[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 195 (Monday, October 7, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52472-52475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-25625]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-305]
Wisconsin Public Service Company, Wisconsin Power and Light
Company and Madison 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 Nos.
DPR-43 issued to Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Wisconsin Power
and Light Company, and Madison Gas and Electric Company (the licensee),
for operation of the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, located in Kewaunee
County, Wisconsin.
The proposed amendment would change Technical Specification (TS)
requirements related to the low temperature overpressure protection
(LTOP) system. Specifically, the LTOP curve would be modified to define
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G pressure temperature limitations for LTOP
evaluation through the end of operating cycle (EOC) 33. In addition,
the LTOP enabling temperature and the temperature required for starting
a reactor coolant pump would be changed consistent with the design
basis for the LTOP system. Finally, the TS bases would be changed
consistent with the changes described above.
In a letter dated September 27, 1996, the licensee requested that
this amendment application be treated exigently. The current LTOP curve
is applicable through EOC 21 or 18.40 effective full-power years
(EFPY). The startup for cycle 22 is scheduled for October 22, 1996. Due
to time constraints, sufficient time is not available to permit the
customary public notice in advance of this action. This proposed
amendment supersedes a previously submitted proposed amendment on this
subject dated April 30, 1996, which was published in the Federal
Register on May 22, 1996 (61 FR 25714). The new submittal was necessary
in order to address NRC concerns with the original submittal.
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:
The proposed change was reviewed in accordance with the
provisions of 10 CFR 50.92 to show no significant hazards exist. The
proposed change will not:
1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The LTOP setpoint, revised enabling temperature, and revised P/T
[pressure/temperature] limits reflected in proposed Figure TS 3.1-4
ensure that the Appendix G pressure/temperature limits are not
exceeded, and therefore, help ensure that RCS [reactor coolant
system] integrity is maintained. The changes do not modify the
reactor coolant system pressure boundary, nor make any physical
changes to the facility design, material, construction standards, or
setpoints. The LTOP valve setpoint remains at 500 psig.
The LTOP enabling temperature based on Figure TS 3.1-4 is 355 deg.F
and is consistent with BTP RSB 5-2 guidance of RTNDT + 90
deg.F. The revised enabling temperature is greater than the 338
deg.F value in the current TS. A higher enabling temperature ensures
that the LTOP system is available for the prevention of non-ductile
failure over a larger operating window. The probability of a LTOP
event occurring is independent of the pressure-temperature limits
for the RCS pressure boundary and enabling temperature. Therefore,
the probability of a LTOP event is not increased.
The calculation of pressure temperature limits in accordance
with approved regulatory methods provides assurance that reactor
pressure vessel fracture toughness requirements are met and the
integrity of the RCS pressure boundary is maintained. Similar
methodology was used in calculations to support approved amendment
120 to the Kewaunee Technical Specifications dated April 26, 1995.
The material property bases, including chemistry factor and initial
reference temperature for the unirradiated material (RTNDT),
and margin terms, used for this PA are more conservative than that
used in the current TS.
The PT limits reflected in proposed Figure TS 3.1-4 are based on
the following criteria:
(a) An initial RTNDT value of -56 deg.F. Drop weight
testing of Kewaunee surveillance material was performed by the
Westinghouse Electric Corporation and documented in WCAP 14042,
Revision 1, dated January 1995 with a resultant initial RTNDT
of -50 deg.F. Testing of sister plant surveillance material
resulted in an initial RTNDT of -30 deg.F. The mean value for
all Linde 1092 weld heats in -50.7 deg.F. Therefore, use of the
generic value of -56 deg.F (for welds made with Linde 1092 flux)
with a larger margin term was deemed more conservative and
acceptable for this evaluation.
(b) Paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of 10 CFR 50.61. Paragraph
(c)(2)(ii)(A) of 10 CFR 50.61 requires that licensees determine a
material-specific value of chemistry factor when the surveillance
data is deemed credible according to the criteria of paragraph
(c)(2)(I) of 10 CFR 50.61. Reference 3 documents WPSC's evaluation
which concludes that the KNPP surveillance capsule data satisfy the
credibility criteria. The calculated material-specific chemistry
factor value is 190.6 deg.F (based on KNPP surveillance capsule
data from capsules V, R, P, and S). Adjustment of this chemistry
factor has been accomplished by multiplying by 1.18, the ratio of
the best estimate chemistry factor for heat IP3571 to the chemistry
factor for the Kewaunee surveillance weld. This results in a
chemistry factor value of 224.9 deg.F.
