98-26562. Union Electric Co.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 63, Number 192 (Monday, October 5, 1998)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 53468-53471]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 98-26562]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    [Docket No. 50-483]
    
    
    Union Electric Co.; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 
    Amendment to Facility Operating License 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 the Union Electric Company (UE or the licensee), for 
    operation of the Callaway Plant (CW), located in Callaway County, 
    Missouri.
        The proposed amendment, requested by the licensee in a letter dated 
    May 15, 1997, as supplemented by letters dated June 26, August 4, 
    August 27, and September 24, 1998, would represent a full conversion 
    from the current Technical Specifications (CTS) to a set of improved 
    Technical Specifications (ITS) based on NUREG-1431, ``Standard 
    Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants,'' Revision 1, dated 
    April 1995. NUREG-1431 has been developed by the Commission's staff 
    through working groups composed of both NRC staff members and industry 
    representatives, and has been endorsed by the staff as part of an 
    industry-wide initiative to standardize and improve the Technical 
    Specifications for nuclear power plants. As part of this submittal, the 
    licensee has applied the criteria contained in the Commission's ``Final 
    Policy Statement on Technical Specification Improvements for Nuclear 
    Power Reactors (Final Policy Statement),'' published in the Federal 
    Register on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132), to the CTS, and, using NUREG-
    1431 as a basis, proposed an ITS for CW. The criteria in the Final 
    Policy Statement were subsequently added to 10 CFR 50.36, ``Technical 
    Specifications,'' in a rule change that was published in the Federal 
    Register on July 19, 1995 (60 FR 36953) and became effective on August 
    18, 1995.
        This conversion is a joint effort in concert with three other 
    utilities: Pacific Gas & Electric Company for Diablo Canyon Power 
    Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-275 and 323); TU Electric for 
    Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-445 
    and 50-446); and Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation for Wolf 
    Creek Generating Station (Docket No. 50-482). It is a goal of the four 
    utilities to make the ITS for all the plants as similar as possible. 
    This joint effort includes a common methodology for the licensees in 
    marking-up the CTS and NUREG-1431 Specifications, and the NUREG-1431 
    Bases, that has been accepted by the staff. This includes the 
    convention that, if the words in the CTS specification are not the same 
    as the words in the ITS specification but they mean the same or have 
    the same requirements as the words in the ITS specification, the 
    licensee does not indicate or describe a change to the CTS.
        This common methodology is discussed at the end of Enclosure 2, 
    ``Mark-Up of Current TS''; Enclosure 5a, ``Mark-Up of NUREG-1431 
    Specifications''; and Enclosure 5b, ``Mark-Up of NUREG-1431 Bases,'' 
    for each of the 14 separate ITS sections that were submitted with the 
    licensee's application. For each of the 14 ITS sections, there is also 
    the following: Enclosure 1, the cross reference table connecting each 
    CTS specification (i.e., limiting condition for operation, required 
    action, or surveillance
    
    [[Page 53469]]
    
