[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 170 (Friday, September 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52173-52175]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14511]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-482]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; 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-42, issued to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the
licensee), for operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station, located
in Coffey County, Kansas.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
3.7.2, ``Main Steam Isolation Valves (MSIVs),'' and TS 3.7.3, ``Main
Feedwater Isolation Valves (MFIVs),'' to add the associated actuator
trains to (1) the limiting condition for operation (LCO), (2) the
conditions, required actions, and completion times for the LCO, and (3)
the surveillance requirements. Each MSIV and MFIV has
[[Page 52174]]
two actuator trains. The Table of Contents for the TSs would be changed
to account for the resulting renumbering of TS page numbers.
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 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 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:
(1) Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to incorporate requirements for the MSIV
and MFIV actuator trains do not involve any design or physical
changes to the facility, including the MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator
trains themselves. The design and functional performance
requirements, operational characteristics, and reliability of the
MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator trains are thus unchanged. There is
therefore no impact on the design safety function of the MSIVs and
MFIVs to close (as an accident mitigator), nor is there any change
with respect to inadvertent closure of an MSIV or MFIV (as a
potential transient initiator). Since no failure mode or initiating
condition that could cause an accident (including any plant
transient) evaluated per the Updated Safety Analysis Report-
described safety analyses is created or affected, the change cannot
involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident
previously evaluated.
With regard to the consequences of an accident and the equipment
required for mitigation of the accident, the proposed changes
involve no design or physical changes to the MSIVs, MFIVs, or any
other equipment required for accident mitigation. With respect to
MSIV and MFIV actuator train Completion Times, the consequences of
an accident are independent of equipment Completion Times as long as
adequate equipment availability is maintained. The proposed MSIV and
MFIV actuator Completion Times take into account the redundancy of
the actuator trains, only 3 of 4 MSIVs and MFIVs are assumed to
close in the accident analyses, and are limited in extent consistent
with other Completion Times specified in the Technical
Specifications. Adequate equipment availability would therefore
continue to be required by the Technical Specifications. On this
basis, the consequences of applicable, analyzed accidents (such as a
main steam line break) are not significantly impacted by the
proposed changes.
Based on all of the above, the proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously analyzed.
(2) Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to incorporate requirements for the MSIV
and MFIV actuator trains do not involve any design or physical
changes to the facility, including the MSIVs, MFIVs, and actuator
trains themselves. No physical alteration of the plant is involved,
as no new or different type of equipment is to be installed. The
proposed changes do not alter any assumptions made in the safety
analyses, nor do they involve any changes to plant procedures for
ensuring that the plant is operated within analyzed limits. As such,
no new failure modes or mechanisms that could cause a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated are being
introduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
(3) Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to incorporate requirements for the MSIV and
MFIV actuator trains does not alter the manner in which safety
limits or limiting safety system settings are determined. No changes
to instrument/system actuation setpoints are involved. The safety
analysis acceptance criteria are not impacted by this change and the
proposed change will not permit plant operation in a configuration
outside the design basis.
Therefore, the proposed change 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 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 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result,
for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place 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
(PDR), 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.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, 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 2.309, which is available at the
Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
[[Page 52175]]
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible 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/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing
or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the
Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by
the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or
the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, 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 general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
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/requestor 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 petition must include 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/requestor
who fails to satisfy 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.
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.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition,
request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing
of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications
Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, [email protected];
or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification
number is (301) 415-1966. 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 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 Jay Silberg, Esq.,
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC
20037, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated August 25, 2006, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint
North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible 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 28th day of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-14511 Filed 8-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P