[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 14, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11914-11918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4675]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Notice of Opportunity for Comment on Model Safety Evaluation for 
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler To Provide Actions 
for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable Using 
the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model safety evaluation (SE) 
relating to proposed changes to Actions in the Standard Technical 
Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven 
Auxiliary Feedwater / Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. 
This change would establish a Completion Time in the Standard Technical 
Specifications for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor 
driven AFW/EFW train. The NRC staff has also prepared a model 
application and model no significant hazards consideration (NSHC) 
determination relating to this matter. The purpose of these models is 
to permit the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to 
adopt the associated changes into plant-specific technical 
specifications (TS). Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which the 
models apply can request amendments confirming the applicability of the 
SE and NSHC determination to their reactors. The NRC staff is 
requesting comments on the Model SE, Model Application and Model NSHC 
determination prior to announcing their availability for referencing in 
license amendment applications.

DATES: The comment period expires 30 days from the date of this 
publication. Comments received after this date will be considered if it 
is practical to do so, but the Commission can only ensure consideration 
for comments received on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either electronically or via U.S. 
mail.
    To submit comments or questions on a proposed standard technical 
specification change via the Internet, use Form for Sending Comments on 
NRC Documents, then select Proposed Changes to Technical 
Specifications. If you are commenting on a proposed change, please 
match your comments with the correct proposed change by copying the 
title of the proposed change from column one to the previous table into 
the appropriate field of the comment form.
    Submit written comments to: Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and 
Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    Hand deliver comments to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 
between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
    Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC's Public 
Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trent L. Wertz, Technical 
Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O-12H2, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone 301-415-
1568.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item 
Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification 
Changes for Power Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The 
consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to 
improve the efficiency and transparency of NRC licensing processes. 
This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the Standard 
Technical Specifications (STS) (NUREGs 1430-1434) in a manner that 
supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes 
an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS 
following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that 
the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP 
directs the NRC staff to evaluate any comments received for a proposed 
change to the STS and to either reconsider the change or proceed with 
announcing the availability of the change to licensees. Those licensees 
opting to apply for the subject change to TS are responsible for 
reviewing the NRC staff's evaluation, referencing the applicable 
technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant specific 
information. Each amendment application submitted in response to the 
notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance 
with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
    This notice for comment involves establishing a Completion Time in 
the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the 
Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is 
inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In 
addition, this notice for comment involves changes to the STS that 
establish specific Conditions and Action requirements for

[[Page 11915]]

two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and for 
when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due 
solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than 
one inoperable steam supply. The changes were proposed by the Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) in TSTF Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, 
which is accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html 
(Accession No. ML070100363). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or 
who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, 
should contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff by 
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].

Applicability

    This proposed change to adopt TSTF-412 is applicable to all 
pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), 
Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE). If approved, to 
efficiently process the incoming license amendment applications, the 
NRC staff will request that each licensee applying for the changes 
addressed by TSTF-412, Revision 3, use the CLIIP to submit a License 
Amendment Request (LAR) that conforms to the enclosed Model Application 
(Enclosure 1). Any deviations from the Model Application should be 
explained in the licensee's submittal. Significant deviations from the 
approach, or inclusion of additional changes to the license, will 
result in staff rejection of the submittal. Instead, licensees desiring 
significant variations and/or additional changes should submit a LAR 
that does not claim to adopt TSTF-412. Variations from the approach 
recommended in this notice may require additional review by the NRC 
staff and may increase the time and resources needed for the review.