    requirement) to the associated ITS specification, sorted by both CTS 
    and ITS Specifications; Enclosure 3, the description of the changes to 
    the CTS section and the comparison table showing which plants (of the 
    four licensees in the joint effort) that each change applies to; 
    Enclosure 4, the no significant hazards consideration (NHSC) of 10 CFR 
    50.91 for the changes to the CTS with generic NHSCs for administrative, 
    more restrictive, relocation, and moving-out-of-CTS changes, and 
    individual NHSCs for less restrictive changes and with the organization 
    of the NHSC evaluation discussed in the beginning of the enclosure; and 
    Enclosure 6, the descriptions of the differences from NUREG-1431 
    specifications and the comparison table showing which plants (of the 
    four licensees in the joint effort) that each difference applies to. 
    Another convention of the common methodology is that the technical 
    justifications for the less restrictive changes are included in the 
    NHSCs.
        The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the CTS into 
    four general groupings. These groupings are characterized as 
    administrative changes, relocated changes, more restrictive changes and 
    less restrictive changes.
        Administrative changes are those that involve restructuring, 
    renumbering, rewording, interpretation and complex rearranging of 
    requirements and other changes not affecting technical content or 
    substantially revising an operating requirement. The reformatting, 
    renumbering and rewording process reflects the attributes of NUREG-1431 
    and does not involve technical changes to the existing TS. The proposed 
    changes include (a) providing the appropriate numbers, etc., for NUREG-
    1431 bracketed information (information that must be supplied on a 
    plant-specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant), (b) 
    identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and (c) 
    changing NUREG-1431 section wording to conform to existing licensee 
    practices. Such changes are administrative in nature and do not impact 
    initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or 
    transient events.
        Relocated changes are those involving relocation of requirements 
    and surveillances for structures, systems, components, or variables 
    that do not meet the criteria for inclusion in TS. Relocated changes 
    are those current TS requirements that do not satisfy or fall within 
    any of the four criteria specified in the Commission's policy statement 
    and may be relocated to appropriate licensee-controlled documents.
        The licensee's application of the screening criteria is described 
    in Attachment 2 to its June 2, 1997, submittal, which is entitled, 
    ``General Description and Assessment.'' The affected structures, 
    systems, components or variables are not assumed to be initiators of 
    analyzed events and are not assumed to mitigate accident or transient 
    events. The requirements and surveillances for these affected 
    structures, systems, components, or variables will be relocated from 
    the TS to administratively controlled documents such as the quality 
    assurance program, the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), the ITS 
    BASES, the Technical Requirements Manual (TRM) that is incorporated by 
    reference in the FSAR, the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR), the 
    Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), the Inservice Testing (IST) 
    Program, or other licensee-controlled documents. Changes made to these 
    documents will be made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 or other appropriate 
    control mechanisms, and may be made without prior NRC review and 
    approval. In addition, the affected structures, systems, components, or 
    variables are addressed in existing surveillance procedures that are 
    also subject to 10 CFR 50.59. These proposed changes will not impose or 
    eliminate any requirements.
        More restrictive changes are those involving more stringent 
    requirements compared to the CTS for operation of the facility. These 
    more stringent requirements do not result in operation that will alter 
    assumptions relative to the mitigation of an accident or transient 
    event. The more restrictive requirements will not alter the operation 
    of process variables, structures, systems, and components described in 
    the safety analyses. For each requirement in the CTS that is more 
    restrictive than the corresponding requirement in NUREG-1431 that the 
    licensee proposes to retain in the ITS, they have provided an 
    explanation of why they have concluded that retaining the more 
    restrictive requirement is desirable to ensure safe operation of the 
    facility because of specific design features of the plant.
        Less restrictive changes are those where CTS requirements are 
    relaxed or eliminated, or new plant operational flexibility is 
    provided. The more significant ``less restrictive'' requirements are 
    justified on a case-by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to 
    provide little or no safety benefit, their removal from the TS may be 
    appropriate. In most cases, relaxations previously granted to 
    individual plants on a plant-specific basis were the result of (a) 
    generic NRC actions, (b) new NRC staff positions that have evolved from 
    technological advancements and operating experience, or (c) resolution 
    of the Owners Groups' comments on the Improved Standard Technical 
    Specifications. Generic relaxations contained in NUREG-1431 were 
    reviewed by the staff and found to be acceptable because they are 
    consistent with current licensing practices and NRC regulations. The 
    licensee's design will be reviewed to determine if the specific design 
    basis and licensing basis are consistent with the technical basis for 
    the model requirements in NUREG-1431, thus providing a basis for these 
    revised TS, or if relaxation of the requirements in the current TS is 
    warranted based on the justification provided by the licensee.
        These administrative, relocated, more restrictive, and less 
    restrictive changes to the requirements of the CTS do not result in 
    operations that will alter assumptions relative to mitigation of an 
    analyzed accident or transient event.
        In addition to the proposed changes solely involving the 
    conversion, there are also changes proposed that are different than the 
    requirements in both the CTS and the improved Standard Technical 
    Specifications (NUREG-1431). These proposed beyond-scope issues to the 
    ITS conversion are as follows:
        1. ITS Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.2.1.2--add frequency of once 
    within 24 hours for verifying the axial heat flux hot channel factor is 
    within limit after achieving equilibrium conditions.
        2. ITS SR 3.2.2.1 note--revise the allowance to increase power 
    until a power distribution is obtained after equilibrium is achieved.
        3. ITS LCO 3.3.1--revise operability and actions for steam 
    generator low-low level instrumentation in ITS Table 3.3.1-1 to not 
    include Mode 3 in operability and to allow 12 hours in Mode 3 in 
    actions instead of entry into ITS 3.0.3 for inoperable steam generator 
    instrumentation.
        4. ITS LCO 3.3.9--revise Action B to increase the verification 
    interval for unborated water source isolation valve position from 14 
    days to 31 days.
        5. ITS LCOs 3.4.5, 3.4.10, 3.4.11, and 3.4.12--revise applicability 
    and add a note (to ITS 3.4.5) to add reactor coolant pump start 
    restrictions for low temperature overpressure protection for the 
    reactor coolant system.
        6. ITS LCO 3.4.7 and SRs 3.4.5.2, 3.4.6.2, and 3.4.7.2--revise 
    steam
    
