[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 193 (Thursday, October 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58879-58881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16445]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

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


Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; 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-41, Facility Operating License No. NPF-51, and Facility Operating 
License No. NPF-74, issued to Arizona Public Service Company (the 
licensee) for the operation of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, 
Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
    The proposed amendment would modify requirements of Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.7.2, ``Main Steam Isolation Valves (MSIVs),'' to 
include specific requirements (Conditions, Required Actions, and 
Completion Times) for the MSIV actuator trains. Additionally, 
surveillance requirement (SR) 3.7.2.1 will be revised to clearly 
identify that each MSIV actuator train is required to be tested to 
support the operability of the associated MSIV.
    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

[[Page 58880]]

    The proposed changes to incorporate requirements for the MSIV 
actuator trains do not involve any design or physical changes to the 
facility, including the MSIVs and actuator trains themselves. The 
design and functional performance requirements, operational 
characteristics, and reliability of the MSIVs and actuator trains 
remain unchanged. Therefore, there is no impact on the design safety 
function of the MSIVs to close (as an accident mitigator), nor is 
there any change with respect to inadvertent closure of an MSIV (as 
a potential transient initiator). Since no failure mode or 
initiating condition that could cause an accident (including any 
plant transient) evaluated in the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating 
Station (PVNGS) Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) 
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 or any other 
equipment required for accident mitigation. With respect to MSIV 
actuator train Completion Time, the consequences of an accident are 
independent of equipment Completion Time as long as adequate 
equipment availability is maintained. The proposed Condition A Note 
takes into account the redundancy of the actuator trains and the 
accident analysis assumption that only 3 of 4 MSIVs close in the 
accident. Adequate equipment availability would therefore continue 
to be available and Condition C [of TS 3.7.2] for an inoperable MSIV 
would continue to support the Palo Verde safety analysis. On this 
basis, the consequences of applicable analyzed accidents (such as a 
main steam line break) are not significantly impacted by the 
proposed changes.
    Therefore, 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 
actuator trains do not involve any design or physical changes to the 
facility, including the MSIVs 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 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 
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, Rulemaking, 
Directives and Editing 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 
O1F21, 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, 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 requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must 
also identify the specific

[[Page 58881]]

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 Michael G. Green, Senior 
Regulatory Counsel, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, P.O. Box 52034, 
Mail Station 8695, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2034, attorney for the 
licensee.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated September 26, 2006, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White 
Flint North, File Public Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be 
accessible from the 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 September 2006.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mel B. Fields,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E6-16445 Filed 10-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P