Public Notices

    This notice requests comments from interested members of the public 
within 30 days of the date of publication in the Federal Register. 
Following the NRC staff's evaluation of comments received as a result 
of this notice, the NRC staff may reconsider the proposed change or may 
proceed with announcing the availability of the change in a subsequent 
notice (perhaps with some changes to the SE or proposed NSHC 
determination as a result of public comments).
    If the NRC staff announces the availability of the change, 
licensees wishing to adopt the change will submit an application in 
accordance with applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. The 
NRC staff will in turn issue for each application a notice of proposed 
action, which includes a proposed NSHC determination. A notice of 
issuance of an amendment of operating license will also be issued to 
announce the adoption of TSTF-412 for each plant that applies for and 
receives the requested change.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of March, 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy J. Kobetz,
Chief, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and 
Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    The following example of a license amendment request (LAR) was 
prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate the adoption of Technical 
Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3 
``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump 
Inoperable.'' The model provides the expected level of detail and 
content for a LAR to adopt TSTF-412, Revision 3. Licensees remain 
responsible for ensuring that their plant-specific LAR fulfills their 
administrative requirements as well as NRC regulations.

Proposed Model License Amendment Request

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Document Control Desk
Washington, DC 20555

Subject: Plant Name

    Docket No. 50-
    Application for Technical Specification Improvement To Revise 
Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater/
Emergency Feedwater Pump Inoperable Using the Consolidated Line Item 
Improvement Process

Gentlemen:

    In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 of Title 10 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is submitting a 
request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for 
[PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.].
    The proposed amendment establishes Conditions, Required Actions, 
and Completion Times in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) 
for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven 
Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) pump is inoperable 
concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In 
addition, this amendment establishes changes to the STS that 
establish specific Actions when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are 
inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is 
inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or 
(b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The 
change is consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specification Task 
Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for 
One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The 
availability of this technical specification improvement was 
announced in the Federal Register on [DATE OF NOTICE OF 
AVAILABILITY] as part of the consolidated line item improvement 
process (CLIIP).
    Enclosure 1 provides a description of the proposed change and 
confirmation of applicability.
    Enclosure 2 provides the existing TS pages marked-up to show the 
proposed change.
    Enclosure 3 provides the existing TS Bases pages marked-up to 
reflect the proposed change. There are no new regulatory commitments 
associated with this proposed change.
    [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment 
by [DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X 
DAYS].
    In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application, 
with enclosures, is being provided to the designated [STATE] 
Official.
    I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United 
States of America that I am authorized by [LICENSEE] to make this 
request and that the foregoing is true and correct.

[Note that request may be notarized in lieu of using this oath or 
affirmation statement.]

    If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, 
please contact [ ].

Sincerely,

Name, Title

Enclosures: 1. Description and Assessment
    2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes
    3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes

cc: NRR Project Manager
    Regional Office
    Resident Inspector
    State Contact

Enclosure 1 to Model License Amendment Request--Description and 
Assessment

1.0 Description

    The proposed License amendment establish a new Completion Time in 
Standard Technical Specifications Section [3.7.5] where one steam 
supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with 
an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This amendment also 
establishes specific Conditions and Action requirements when two motor 
driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one 
inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one 
inoperable steam supply.

[[Page 11916]]

    The changes are consistent with NRC approved Industry/Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Change 
Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply 
to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The availability of this 
technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal 
Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the consolidated line 
item improvement process (CLIIP).

2.0 Assessment

2.1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation
    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the safety evaluation published on [DATE ] 
([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. This verification included a 
review of the NRC staff's evaluation as well as the supporting 
information provided to support TSTF-412, Revision 3. [LICENSEE] has 
concluded that the justifications presented in the TSTF proposal and 
the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to 
[PLANT, UNIT NOS.] and justify this amendment for the incorporation of 
the changes to the [PLANT] Technical Specifications.
2.2 Optional Changes and Variations
    [LICENSEE] is not proposing any variations or deviations from the 
technical specification changes described in TSTF-412, Revision 3, or 
the NRC staff's model safety evaluation published in the Federal 
Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]).

3.0 Regulatory Analysis

3.1 No Significant Hazards Determination
    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination published on [DATE] as part of the CLIIP. 
[LICENSEE] has concluded that the proposed determination presented in 
the notice is applicable to [PLANT] and the determination is hereby 
incorporated by reference to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 
50.91(a).
3.2 Verification and Commitments
    There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this 
proposed change.

