, 19g3,. letter Cajun i

requested a hearing be conducted prior to a final no significant hazards l

consideration determination. With regard to that concern, 10 CFR 50.91(a)(4) l addresses staff actions in the event public comments or a request for a.

hearing are received. Specifically, it states, "Where the Commission makes a j

final determination that no significant hazards consideration is involved and that the amendment should be issued, the emdment will be effective upon issuance, even if adverse public comments have been received'and even if an interested person meeting the provision called for in 2.714 of this chapter has filed a request for a hearing. The Commission need hold any required hearing only after it issues an amendment, unless it~ determines that a l

significant hazards consideration is involved in which case the Commission j

9 will provide an opportunity for a prior hearing."

The NRC has considered Cajun's comments and has concluded that there is nothing in them that would cause the staff to change the proposed no l

s,ificant hazards consideration determination.

l For these reasons, and those given by the licensee, the staff agrees with the licensee's determination, and therefore has made a final determination that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

4.0 ANTITRUST EVALUATION i

Pursuant to Section 105c of the Atomic Energy' Act of 1954, and the i

Commission's Rules and Regulations, the staff conducted a review to determine j

l whether significant competitive changes have occurred in the licensee's l

activities since the previous antitrust operating license review.

j i

Pursuant to procedures set forth by the Commission in delegating authority to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and the Director of i

the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, as appropriate, the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has made a finding that as a result of the proposed merger, no significant antitrust changes have occurred since the operating license antitrust review of River Bend.

The Director's finding was published ir. the Federal Reaister' on October 20, 1993, (58 FR 54175) and provided for requests for reevaluation of the finding by November 19, 1993 Requests to rcevaluate the Director's finding, dated j

November 19, 1993, werti receiv d from counsel representing the City of Lafayette, Louisiana, Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government, Louisiana Energy and Power Authority, and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.

i t

i

-.,,_,,.~,,.-,-._-,s

Reviews of post-operating license amendment applications involving changes in licensees have included an antitrust review by the staff and consultation with the Attorney General. The antitrust review by the staff focuses on significant changes in the licensee's activities since the most recent antitrust review of the facility in question. The staff applied the criteria established by the Commission in its Summer decision in reaching its No Significant Change Finding for River Bend.

The concerns raised by the City of Lafayette, Louisiana, Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government, Louisiana Energy and Power Authority, and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. in the Requests for Reevaluation were thoroughly considered by the staff in its initial evaluation of competitive changes resulting from the proposed merger between GSU and Entergy. The information provided by the City of Lafayette, Louisiana, Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government, Louisiana Energy and Power Authority, and Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. does not identify any new competitive concerns or any data that were overlooked by the staff in its initial review of the proposed merger. Consequently, it is the determination of the staff that the criteria established by the Commission to substantiate a "significant change" have not been met.

The Commission's Rules and Regulations (2.101(e)(3)) for reviewing antitrust issues prior to issuing an operating license provide for a thirty day period in which the Commission can review a reevaluation of a "significant change" determination.

For antitrust reviews occurring after issuance of the operating license, it has been the staff's practice to provide a thirty day period for Commission review. However, in this particular case, the staff recommended the Commission inform the staff by December 17, 1993, whether they would exercise iua soonte review. This only provided a nine day review period in an attempt to meet GSU's request to complete the merger by the end of the calendar year. The Director has determined that he will not change his finding that no "significant change" has occurred. The Director's reevaluation was published in the Federal Register on December 13, 1993 (58 FR 65200) ;,nd became final NRC action on December 16, 1993, with the Commission's netision not to exercise sua sconte review.

5.0 STATE CON 3ULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Louisiana State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21. 51.32, and 51.35, an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact was published in the Federal Reaister on i

October 29, 1993 (58 FR 58202). Accordingly, based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has determined that issuance of this amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

~.

7.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

l Principal Contributor: Edward T. Baker, PDIV-2, NRR l

Date: December 16, 1993 1

i

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i

NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0lEISSION In the Matter of

)

)

GULF STATES UTILITIES

)

Docket No. 50-458 ENTERGY CORPORATION

)

(License No. NPF-47)

ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.