    [[Page 53470]]
    
    generator level requirements in Modes 3, 4, and 5 to ensure tubes are 
    covered.
        7. ITS LCO 3.4.1.2--revise applicability note to allow a longer 
    time, up to 4 hours, for injecting into the reactor coolant system.
        8. ITS SR 3.6.3.7--note added to not require leak rate test of 
    containment purge valves with resilient seals when penetration flow 
    path is isolated by leak-tested blank flange.
        9. Actions and table for ITS LCO 3.7.1--changes to main steam 
    safety valves (MSSVs) to reflect Westinghouse Nuclear Safety Letter 94-
    01, revising acceptable power levels when MSSVs are inoperable.
        10. ITS LCO 3.7.15--changes reference for the spent fuel pool level 
    from that above top of fuel stored in racks to that above the top of 
    racks.
        11. ITS LCO 3.7.13--adds note to applicability and new actions on 
    test capability of emergency exhaust system to maintain a negative 
    building pressure while in safety injection signal lineup.
        12. ITS LCO 3.8.6--revise float voltage in Table 3.8.6-1 and add an 
    allowed voltage variation.
        13. ITS 5.6.5--adds refueling boron concentration and shutdown 
    margin limits to the core operating limits report.
        14. ITS 5.7--changes limits for high radiation areas to reflect the 
    requirements of revised 10 CFR Part 20.
        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.
        By November 4, 1998, 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 at the local public 
    document room located at the Elmer Ellis Library, University of 
    Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, 65201. 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.
        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 Mr. John O'Neill, Esq., Shaw, 
    Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC, 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).
        If a request for a hearing is received, the Commission's staff may 
    issue the amendment after it completes its technical review and prior 
    to the completion of any required hearing if it publishes a further 
    notice for public comment of its proposed finding of no significant 
    hazards consideration in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and 50.92.
        For further details with respect to this action, see the 
    application for amendment dated May 15, 1997, as supplemented by 
    letters dated June 26, August 4, August 27, and September 24, 1998, 
    which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public 
    Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
    and at the local public document room located at the Elmer Ellis 
    Library, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, 65201.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of September 1998.
    
    
    [[Page 53471]]
    
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Kristine M. Thomas,
    Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects 
    III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 98-26562 Filed 10-2-98; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
10/05/1998
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
98-26562
Pages:
53468-53471 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 50-483
PDF File:
98-26562.pdf