(c) Neutron fluence (E greater than 1 MeV) projections through
[the] end of operating cycle 33. The use of predicted fluence values
through the end of operating cycle 33 is appropriately considered
within the calculations in accordance with standard industry
methodology previously docketed under WCAP 13227 and WCAP 14279. The
neutron exposure projections utilized for calculation of the
reference temperature were multiplied by a factor of 1.11 to adjust
for biases observed between cycle specific calculations and the
results of neutron dosimetry for the four surveillance capsules
removed from the KNPP reactor. The factor of 1.11 was derived by
taking the average of the measured to calculation (M/C) flux ratios
obtained from the dosimetry results of capsules V, R, P, and S
removed from the KNPP reactor vessel. The resulting effect of using
predicted fluence values through the end of cycle 33 instead of
cycle 21 is to require the [plant to evaluate LTOP transients to
more limiting requirements].
Additional conservatism from a more conservative material
property basis and higher projected fluence values is readily
illustrated by the increase in magnitude of EOCNDT1/4T from
212.94 deg.F (derived from the material property basis used in the
current TS) to 264.46oF used for this PA. The proposed PT limits are
shifted to a lower pressure and higher temperature, which is more
conservative.
The changes do not adversely affect the integrity of the RCS
such that its function in the control of radiological consequences
is affected. In addition, the changes do not affect any fission
barrier. The changes do not degrade or prevent the response of the
LTOP relief valve or other safety-related systems to
[[Page 52473]]
previously evaluated accidents. In addition, the changes do not
alter any assumption previously made in the radiological
consequences evaluations nor affect the mitigation of the
radiological consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Therefore, the consequences of an accident previously evaluated will
not be increased.
Thus, operation of KNPP in accordance with the PA does not
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
any accident previously evaluated.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different type of accident
from an accident previously evaluated.
The enabling temperature and Appendix G pressure temperature
limitations were prepared using methods derived from the ASME Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Code and the criteria set forth in NRC
Regulatory Standard Review Plan 5.3.2. The changes do not cause the
initiation of any accident nor create any new credible limiting
failure for safety-related systems and components. The changes do
not result in any event previously deemed incredible being made
credible. As such, it does not create the possibility of an accident
different than previously evaluated.
The changes do not have any adverse effect on the ability of the
safety-related systems to perform their intended safety functions.
Since the enabling temperature is higher, the LTOP system is
available for prevention of non-ductile failure over a wide
operating window. The new LTOP operating window (i.e., less than or
equal to 355 deg.F) is within the existing band for the residual
heat removal system; operating procedures allow the LTOP system to
be placed into service at less than 400 deg.F. The proposed changes
do not make physical changes to the plant or create new failure
modes. Therefore, it will not create the possibility of a
malfunction of equipment important to safety different than
previously evaluated. Thus, the PA does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The use of Paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of 10 CFR 50.61, chemistry
factor ratio of 1.18, initial reference temperature of -56 deg.F,
and fluence values through EOC [end of cycle] 33 does not modify the
reactor coolant system pressure boundary, nor make any physical
changes to the LTOP setpoint or system design. Proposed Figure TS
3.1-4 was prepared in accordance with regulatory requirements and
requires evaluation of LTOP events to the more conservative material
property basis and more limiting requirements of neutron exposure
projections of 33.41 EFPY instead of 18.40 EFPY.
Therefore, the PA does not create the possibility of a new or
different type of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The Appendix G pressure temperature limitations were prepared
using methods derived from the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
and the criteria set forth in NRC Regulatory Standard Review Plan
5.3.2. These documents along with the calculational limitations
specified in 10 CFR 50.61 are an acceptable method for implementing
the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendices G and H. Inherent
conservatism in the P/T limits resulting from these documents
include:
a. An assumed defect in the reactor vessel wall with a depth
equal to \1/4\ of the thickness of the vessel wall (\1/4\T) and a
length equal to 1\1/2\ times the thickness of the vessel wall.
b. Assumed reference flaw oriented in both longitudinal and
circumferential directions and limiting material property. At KNPP,
the only weld in the core region is oriented in the circumferential
direction.
c. A factor of safety of 2 is applied to the membrane stress
intensity factor.
d. The limiting toughness is based upon a reference value
(KIR) which is a lower bound on the dynamic crack initiation or
arrest toughness.
e. A 2-sigma margin term is applied in determining the adjusted
reference temperature (ART) that is used to calculate the limiting
toughness.
Similar methodology was used in calculations to support approved
amendment 120 dated April 26, 1995. Beyond the conservatism
described above, WPSC [Wisconsin Public Service Corporation] has
incorporated the following additional margin in preparing this PA:
a. The reactor coolant pump starting restrictions of TS
3.1.a.1.c reflect the more limiting LTOP enabling temperature of 355
deg.F consistent with the design basis for the LTOP system.
b. The LTOP enabling temperature based on Figure TS 3.1-4 is 355
deg.F and is more conservative than the 338oF value in the current
TS.
