[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 91 (Thursday, May 12, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-11647]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: May 12, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-397]
Washington Public Power Supply System; 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 issuing an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-
21 issued to Washington Public Power Supply System (the licensee) for
operation of its Nuclear Project No. 2 (WNP-2) plant, located in Benton
County, Washington.
The proposed amendment changes the plant operating license to
rename three primary containment isolation check valves listed in the
technical specifications. The licensee is making an administrative
change to rename valve PI-EFC-X29d to make its number consistent with
other similar valves in the technical specifications. The license is
renaming excess flow check valves PI-EFCX-72f and PI-EFCX-73e because
they are replacing them with swing check valves that have a different
numbering nomenclature.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in 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 license has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
The Supply System has evaluated the proposed changes against the
above standards as required by 10 CFR 50.91(a) and concluded that the
change does not:
(1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated:
Revising the equipment piece number (EPN) for PI-EFC-X29d to PI-
EFC-X29b in Technical Specification Table 3.6.3-1 is an administrative
change and provides consistency between the Technical Specifications
and approved design bases. PI-EFC-X29d provides instrument line break
(ILB) mitigation as analyzed in FSAR Section 15.6.2. Renaming PI-EFC-
X29d has no impact on FSAR accident analyses.
Replacing existing excess flow check valves PI-EFCX-72f and PI-
EFCX-73e with swing check valves and changing the EPNs has no impact on
the containment isolation design basis described in FSAR Section
6.2.4.3.2.2.3.3. This plant modification will conform the plant to the
FSAR design basis. The FSAR describes the drywell and suppression
chamber air sampling lines and indicates that ``the return lines are
equipped with * * * a reverse-oriented excess flow check valve used as
a simple check valve inside of containment.'' Replacement of the spring
loaded excess flow check valve with a simple check valve (without a
spring) meets plant design bases and 10CFR50 Appendix A, General Design
Criterion (GDC) 56 criteria for containment isolation. The valve change
and resulting EPN change do not impact the FSAR design analyses.
Therefore, this change does not increase the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
(2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated:
No new mode of operation of any equipment results from the valve
design change or EPN change for the three excess flow check valves.
Renaming valve PI-EFC-X29d is an administrative change.
The replacement, and subsequent EPN change, of inboard containment
isolation excess flow check valves PI-EFCX-72f and PI-EFCX-73e with
swing check valves brings the plant into conformance with the analyzed
design bases. Operation and maintenance of these valves in accordance
with design and Technical Specification requirements provide assurance
that primary containment will be maintained for the design basis LOCA
event. The EPN change is required to conform to standard nomenclature
for identification of penetration isolation valves.
Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
(3) Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety:
The administrative name change for PI-EFC-X29d is made to ensure
consistency between Technical Specification Table 3.6.3-1 and existing
plant design documentation. Renaming this excess flow check valve
provides consistency to the nomenclature of other excess flow check
valves which use a dual tube method of draining condensate.
The replacement and subsequent EPN change of inboard containment
isolation valves PI-EFCX-72f and PI-EFCX-73e brings the plant into
conformance with the analyzed design bases. Maintenance and operation
requirements are not modified in any manner. Adherence to the analyzed
design bases will not affect the margin of safety for the design bases
analysis.
Therefore, this change does not involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety.
In preparing this request the Technical Specification Bases were
reviewed for impact. No changes are necessary to address the EPN
changes or the replacement of two excess flow check valves with swing
check valves.
Based on this review, the Supply System has determined that the
three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Accordingly, the Supply
System has determined that this amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
The NRC reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review,
it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied.
Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 30-
day notice period expires. 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
30-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, 11555 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
20555.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By June 13, 1994, 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 20555 and at the local
public document room located at the Richland Public Library, 955
Northgate Street, Richland, Washington 99352. 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 particularly 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 supplemental 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 20555, 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 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union
operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the
following message addressed to Theodore R. Quay, Director, Project
Directorate IV-3: 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 Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq., Winston &
Strawn, 1400 L Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20005-3502, the licensee's
attorney.
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 May 5, 1994, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local
public document room located at the Richland Public Library, 955
Northgate Street, Richland, Washington 99352.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of May 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Mark Padovan,
Acting Project Manager Project Directorate IV-3 Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-11647 Filed 5-11-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
