[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 223 (Monday, November 20, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67166-67167]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19569]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 [Docket No. 50-259]


Tennessee Valley Authority; 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-33 issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for operation of 
the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Unit 1 located in Limestone 
County, Alabama.
    The proposed amendment would delete the Technical Specification 
(TS) Surveillance Requirement (SR) to verify the position of a low 
pressure coolant injection (LPCI) crosstie valve. 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 Technical Specification change involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No. This TS change is administrative in nature, since 
it deletes the surveillance requirement (SR 3.5.1.4) to periodically 
verify the position of a valve which has now been physically removed 
from Unit 1. Originally, BFN's LPCI design included the capability 
for the redundant LPCI loop discharge piping to be cross-tied; 
however, subsequent analysis determined that the crosstie 
capability, under certain accident and single-failure scenarios, 
could result in the loss of injection from both LPCI loops. This 
analysis also determined that the crosstie capability was not 
required for the mitigation of any design basis events. Accordingly, 
since certain crosstie failure modes could prevent mitigation of 
these or other events, TVA modified the plant design to eliminate 
the crosstie capability. This was accomplished by closing and 
deenergizing the motor-operated isolation valve that existed in the 
crosstie flow path and adding an SR to require periodic verification 
that the valve was closed and deenergized.
    The modified Unit 1 configuration [i.e., LPCI loop discharge 
crosstie valve removed and the associated remaining piping capped or 
closed with a blind flange] eliminates the possibility of an 
undesired flow path. Additionally, the Seismic Class I qualification 
and the ASME Section XI classification of the remaining piping in 
the new plant configuration are equivalent to the replaced line 
configuration. Accordingly, the TS change does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed Technical Specification change create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated?
    Response: No. The physical modification eliminating the LPCI 
loop discharge crosstie capability does not require revision of the 
safety analyses. In addition, since the LPCI loop crosstie valve has 
been physically removed from the system and the associated lines 
capped or closed via blind flange, the possibility for inadvertent 
flow between the LPCI loops has been eliminated. Removing the valve 
and capping/flanging the remaining piping is an improvement over the 
old configuration. The LPCI function will be accomplished in the 
same way as before the modification, and no new failure modes have 
been introduced.
    3. Does the proposed Technical Specification change involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
    Response: No. This TS changes does not involve a reduction in 
the margin of safety since removal of the LPCI loop cross tie valve 
eliminates the possibility of flow between the two LPCI loops, and 
it obviates the need for valve position verification contained in 
the SR. In addition, since removing the valve and capping/flanging 
the residual piping meets the intent of the SR, the safety analysis 
remains unchanged.

    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 
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

[[Page 67167]]

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 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 the General Counsel, 
Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11A, 
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902, attorney for the licensee.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated November 9, 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 14th day of November 2006.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Margaret H. Chernoff,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-19569 Filed 11-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P