4.0 Environmental Evaluation

    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in 
the model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on [DATE 
] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that 
the NRC staff's findings presented in that evaluation are applicable to 
[PLANT] and the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this 
application.

Enclosure 2 to Model License Amendment Request: PROPOSED TECHNICAL 
SPECIFICATION CHANGES

Enclosure 3 to Model License Amendment Request: Changes to TS Bases 
Pages

Proposed Model Safety Evaluation

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, Consolidated Line Item Improvement
Technical Specification Task Force Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, 
Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to the Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump 
Inoperable

1.0 Introduction

    By application dated [DATE], [LICENSEE NAME] (the licensee), 
submitted a request for changes to the [PLANT NAME], Technical 
Specifications (TS) (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS) Accession No. [MLxxxxxxxxx]). The requested change would 
establish a Completion Time for the Condition where one steam supply to 
the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an 
inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train and establish specific Conditions 
and Required Actions when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are 
inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is 
inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) 
due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply.
    These changes were described in a Notice of Availability published 
in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]).

2.0 Regulatory Evaluation

    In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission established its regulatory 
requirements related to the content of Technical Specifications (TS). 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(c), TS are required to include items in the 
following categories: (1) Safety limits, limiting safety system 
settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for 
operation (LCOs); (3) surveillance requirements (SRs); (4) design 
features; and (5) administrative controls. The rule does not specify 
the particular requirements to be included in a plant's TS.

3.0 Technical Evaluation

TS 3.7.5, Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW)/Emergency Feedwater (EFW) System

    The AFW/EFW System is designed to automatically supply sufficient 
water to the steam generator(s) to remove decay heat upon the loss of 
normal feedwater supply with steam generator pressure at the set point 
of the Main Steam Safety Valves (MSSVs). Subsequently, the AFW/EFW 
System supplies sufficient water to cool the unit to Residual Heat 
Removal (RHR) System entry conditions, with steam being released 
through the Atmospheric Dump Valves (ADVs).
    AFW/EFW Systems typically consist of two motor driven AFW/EFW pumps 
and one steam turbine driven pump configured into three trains. The 
capacity of the motor driven and steam driven AFW/EFW pumps can vary by 
plant. Motor driven pumps typically provide 50% or 100% of the required 
AFW/EFW flow capacity as assumed in the accident analysis. Motor driven 
AFW/EFW pumps are typically powered from an independent Class 1E power 
supply and each pump train typically feeds half of the steam 
generators, although each pump has the capability to be realigned from 
the control room to feed other steam generators. The steam turbine 
driven AFW/EFW pump provides either 100% or 200% of the required 
capacity to all steam generators. The steam turbine driven pump 
receives steam from two main steam lines upstream of the main steam 
isolation valves. Each of the steam feed lines will supply 100% of the 
requirements of the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump.

LCO 3.7.5, Condition A (as Proposed)

    Condition A is modified to refer to the inoperability of a turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train due to an inoperable steam supply, instead of 
referring to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/EFW pump. This 
change is being proposed in order to make Condition A train oriented 
instead of component oriented, consistent with the other Conditions 
that are included in STS 3.7.5. The train oriented approach is 
consistent with the preferred approach that is generally reflected in 
the STS, and therefore the proposed change is considered to be 
acceptable.

STS 3.7.5, Condition C (as Proposed)

    A new Condition C with two possible Required Actions (C.1 OR C.2) 
is proposed for the turbine driven AFW/EFW train being inoperable due 
to one inoperable steam supply and one motor driven AFW/EFW train being 
inoperable

