[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 135 (Thursday, July 15, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38221-38223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18056]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-482]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; 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-42 issued to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the
licensee) for operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS)
located in Coffey County, Kansas.
The proposed amendment request dated June 30, 1999, would revise
Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.7.5 of the current TSs by adding a
temporary action statement that would allow the plant to operate for up
to 12 hours with an inlet temperature up to but less than 95 degrees F.
The current TS limit is 90 degrees F. This new action statement would
be temporary in that it would be effective until September 30, 1999,
after the summer. This action statement was added to the current TSs in
Amendment 118 dated July 18, 1998, but it was only effective until
September 30, 1998. Amendment 118 was issued because in 1998 the WCGS
cooling lake that provides inlet water to the plant exceeded 89 degrees
F and, due to predictions for continuing harsh meteorological
conditions throughout the summer of 1998, the concern existed that the
plant inlet temperature would exceed 90 degrees F and the plant would
be forced to have an unnecessary shutdown. The licensee submitted a
permanent change to TS 3/4.7.5 on January 12, 1999; however, the
Commission considers this proposed change to be generic in nature and
should be reviewed as a change to NUREG-1431, Standard Technical
Specifications, Westinghouse Plants.'' NUREG-1431 is the standard for
the Improved Technical Specifications that were issued for WCGS in
Amendment 123 dated March 31, 1999. To allow the Commission sufficient
time to review the generic change to NUREG-1431, the licensee was
requested to resubmit the temporary change approved in Amendment 118
with the temporary change being effective until September 30, 1999, for
the warm weather of this summer. This is the change submitted by the
licensee on June 30, 1999.
The proposed change is only to the current TSs because the improved
TSs issued in Amendment 123 will become effective after September 30,
1999, when this temporary change is no longer valid.
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 licensee has provided its analysis of
the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below:
1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change does not involve any physical alteration of
plant systems, structures or components. The proposed change
provides an allowed time [12 hours] for the plant to continue
operation with plant inlet water temperature in excess of the
current technical specification limit of 90 deg.F, but less than the
design limit of 95 deg.F for plant components. The plant inlet water
temperature is not assumed to be an initiating condition of any
accident analysis evaluated in the updated safety analysis report
(USAR). Therefore, the allowance of a limited time for the water
temperature to be in excess of the current limit does not involve an
increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated in
the USAR. The UHS [ultimate heat sink] supports operability of
safety related systems used to mitigate the consequences of an
accident. Plant operation for brief periods with plant inlet water
temperature greater than 90 deg.F but less than 95 deg.F will not
adversely affect the operability of these safety-related systems and
will not adversely impact the ability of these systems to perform
their safety-related functions. Therefore, the proposed change does
not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the USAR.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed change does not involve any physical alteration of
plant systems, structures or components. The temperature of the
plant inlet water being greater than 90 deg.F but less than 95 deg.F
for a short period [12 hours] does not introduce new failure
mechanisms for systems, structures or components not already
considered in the USAR. Therefore, the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated is
not created.
3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction
in the margin of safety.
The proposed change will allow an increase in plant inlet water
temperature above the current technical specification limit of
90 deg.F for the Ultimate Heat Sink, and delay the requirement to
shutdown the plant when the plant inlet water system temperature
limit is exceeded for 12 hours. The proposed change does not alter
any safety limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting
conditions for operation [except for TS 3/4.7.5], and the proposed
temperature increase will remain below the design limit cooling
water input value for safety-related equipment. Thus, the proposed
change 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.
[[Page 38222]]
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
expiration of the 30-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 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 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 August 16, 1999, 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 Emporia State University, William Allen
White Library, 1200 Commercial Street, Emporia, Kansas 66801 and
Washburn University School of Law Library, Topeka, Kansas 66621. 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 20555-0001, 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 Jay Silberg, Esq., Shaw, Pittman,
Potts and 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
[[Page 38223]]
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 June 30, 1999, 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 Emporia State University, William Allen
White Library, 1200 Commercial Street, Emporia, Kansas 66801 and
Washburn University School of Law Library, Topeka, Kansas 66621.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of July 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack N. Donohew,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning,
Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-18056 Filed 7-14-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
