[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49527-49529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20996]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530]


Arizona Public Service Company; Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No 
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a 
Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74 issued to Arizona Public Service Company 
(the licensee) for operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, located in Maricopa County, Arizona.
    The proposed amendments in the licensee's application dated 
November 7, 2002, as supplemented by letters dated April 25, July 10, 
and July 30, 2003, would revise TS 3.2.4, ``Departure From Nucleate 
Boiling Ratio (DNBR),'' TS 3.3.1, ``Reactor Protective System (RPS) 
Instrumentation--Operating,'' TS 3.3.3, ``Control Element Assembly 
Calculators (CEACs),'' and TS 5.4.1, ``Administrative Controls--
Procedures.'' The proposed changes are to Limiting Conditions for 
Operation (LCOs), LCO Actions, LCO Surveillance Requirements, and the 
procedures used to modify the core protection calculator addressable 
constants. The amendments support the replacement of the Core 
Protection Calculator System (CPCS). The replacement CPCS will perform 
functionally identical safety-related algorithms as the existing CPCS, 
although on a newer platform, and the CPCS design function will remain 
unchanged. Because the replacement CPCS for each unit will be installed 
in refueling outages for the three units over at least a year, starting 
with the Unit 2 fall 2003 outage, the licensee has proposed to have the 
TSs contain both the current requirements and the new requirements with 
the phrases ``(Before CPC Upgrade)'' and ``(After CPC Upgrade)'' on the 
TSs to show which requirements apply to which case.
    The application was noticed in the Federal Register on December 10, 
2002 (67 FR 75868) for the changes to TSs 3.2.4, 3.3.1, and 3.3.3. 
Since that notice, the licensee has submitted its supplemental letter 
dated July 30, 2003, which provided an additional proposed change to TS 
5.4.1, ``Administrative Controls--Procedures.'' This additional 
proposed change is related to the procedures used to modify the CPCS 
addressable constants.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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 title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 
accordance with the proposed amendments 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:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.

[[Page 49528]]

    The Core Protection Calculator System (CPCS) is being replaced 
due primarily to parts obsolescence. The replacement CPCS will 
perform functionally identical safety-related algorithms as the 
existing CPCS, but on a newer platform. The CPCS design function 
will remain unchanged.
    The physical location of the replacement CPCS will be the same 
as the existing CPCS in the auxiliary protective cabinets. 
Installation will occur during refueling outages when the system is 
not required for service. [The] majority of the testing will be 
performed prior to installation.
    The CPCS is not an initiator of any analyzed accident, but is 
used for mitigation of a large number of anticipated operational 
occurrences and a small number of accidents. Since the CPCS is not 
an accident initiator, and the replacement CPCS is functionally 
unchanged, the CPCS replacement will not increase the probability of 
an accident.
    The functionality of the existing CPCS safety related algorithms 
are replicated in the System Requirements Specification for the 
Common Q [Common Qualified] Core Protection Calculator System. The 
basic Common Q CPCS design concept was approved by NRC Safety 
Evaluation (SE), Acceptance For Referencing Of Topical Report CENPD-
396-P, Rev. 01, ``Common Qualified Platform'' and Appendices 1, 2, 3 
and 4, Rev. 01, dated August 11, 2000 (Ref. 2 [listed in the 
enclosure to the amendment request]), and there have been no 
significant functional changes to the design as presented. The 
requirements for response time and accuracy that are assumed in the 
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) Updated Final Safety 
Analysis Report (UFSAR) accident analysis will continue to be met. 
Therefore, since the new [replacement] CPCS will be capable of 
performing the same safety-related functions within the same 
response time and accuracy as the existing CPCS, the proposed change 
does not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The CPCS provides a monitoring and detection function and is not 
an initiator for any accident. The CPCS provides Reactor Protection 
System (RPS) trips on Low Departure from Nucleate Boiling Ratio 
(DNBR) and High Local Power Density (LPD) in response to 
calculations involving several input variables. It also provides a 
Control Element Assembly Withdrawal Prohibit (CWP) signal to the 
Plant Protection System (PPS), and provides indication and 
annunciation. The CPCS performs no other plant functions, and is not 
used to initiate any ESF [(Engineered Safety Feature)] functions. 
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.

    The [new] CPCS is a replacement for the existing CPCS. It will 
retain the same safety-related functionality as the existing CPCS. 
The equipment will be qualified in accordance with requirements 
described in the Palo Verde UFSAR.
    The replacement CPCS will perform functionally identical safety-
related algorithms as the existing CPCS, will trip in response to 
the same inputs with equivalent accuracy, and will meet the same 
four channel separation requirements. The only significant area of 
difference involves the platform. The Common Q platform uses a 
consistent set of qualified building blocks (Advant Controllers, 
Flat Panel Displays, Power Supplies, and Communication Systems) that 
can be used for any safety system application. For Palo Verde 
purposes, the only application of this platform at this time will be 
for use as a CPCS. The new platform will include improved human 
factors and fault tolerance within each CPCS channel.
    In summary, the replacement CPCS performs the same functions as 
the existing CPCS, meets the qualification requirements of the 
existing CPCS, and meets the accuracy standards of the existing 
CPCS. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.
    Based on the above, APS [(the licensee)] concludes that the 
proposed amendments(s) present no significant hazards consideration 
under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and, accordingly, 
a finding of ``no significant hazards consideration'' is justified.

    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 amendments 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 amendments before the expiration 
of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is 
that the amendments involve 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. Documents may 
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By September 17, 2003, the licensee may file a request for a 
hearing with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject 
facility operating licenses 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 there are 
problems in accessing the document, contact the Public Document Room 
Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to 
[email protected]. 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

[[Page 49529]]

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 amendments 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 
amendments and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendments.
    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 (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 
O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, by the 
above date. Because of the continuing disruptions in delivery of mail 
to United States Government offices, it is requested that petitions for 
leave to intervene and requests for hearing be transmitted to the 
Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission 
to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to [email protected]. A copy of the 
request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be 
sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and because of continuing 
disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it 
is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile 
transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to [email protected]. A 
copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene 
should also be sent to Kenneth C. Manne, Senior Attorney, Arizona 
Public Service Company, P.O. Box 52034, MS 7636, Phoenix, Arizona 
85072-2034, 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 amendments dated November 7, 2002, as supplemented by 
letters dated April 25, July 10, and July 30, 2003, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White 
Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be 
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/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 12th day of August 2003.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 03-20996 Filed 8-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P