[[Page 11917]]

at the same time. Required Action C.1 requires restoration of the 
affected steam supply to operable status within either 24 or 48 hours, 
depending on the capability of the motor driven AFW/EFW train that 
remains operable. Alternatively, Required Action C.2 requires 
restoration of the inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train within either 
24 or 48 hours, again depending on the capability of the motor driven 
AFW/EFW train that remains operable. New Condition C provides two 
proposed Completion Times that are dependent upon the capacity of the 
remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train to provide AFW/EFW to the 
steam generators.
    A proposed 24 hour Completion Time is applicable to plants that may 
provide insufficient flow to the steam generators (SGs) in accordance 
with accident analyses assumptions if a main steam line break (MSLB) or 
feedwater line break (FLB) were to occur that renders the remaining 
steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable (a 
concurrent single failure is not assumed). Insufficient feedwater flow 
could result, for example, if a single motor driven AFW/EFW train does 
not have sufficient capacity to satisfy accident analyses assumptions, 
or if the operable pump is feeding the faulted SG (i.e. the SG that is 
aligned to the operable steam supply for the turbine driven AFW/EFW 
pump). [This would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor 
driven pump having less than 100% of the required flow.] Likewise, a 
proposed 48 hour Completion Time is applicable when the remaining 
operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is capable of providing sufficient 
feedwater flow in accordance with accident analyses assumptions. [This 
would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump 
having greater than or equal to 100% of the required flow.]
    The STS typically allows a 72 hour Completion Time for Conditions 
where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated 
accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure. In this 
particular case, a 24 hour Completion Time is proposed for the 
situation where the AFW/EFW system would be able to perform its 
function for most postulated events, and would only be challenged by a 
MSLB or FLB that renders the remaining operable steam supply to the 
turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable. Additionally, depending on the 
capacity of the operable motor driven AFW/EFW pump, it may be able to 
mitigate MSLB and FLB accidents during those instances when it is not 
aligned to the faulted SG. The selection of 24 hours for the Completion 
Time is based on the remaining operable steam supply to the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW pump and the continued functionality of the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train, the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW 
train, and the low likelihood of an event occurring during this 24 hour 
period that would challenge the capability of the AFW/EFW system to 
provide feedwater to the SGs. The proposed Completion Time for this 
particular situation is consistent with what was approved for Waterford 
3 by License Amendment 173 for a similar Condition (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML012840538), and it is commensurate with the STS in that the proposed 
Completion Time is much less than the 72 hours that is allowed for the 
situation where accident mitigation capability is maintained. 
Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed 24 hour Completion 
Time is acceptable for this particular situation.
    A 48 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where the 
remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is able to mitigate 
postulated accidents in accordance with accident analyses assumptions 
without assuming a concurrent single active failure. The selection of 
48 hours is based on the continued capability of the AFW/EFW system to 
perform its function, while at the same time recognizing that this 
Condition represents a higher level of degradation than one inoperable 
AFW/EFW train which is currently allowed for up to 72 hours by STS 
3.7.5. The proposed 48 hour Completion Time represents an appropriate 
balance between the more severe 24 hour situation discussed in the 
previous paragraph and the less severe Condition that is afforded a 72 
hour Completion Time by the current STS. Therefore, the NRC staff 
agrees that the proposed 48 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this 
particular situation.

STS 3.7.5, Condition D (as Proposed)

    The current Condition C is renamed as Condition D. This Condition 
has been modified to incorporate changes brought on by the addition of 
new Condition C. The first Condition has been modified and now applies 
to the situation where the Required Action and associated Completion 
Time of Condition A, B, or C are not met. This section of Condition D 
is modified to also apply to the new Condition C when the Completion 
Time that is specified for new Condition C is not met. The NRC staff 
considers this to be appropriate and consistent with existing STS 3.7.5 
requirements to place the plant in a mode where the Condition does not 
apply when the Required Actions are not met.
    The second Condition following the first ``OR'' in Condition D is 
modified from ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3'' to 
``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3 for reasons other 
than Condition C.'' This change is necessary to recognize the situation 
specified by Condition C (as proposed) where one motor driven AFW/EFW 
train is allowed to be inoperable at the same time that the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable due to an inoperable steam supply to 
the pump turbine. Therefore, the NRC staff considers the proposed 
change to be acceptable.
    The Required Actions associated with this Condition were renamed 
from C.1 AND C.2 to D.1 AND D.2 but not otherwise changed. Required 
Action D.1 requires the plant to be in Mode 3 in 6 hours, and Required 
Action D.2 requires the plant to be in Mode 4 in 18 hours. This change 
is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, this 
proposed change is acceptable.

