[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10118-10120]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4464]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-483]


Union 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 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-30 issued to Union Electric Company (the licensee) for operation of 
the Callaway Plant, Unit 1 (Callaway) located in Callaway County, 
Missouri.
    The proposed supplemental amendment request dated February 17, 
2000, would revise several sections of the Improved Technical 
Specification (ITSs) to correct 6 editorial errors made in the 
application dated May 15, 1997, (and supplementary letters) for the 
ITSs or in the certified copy of the ITSs that was submitted in the 
licensee's letters of May 27 and 28, 1999. The ITSs were issued by the 
staff's letter of May 28, 1999, and will be implemented to replace the 
current TSs by April 30, 2000. The intent of the application is to 
correct the ITSs before they are implemented. None of the proposed 
changes alter any of the requirements in the ITSs.
    The proposed changes to the ITSs are the following.
    (1) The correct word ``Dump'' will replace the incorrect word 
``Pump'' in the table of contents, on ITS page 3, Section 3.7.4, to 
state the correct name of the section, ``Atmospheric Steam Dump 
Valves.''
    (2) Specification 3.1.8 will be added to item a.7 on ITS page 5.0-
29 of Section 5.6.5, ``CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (COLR),'' because 
this specification also references the shutdown margin in the COLR
    (3) The word ``BASIS'' will be spelled correctly in Section 1.1, 
``Definitions,'' for the title of staggered test basis on ITS page 1.1-
6.
    (4) A period will be added after the B in ``B 1.2'' to state 
Required Action B.1.2 for limiting condition for operation (LCO) 3.4.15 
on ITS page 3.4-37.
    (5) The apostrophe in the acronym MSSV's will be deleted in 
Condition B of LCO 3.7.1 on ITS page 3.7-1.
    (6) The word ``subsystems'' will be replaced by ``subsystem'' 
because the word should not be plural, in Required Action A.2.4 of LCO 
3.8.5 on ITS page 3.8-25.
    The application of February 17, 2000, is a supplemental letter to 
the licensee's January 14, 2000, application for corrections to the 
ITSs. In its letter of January 14, 2000 (ULNRC-04172), the licensee 
proposed to correct 8 editorial errors made in either (1) the 
application dated May 15, 1997, (and supplementary letters) for the 
ITSs, or (2) the certified copy of the ITSs that was submitted in the 
licensee's letters of May 27 and 28, 1999. The notice of consideration 
for the application of January 14, 2000, will be published in the 
Federal Register on February 23, 2000.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission 
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment 
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the 
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of 
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; 
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As 
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of 
the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The licensee stated 
in their supplemental application of February 17, 2000, that the no 
significant hazards consideration submitted in its original application 
of January 14, 2000, also applied to the corrections in this 
supplemental application. The licensee's no significant hazards 
consideration is presented below:

    1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed changes involve corrections to the ITS that are 
associated with the original conversion application and supplements 
or the certified copy of [the] ITS. The changes are considered as 
administrative changes and do not modify,

[[Page 10119]]

add, delete, or relocate any technical requirements of the Technical 
Specifications. As such, the administrative changes do not effect 
initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or 
transient events.
    Therefore, these changes do not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    The proposed changes do not involve a physical alteration of the 
plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or 
changes in methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed 
changes will not impose any new or eliminate any old requirements.
    Thus, the changes do not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    The proposed changes will not reduce a margin of safety because 
they have no effect on any safety analyses assumptions. The changes 
are administrative in nature.
    Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant reduction in 
the margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of 
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 
determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances 
change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely 
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, 
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of 
the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that 
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final 
determination will consider all public and State comments received. 
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal 
Register a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing 
after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this 
action will occur very infrequently.
    Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of 
this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to 
Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of 
written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document 
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By March 27, 2000, 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 accessible 
electronically from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC Web 
site, http://www.nrc.gov (the Electronic Reading Room). If a request 
for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above 
date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, 
designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety 
and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; 
and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene 
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in 
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of 
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons 
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the 
following factors: (1) the nature of the petitioner's right under the 
Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of 
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the 
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be 
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition 
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of 
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person 
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been 
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of 
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference 
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy 
the specificity requirements described above.
    Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference 
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to 
the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions 
which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must 
consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be 
raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a 
brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise 
statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the 
contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the 
contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references 
to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is 
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those 
facts or expert opinion. Petitioner must provide sufficient information 
to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material 
issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within 
the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be 
one which, if 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

[[Page 10120]]

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 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC, 
by the above date. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the 
Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to John O'Neill, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, 
Potts & Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037, 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 
supplemental application for amendment dated February 17, 2000, which 
is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document 
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC, and 
accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Library component on 
the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov (the Electronic Reading Room).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of February, 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack N. Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV and 
Decommissioning, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-4464 Filed 2-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P