[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56943-56945]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24162]
[[Page 56943]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-483]
Union 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.
NPF-30 issued to Union Electric Company (the licensee) for operation of
the Callaway Plant, Unit 1 (Callaway) located in Callaway County,
Missouri.
The proposed amendment request would revise the technical
specifications (TS) to annotate the frequency for Surveillance
Requirement (SR) 3.5.2.5 that verification of the automatic closure
function of the residual heat removal (RHR) pump suction Valve
BNHV8812A shall be performed prior to startup from the first shutdown
to MODE 5 occurring after September 8, 2000, but no later than June 1,
2001.
In the application for the exigent amendment, the licensee stated
that SR 3.5.2.5 requires that on an 18-month frequency each ECCS
automatic valve in the flow path that is not locked, sealed, or
otherwise secured in position, be tested to show that it will actuate
to its correct position on an actual or simulated actuation signal.
However, it was not previously recognized by the licensee that the
surveillance should include subsequent valve actuations that are
dependent on separate valves' position switch interlocks. Since Valve
BNHV8812A does not actuate via a slave relay(s), it was not recognized
by the licensee as being covered by this surveillance requirement.
Therefore, the automatic closure of Valve BNHV8812A was not included in
the plant's technical specification surveillance procedures. However,
the automatic closure function of the valve has been previously tested,
but not within the 18-month interval required by SR 3.5.2.5. Since the
valve should not be tested during power operation, the licensee
requested that the NRC exercise discretion not to enforce compliance
with Technical Specification 3.5.2, in that SR 3.5.2.5 has not been
currently performed for the automatic closure function of Valve
BNHV8812A within the specified 18-month surveillance interval, and that
plant operation be allowed to continue until the proper plant
conditions exist to test the valve. The licensee was granted
enforcement discretion on September 8, 2000, as documented in the
staff's letter dated September 11, 2000, in that the staff will not
enforce compliance with the action statements of SR 3.5.2.5 because of
the failure to test the automatic closure function of Valve BNHV8812A
as required by the SR. This enforcement discretion will expire when
either (1) the automatic closure function of Valve BNHV8812A is tested
at the next plant shutdown to Mode 5 or, (2) the exigent amendment
request is acted upon.
The exigent amendment request is in support of the granted
enforcement discretion and would allow the licensee to defer testing of
the automatic closure function of the valve until the first proper
plant conditions exist to test the valve. The testing would be at the
first shutdown to MODE 5 occurring after September 8, 2000, but no
later than June 1, 2001. Callaway is scheduled to have a refueling
outage in Spring 2001.
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. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
Overall protection system performance will remain within the
bounds of the previously performed accident analyses since there are
no hardware changes. The Reactor Trip System (RTS) and Engineered
Safety Feature Actuation System (ESFAS) instrumentation will be
unaffected. These protection systems will continue to function in a
manner consistent with the plant design basis. All design, material,
and construction standards that were applicable prior to the request
are maintained.
The proposed request will not affect the probability of any
event initiators. There will be no degradation in the performance
of, or an increase in the number of challenges imposed on, safety-
related equipment assumed to function during an accident situation.
There will be no change to normal plant operating parameters or
accident mitigation performance.
The proposed request will not alter any assumptions or change
any mitigation actions in the radiological consequence evaluations
in the FSAR.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
There are no hardware changes nor are there any changes in the
method by which any safety-related plant system performs its safety
function. This request will not affect the normal method of plant
operation. No performance requirements will be affected.
No new accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure
mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced as a result
of this request. There will be no adverse effect or challenges
imposed on any safety-related system as a result of this request.
This request does not alter the design or performance of the
7300 Process Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation System, or
Solid State Protection System used in the plant protection systems.
Therefore, the proposed request does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
There will be no effect on the manner in which safety limits or
limiting safety system settings are determined nor will there be any
effect on those plant systems necessary to assure the accomplishment
of protection functions. There will be no impact on the overpower
limit, departure from nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR) limits, heat
flux hot channel factor (FQ), nuclear enthalpy rise hot
channel factor (FH), loss of coolant accident peak cladding
temperature (LOCA PCT), peak local power density, or any other
margin of safety. The radiological dose consequence acceptance
criteria listed in the Standard Review Plan will continue to be met.
Therefore, the proposed request does not involve a significant
reduction in any 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 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
[[Page 56944]]
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, 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. Copies of
written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By October 20, 2000, 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 2.714 which is
available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and accessible
electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room link at
the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov). If a request for a hearing or
petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the
Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the
Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or
the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of
hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, 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 factors: (1) the nature of the petitioner's right under the
Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy
the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to
the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions
which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must
consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be
raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a
brief explanation of the bases of 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 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. Petitioner 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 to relief. A
petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies 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, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-
examine witnesses.
If the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is
requested, 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.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC,
by the above date. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the
Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to John O'Neill, Esq., Shaw, Pittman,
Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037,
attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended
petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not
be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the
petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the
factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated September 8, 2000, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the
Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and accessible
electronically through the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading
[[Page 56945]]
Room link at the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov).
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of September 2000.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Girija S. Shukla,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV and Decommissioning
Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-24162 Filed 9-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P