STS 3.7.5, Condition E (as Proposed)

    Because current Condition C is renamed as Condition D, current 
Condition D is renamed as Condition E. This change is purely editorial 
as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is 
acceptable.

STS 3.7.5, Condition F (as Proposed)

    Because current Condition D is renamed as Condition E, current 
Condition E is renamed as Condition F. This change is purely editorial 
as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is 
acceptable.

STS 3.7.5, Bases (as Proposed)

    Though changes to the STS Bases do not require NRC approval per se, 
changes to the STS Bases were reviewed to assess their consistency with 
the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5. The proposed changes to the STS 
Bases appeared to be consistent with the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5.

4.0 State Consultation

    In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the [STATE] State 
official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The 
State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the following comments--with 
subsequent disposition by the NRC staff].

5.0 Environmental Consideration

    The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the 
installation or use of a facility component located within the 
restricted

[[Page 11918]]

area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance 
requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 
no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the 
types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is 
no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational 
radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed 
finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards 
consideration, and there has been [(1) no public comment on such 
finding (2) the following comments with subsequent disposition by the 
NRC staff ([xx FR xxxxx, DATE]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the 
eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 
51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact 
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection 
with the issuance of the amendment.

6.0 Conclusion

    The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed 
above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and 
safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the 
proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance 
with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the 
amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or 
to the health and safety of the public.
    The proposed changes are consistent with NRC practices and policies 
as generally reflected in the STS and as reflected by applicable 
precedents that have been approved. Therefore, the NRC staff has 
determined that the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5 should be approved.

Model No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination

    Description of amendment request: The requested change, applicable 
to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox 
(B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE), would provide 
changes to the Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) 
relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater/
Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. The proposed change is 
described in Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard TS 
Change Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, and was described in the Notice 
of Availability published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR 
xxxxx]).
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis of the issue 
of no significant hazards consideration is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) System is not an 
initiator of any design basis accident or event, and therefore the 
proposed changes do not increase the probability of any accident 
previously evaluated. The proposed changes to address the condition 
of one or two motor driven AFW/EFW trains inoperable and the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train inoperable due to one steam supply inoperable 
do not change the response of the plant to any accidents.
    The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators 
or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and 
configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is 
operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely 
affect the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to 
perform their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences 
of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The 
proposed changes do not affect the source term, containment 
isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating 
the radiological consequences of any accident previously evaluated. 
Further, the proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts 
of radioactive effluent that may be released offsite, nor 
significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational/public 
radiation exposures.
    Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of any 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 result in a change in the manner in 
which the AFW/EFW System provides plant protection. The AFW/EFW 
System will continue to supply water to the steam generators to 
remove decay heat and other residual heat by delivering at least the 
minimum required flow rate to the steam generators. There are no 
design changes associated with the proposed changes. The changes to 
the Conditions and Required Actions do not change any existing 
accident scenarios, nor create any new or different accident 
scenarios.
    The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant 
(i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a 
change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, 
the changes do not impose any new or different requirements or 
eliminate any existing requirements. The changes do not alter 
assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are 
consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant 
operating practice.
    Therefore, the 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 do not alter the manner in which safety 
limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for 
operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria 
are not impacted by these changes. The proposed changes will not 
result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design 
basis.
    Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not 
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    Based on the above, the proposed change involves 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.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this xx day of xxxxxxx, 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Project Manager.
Plant Licensing Branch [ ], Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E7-4675 Filed 3-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P