[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 208 (Friday, October 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63040-63042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18022]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-275]
Pacific Gas and 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.
DPR-80, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E/the licensee),
for operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit No. 1, located in
San Luis Obispo County, California.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
Section 3.8.4, ``DC Sources--Operating,'' Condition B to extend the
completion time (CT) to restore an inoperable battery from 2 hours to
12 hours, provided certain required actions are taken. The extended CT
would allow sufficient time to correct a degraded condition (e.g.,
either bypass or replace an inoperable battery cell) without
introducing time pressure as an error precursor. PG&E has requested
that this amendment be processed on a one-time exigent basis to support
timely corrective action for the degraded condition affecting a single
cell that impacts the long-term reliability of Vital Battery 1-1. This
amendment is being requested on an exigent basis so that the plant will
avoid the risk of a TS-required shutdown should the degraded battery
cause the Vital Battery 1-1 to be inoperable.
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:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes add provisions to increase the completion
time (CT) from two hours to twelve hours, on a one-time basis for
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 1 Vital Battery 1-1. Additional
Required Actions are specified when this battery, associated with
the plant Class 1E Direct Current (DC) electrical power subsystem,
is inoperable. The proposed changes do not physically alter any
plant structures, systems, or components, and are not accident
initiators: therefore, there is no effect on the probability of
accidents previously evaluated. As part of the single failure design
feature, loss of any one DC electrical power subsystem does not
prevent the minimum safety function from being performed. Also, the
proposed changes do not affect the type or amounts of radionuclides
release following an accident, or affect the initiation and duration
of their release. Therefore, the consequences of accidents
previously evaluated, which rely on the Class 1E battery to
mitigate, are not significantly increased.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or 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 proposed changes do not involve a change in design,
configuration, or method of operation of the plant. The proposed
changes will not alter the manner in which equipment is initiated,
nor will the functional demands on credit equipment be changed. The
proposed changes do not impact the interaction of any systems whose
failure or malfunction can initiate an accident. There are no
identified redundant components affected by these changes and thus
there are no new common cause failures or any existing common cause
failures that are affected by extending the CT. The proposed changes
do not create any new failure modes.
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 changes are based upon both a deterministic
evaluation and a risk-informed assessment.
The deterministic evaluation concluded that though one battery
associated with the Class 1E DC electrical power subsystem is
inoperable, the redundant operable Class 1E DC electrical power
subsystems will be able to perform the safety function as described
in the accident analysis.
The risk assessment performed to support this license amendment
request concluded that with additional Required Actions the increase
in plant risk is small and consistent with the NRC's Safety Goal
Policy Statement, ``Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods in
Nuclear Activities: Final Policy Statement,'' and guidance contained
in Regulatory Guides (RG) 1.174, ``An Approach for using
Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-
Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis,'' and RG 1.177, ``An
Approach for Plant-Specific Risk-Informed Decisionmaking: Technical
Specifications.''
Together, the deterministic evaluation and the risk-informed
assessment provide assurance that the plant Class 1E DC electrical
power subsystem will be able to perform its design function with a
longer CT for an inoperable Unit 1 Vital Battery 1-1 and risk is not
significantly impacted by the change.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
reduction in a 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
[[Page 63041]]
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 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, 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, 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 and Issuance of Orders'' 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 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/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 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/requestor is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts
or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor 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/
requestor 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.
[[Page 63042]]
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 Richard F. Locke, Esq., Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O.
Box 7442, San Francisco, California 94120, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated October 18, 2006, which is available
for public inspection at 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. 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.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, or 301-415-4737, or by
e-mail to [email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan Wang,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-18022 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P