[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 94 (Thursday, May 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26829-26831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12735]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-305]
Wisconsin Public Service Company; Wisconsin Power and Light
Company; Madison Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment To Facility Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
DPR-43 issued to Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Wisconsin Power
and Light Company, and Madison Gas and Electric Company (the licensee),
for operation of the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, located in Kewaunee
County, Wisconsin.
The proposed amendment would change the main steam isolation valve
(MSIV) closure time assumption referenced in the Basis for Technical
Specification (TS) 4.7.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR
[[Page 26830]]
50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment would not: (1) Involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; (2)
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
The proposed changes were reviewed in accordance with the
provisions of 10 CFR 50.92 to determine that no significant hazards
exist. The proposed changes will not:
1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The closure time for the (MSIVs) is not an accident initiator.
The surveillance requirement for the MSIVs will remain unchanged.
Therefore, this change will not increase the probability of
occurrence of an accident previously evaluated.
The main steam line break (MSLB) accident analysis has many
conservative input assumptions. The 10 second MSIV closure value is
overly conservative. This value can be reduced to a value greater
than or equal to the value required by TS 4.7 and will still be a
conservative value with regard to actual closure times expected.
Changing the analysis input assumptions will result in less severe
analytical consequences, but does not change the underlying accident
progression. Therefore, this change will not increase the
consequences of an accident previously analyzed.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
This change revises a specified analysis assumption for MSIV
closure in the Basis for TS 4.7. Changing the closure time allowed
for analysis purposes will not create a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The MSLB accident analysis employs several conservative input
assumptions. The revised assumption for the MSIVs is conservative
with respect to actual valve performance. The surveillance test
results for the MSIVs over the past 10 years, a total of 53 tests,
revealed that the MSIVs close within 3-4 seconds, with them closing
between 4-5 seconds on only 4 occasions. The surveillance tests are
performed during intermediate or hot shutdown conditions to test in
an environment most similar to accident conditions. There is
negligible flow through the main steam lines during this test. Since
the valves are tested at a condition with negligible flow, during an
accident the valves would close more quickly as the valve disc
enters the flow stream. In the past 10 years, one MSIV failed to
meet its timing test on one occasion, and the other MSIV failed to
meet its timing test on two occasions. The cause of two of the three
failures was attributed to sticking limit switches, which were valve
indication problems, not valve performance problems. The cause of
the remaining failure was not explicitly identified. The MSIVs have
been very reliable in meeting their timing tests. Using a closure
assumption less than 10 seconds will continue to provide
conservatism in the MSLB accident analysis, as long as the value
chosen meets the value required by TS 4.7.
Any future MSLB analyses implementing the less conservative MSIV
closure assumption must continue to meet the acceptance criteria
required by Kewaunee's Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR), and
thereby, demonstrate that adequate margin of safety is maintained.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances
change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely
way would result, for example, in preventing startup of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final
determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish, in the Federal
Register, a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a
hearing after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take
this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules Review and
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page
number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be
delivered to Room 6D22, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies
of written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By June 16, 1997, the licensee may file a request for a hearing
with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility
operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this
proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding
must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to
intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene
shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's, ``Rules of Practice
for Domestic Licensing Proceedings,'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested
persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714, which is
available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public
document room located at the University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Library,
2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, WI. If a request for a hearing or
petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the
Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the
Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or
the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of
hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner's right under the
Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended
[[Page 26831]]
petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to
the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions
which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must
consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be
raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a
brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the
contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the
contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references
to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those
facts or expert opinion. The petitioner must provide sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to
matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The
contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner
to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which
satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention
will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-
examine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves
no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place
before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Services
Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room,
the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above
date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the notice
period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the
Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-800-248-
5100 (in Missouri, 1-800-342-6700). The Western Union operator should
be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following message
addressed to Gail H. Marcus: petitioner's name and telephone number,
date petition was mailed, plant name, and publication date and page
number of this Federal Register notice. A copy of the petition should
also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Bradley D. Jackson,
Esq., Foley and Lardner, P.O. Box 1497, Madison, WI 53701-1497,
attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended
petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not
be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the
petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the
factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated May 2, 1997, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public
document room located at the University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Library,
2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, WI.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of May 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard J. Laufer,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-3, Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-12735 Filed 5-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P