)

)

(River Bend Station, Unit I)

)

ORDER APPROVING TRANSFERS AND NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF LICENSE AMENDMENTS 1.

On November 20, 1985, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50, License No. NPF-47 was issued, under which Gulf States Utilities Company (GSU) is authorized to j

operate and hold a 70 percent ownership share in River Bend Station, Unit I (River Bend), uhich is located in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana.

II.

In June 1992, GSU and Entergy Corporation (Entergy) entered into an agreement providing for the combination of the businesses of their companies.

In accordance with the merger plan, GSU, following the merger, will continue to operate as an electric utility, but as a subsidiary of a new holding company to be named Entergy Corporation, with its electric operations fully integrated with those of the Entergy System. Upon consummation of the proposed business combination and subject to the receipt of the necessary approvals, Entergy Operations Inc. (E01), on behalf of the owners, will assume operations and managerial responsibility for River Bend.

~

, l t

i III.

To implement the business combination, GSU applied to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.(NRC) for_ two license amendments to license NPF-47, by i

two letters dated January 13, 1993, as supplemented by later filings. Under-these requested license amendments, the license would reflect the transfer of ownership of GSU to become a wholly-owned subsidiary'of Entergy as n' result of a merger between GSU and Entergy, and control over the operation of River Bend would be transferred from GSU to E01, another wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy. Notice of these applications for transfer and proposed no significant hazards consideration determinations were published in the Federal Reaister on July 7, 1993 (58 FR 36435 and 58 FR 36436).

IV..

The transfer of rights under license NPF-47 is subject to the NRC's approval under 10 CFR 6 50.80. Based on information provided by GSU and Entergy, and other information before the Commission, it is determined that the proposed transfer of the control of operations of River Bend from GSU to EDI, and the proposed transfer of ownership of GSU to Entergy, subject to the conditions set forth herein, are in the public interest and are consistent with the applicable provisions of law, regulations and orders issued by the j

Commission. These actions were evaluated by the staff as documented in Safety Evaluations, dated December 16, 1993, which contain final no significant hazards consideration determinations. The conditions of the transfer, to which GSU has not objected, are:

1 2.C.(3)

Antitrust Conditions

)

a.

GSU shall comply with the antitrust license. conditions i

set forth in Appendix C, attached hereto and incorporated in this license.

b.

E01 shall not market or broker power or energy from River Bend Station, Unit 1.

GSU is responsible and accountable for the actions of its agent, E01, to the extent said agent's actions affect the marketing or brokering of power or energy.from River Bend Station, Unit I and, in any way, contravene the antitrust conditions of this paragraph or Appendix C of this license.

2.C.(16)

Mercer Related Reports GSU shall inform the Director, NRR:

t a.

Sixty days prior to a transfer (excluding grants of security interests or liens) from GSU to Entergy or any i

other entity of facilities for the production, transmission or distribution of electric energy having a depreciated book value exceeding one percent' (1%) of GSU's consolidated net utility plant, as recorded on GSU's books of account.

i l

i

,,, ~

.~.-,.-.,n.

\\

- i b.

Of an award of damages in litigation initiated against GSU by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative regarding River Bend within 30 days of the award.

1 V.

Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 103, IDE,161b,1611, and 187 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2201 et seq. and 10 CFR Part 50, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the transfers to Entergy Corporation and Entergy Operations Inc., discussed above, are approved, and NOTICE IS GIVEN that license amendments providing for the transfer of control of operation of River Bend to E01, subject to the license conditions set out and hersin, and the transfer of ownership of GSU to Entergy are issued, and both amendments being subject to the further conditions that should both of these transfers not be completed by June 14, 1994 this order will be null and void, except that for good cause shown, the date upon which the transfers are to be completed may be extended for a short period beyond June 14, 1994 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fRL Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Rockville, Maryland this if,th day of December 1993