[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49261-49263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24919]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 49262]]
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 Nuclear Generating Station,
Unit 1 located in Coffey County, Kansas.
The proposed amendment would change the technical specifications to
allow one-time testing of certain relay contacts while the plant is in
MODE 1 and to allow a one-time addition of 24 hours to the shutdown
action statement to provide time to perform the testing.
On September 4, 1997, as a result of reviews undertaken in response
to Generic Letter 96-01, ``Testing of Safety Related Logic Circuits,''
and information received from another plant, Wolf Creek Nuclear
Operating Corporation (WCNOC) determined certain relay contacts that
open had not been monitored during performance of surveillance
procedure, STS KJ-001A/B, ``Integrated Diesel Generator Safeguards
Actuation Test Train A/B.'' The current testing process implemented
through STS KJ-001A/B had not demonstrated the function of the contacts
because there are other contacts in series that could also be open.
The relay contacts provide a blocking/time delay function for start
of the component cooling water (CCW), essential service water (ESW) and
motor driven auxiliary feedwater pumps (MDAFWP). On a loss of offsite
power the CCW, ESW, and MDAFWP are shed from the safety busses and then
loaded in sequence to the EDGs. The contacts blocking/time delay
function assure that no matter what the start demand is for the pumps,
they are not started until the parallel contacts of the load sequencer
close to start the pumps in the required sequence.
Technical Specification 4.0.3 was entered at 1906 CDT on September
4, 1997, for missed surveillances. Technical Specification 4.0.3 allows
the action requirements to be delayed for up to 24 hours to permit the
completion of the surveillance when the allowable outage time limits of
the action requirements are less than 24 hours. However, Technical
Specification 4.8.1.1.2.g requires that the surveillance testing be
performed once every 18 months during shutdown.
Without the proposed change, the plant would have had to shut down
to perform this surveillance test. A Notice of Enforcement Discretion
was issued on September 5, 1997, to allow a one time test of the
unmonitored contacts in Mode 1 and to allow an additional 24 hours to
complete the testing.
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 of consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
This proposed change does not change the function or performance
requirements for the Load Shedding and Emergency Load Sequencing
System, as described in the Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR)
and the Technical Specifications. Testing these relays at power will
not cause any degradation in system performance, nor will it
increase the number of challenges to equipment assumed to function
during an accident situation. The testing will require related
equipment to be declared inoperable for the duration of each test,
but these durations will be much less than those allowed by the
applicable Technical Specification Action Statements. Further, the
proposed change would prevent an unnecessary unit shutdown which
could result in a reactor transient and a unwarranted challenge of
the safety-related systems. This is a one-time test, and future
testing will be performed in accordance with the requirements
specified in the Technical Specifications.
Thus, the proposed change will not result in an increase in the
consequences of, or an increase in the probability of occurrence of,
any accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The Load Shedding and Emergency Load Sequencing System will
continue to perform in a manner consistent with the assumptions in
the USAR. No new scenarios, transient precursors, failure
mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced. There will
be no adverse effects or challenges imposed on any safety-related
system as a result of this request. Therefore, the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident is not created.
3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction
in the margin of safety.
The purpose of this request is to allow WCNOC the ability to
perform a one-time partial test of the subject Load Shedding and
Emergency Load Sequencing System relay contacts while at power. This
testing will demonstrate complete compliance with Technical
Specification 3/4.8.1 without having to shut down the unit. This
activity will not affect any system or component setpoints or safety
limit settings associated with the Load Shedding and Emergency Load
Sequencing System. No new accident scenarios, transient precursors,
failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced.
There will be no significant adverse effects or challenges imposed
on any safety-related system as a result of this request. This
request will not result in 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 14 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 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 Freedom of Information and Publications
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 6D22, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,
[[Page 49263]]
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, 1997, 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 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, 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 Trowbidge, 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).
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated September 8, 1997, 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 15th day of September 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William H. Bateman,
Director, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-24919 Filed 9-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