c. The calculated material-specific chemistry factor value of
190.6oF (based upon KNPP surveillance capsule data from capsules V,
R, P, and S) has been multiplied by 1.18 yielding an adjusted
chemistry factor value of 224.9oF to account for chemical
composition differences between the best estimate value for weld
heat IP3571 and the Kewaunee surveillance weld material. d. The
neutron exposure projections were multiplied by a factor of 1.11 to
adjust for biases observed between cycle specific calculations and
the results of neutron dosimetry for the four surveillance capsules
removed from the KNPP reactor. The factor of 1.11 was derived by
taking the average of the measured to calculation (M/C) flux ratios
obtained from the dosimetry results of capsules V, R, P, and S
removed from the KNPP reactor vessel. Additional conservatisms
beyond that described above but not used in development of the
proposed TS and Figure include: (a) A 2 inch diameter spring loaded
safety valve set at 480 psig located in the LTOP system. At 500
psig, the LTOP relief valve setpoint, the relieving capacity of this
smaller valve is 230 gpm. (b) The actual LTOP relief valve capacity
is at least 10% greater than the capacity used in the design and
setpoint analyses. This is in accordance with the requirements of
Section III NC-7000. (c) Assumptions in the overpressure transient
analyses are conservative relative to the actual Kewaunee reactor
coolant system (RCS) and operating practices:
1. The RCS was assumed to be rigid with respect to metal
expansion.
2. No credit was taken for the shrinkage effect caused by low
temperature safety injection water added to higher temperature
reactor coolant.
3. No credit was taken for the reduction in reactor coolant bulk
modulus at RCS temperatures above 100 deg.F (constant bulk modulus
at all RCS temperatures).
4. The entire volume of water of the steam generator secondary
was assumed available for heat transfer to the primary. In reality,
the liquid immediately adjacent and above the tube bundle would be
the primary source of energy in the transient.
5. The overall steam generator heat transfer coefficient, U, was
assumed to be the free convective heat transfer coefficient of the
secondary, hsec. The forced convective heat transfer
coefficient of the primary, hpri and the tube metal resistance
have been ignored thus resulting in a conservative (high)
coefficient.
6. The reactor coolant pump start time assumed in the heat input
analysis was 9-10 seconds; whereas, the Kewaunee pump startup time
is 25-30 seconds.
An alternative methodology to the safety margins required by
Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 has been developed by the ASME Working
Group on Operating Plant Criteria. This methodology is contained in
ASME Code Case N-514. The Code Case N-514 provides criteria to
determine pressure limits during LTOP events that avoid certain
unnecessary operational restrictions, provide adequate margins
against failure of the reactor pressure vessel, and reduce the
potential for unnecessary activation of the relief valve used for
LTOP. Specifically, the ASME Code Case N-514 allows determination of
the setpoint for LTOP events such that the maximum pressure in the
vessel would not exceed 110% of the P/T limits of the existing ASME
Appendix G; and redefines the enabling temperature at a coolant
temperature less than 200 deg.F or a reactor vessel metal
temperature less than RTNDT + 50 deg.F, whichever is greater.
Code Case N-514, ``Low Temperature Overpressure Protection,'' has
been approved by the ASME Code Committee but not yet approved for
use in Regulatory Guide 1.147. The content of this code case has
been incorporated into Appendix G of Section XI of the ASME Code and
published in the 1993 Addenda to Section XI. It is expected that
next revision of 10 CFR 50.55a will endorse the 1993 Addenda and
Appendix G of Section XI. As stated above, this PA utilizes Appendix
G limits and an enabling temperature corresponding to a reactor
vessel metal temperature less than RTNDT + 90 deg.F, which is
more conservative than the alternative methodology contained in Code
Case N-514.
The revised calculations meet the NRC acceptance criteria for
the LTOP setpoint and system design as described in NRC Safety
Evaluation Report (SER) dated September 6, 1985 which concluded that
``the spectrum of postulated pressure transients would be mitigated
* * * such that the temperature pressure limits of Appendix G to 10
CFR 50 are maintained.''
Use of the methodology set forth in the ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code, NRC
[[Page 52474]]
Regulatory Standard Review Plan 5.3.2, 10 CFR 50.61, and 10 CFR 50
Appendices G and H with the above additional margins ensures that
proper limits and safety factors are maintained. Thus, the PA does
not involve a significant reduction in the 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 15 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 15-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 preventing startup of the facility,
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of
the 15-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 and provide for opportunity for a hearing
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 Rules Review and
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page
number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be
delivered to Room 6D22, 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 November 6, 1996, 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 University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Library,
2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54311-7001. 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 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 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.
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, Attention: Docketing and Services
Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room,
the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above
date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the notice
period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the
Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800)
248-5100 (in Missouri
[[Page 52475]]
1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram
Identification Number N1023 and the following message addressed to Gail
H. Marcus: petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition was
mailed, plant name, and publication date and page number of this
Federal Register notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to
the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, and to Bradley D. Jackson, Esq., Foley and
Lardner, P. O. Box 1497, Madison, Wisconsin 53701-1497, 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 27, 1996, 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 University of Wisconsin, Cofrin
Library, 2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54311-7001.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of October 1996.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard J. Laufer,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-3, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-25625 Filed 10-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
