[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 67 (Monday, April 8, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16767-16769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-8388]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-397]


Energy Northwest; 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-21, issued to Energy Northwest (the licensee), for operation of the 
Columbia Generating Station located in Benton County, Washington.
    The proposed amendment would change Technical Specification (TS) 
Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.1.3.6 to add a modifying footnote to 
the verification requirements for main steam isolation valve (MSIV) 
isolation times to specify that the isolation time of each MSIV 
includes circuit response time and to require verification that 
isolation of all of the main steam lines can be completed within the 
limits specified in SR 3.6.1.3.6.
    On March 21, 2002, Energy Northwest requested enforcement 
discretion from compliance with Required Action A of Limiting Condition 
for Operation (LCO) 3.6.1.3 because two inboard MSIVs were declared 
inoperable due to failure to meet SR 3.6.1.3.6. Compliance with the LCO 
action would have required isolation of two main steam lines 
necessitating a plant shutdown. The SR for MSIVs was previously thought 
to be met and each MSIV operable. The discovery that circuit response 
time should not be included in MSIV isolation time regarding the three-
second time limit portion of SR 3.6.1.3.6, resulted in two MSIVs being 
technically inoperable. The staff issued the Notice of Enforcement 
Discretion (NOED) on March 26, 2002. The exigent technical 
specification amendment request will preclude the need for continued 
enforcement discretion.
    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.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under 
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment 
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the 
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of 
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; 
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As 
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of 
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented 
below:

    The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The MSIV closure transient is discussed in FSAR [Final Safety 
Analysis Report] section 15.2.4. The sequence of events for this 
transient is given in FSAR Table 15.2-5 that assumes a time of 3.0 
sec for all MSIVs to be closed. A review was performed of the Cycle 
16 analysis, which modeled the four sets of MSIVs (two valves per 
steam line) collectively as a single orifice that transitions from 
full open to full closed in 3 seconds (includes valve motion time 
only). The overpressurization event occurs as a result of the 
pressure wave reflected back to the reactor pressure vessel by rapid 
MSIV closure. When analyzing the specific closure times from the 
last MSIV isolation time surveillances, performed on February 18 and 
February 22, 2002, it was determined that although two steam lines 
would be isolated in less than 3 seconds, the two remaining steam 
lines would be isolated in greater than 3 seconds. Averaging of the 
limiting (fastest) time for each of the four main steam lines yields 
an average valve motion time of 3.12 seconds. This average time is 
within the bounds of the analysis assumptions. There is no affect on 
the probability of a previously evaluated accident because two main 
steam lines isolating at the slightly faster time does not alter any 
event sequence considered in the accident analysis.
    Therefore, this request for amendment does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of the MSIV 
closure accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed amendment will not change the design function or 
operation of the MSIVs involved. There are no credible new failure 
mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators associated with 
this change that are not considered in the design and licensing 
bases. The safety function of the MSIVs is to mitigate release of 
radioactive material. The proposed amendment does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in 
the margin of safety.

Qualitative Risk Assessment

    Analysis by Columbia Generating Station has determined that the 
current MSIV isolation times will not result in exceeding MCPR 
[minimum critical power ratio] or ASME vessel protection limits. 
Therefore, there is no adverse affect on any station equipment. 
Accordingly, implementing the requested amendment to Technical 
Specifications would not affect the baseline core damage 
probability.
    Since the average of the measured limiting (fastest) isolation 
times for the MSIVs remain bounded by the Cycle 16 Licensing 
analysis there is no condition that would present a challenge to 
thermal limits, and thus, fuel failures. Also, since margin to the 
ASME overpressure limit is still maintained, protection of the RPV 
is not diminished. Therefore, there can be no increased risk to the 
public health and safety.
    Other relevant analyses indicate that for closure times of 2 
seconds or greater the impact on MCPR and vessel pressure is 
insignificant and will not challenge safety limits. The measured 
valve motion times of 2.74 seconds and 2.88 seconds are well above 
this value. Further, the average MSIV valve motion time of 3.12 
seconds shows that the overall plant response with the current 
configuration is well within the bounds of the analysis. Therefore, 
this amendment request does 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 14 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 14-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

[[Page 16768]]

shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license 
amendment before the expiration of the 14-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. 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. Documents may 
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By May 8, 2002, 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, located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland, and available electronically on the Internet at the NRC Web 
site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. 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 a 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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day 
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the 
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is 
requested, 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 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 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 Thomas 
C. Poindexter, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., Washington, 
DC 20005-3502, attorney for the licensee.
    Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended 
petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not 
be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding 
officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the 
petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the 
factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated March 22, 2002, as supplemented by 
letter dated March 28, 2002, which is available for public inspection 
at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White 
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://
www.nrc.gov/

[[Page 16769]]

reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who 
encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should 
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 
301-415-4737 or by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of April 2002.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John Hickman,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 02-8388 Filed 4-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P