Callaway Plant, Unit 1; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 54776-54778 [E5-5086]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 179 (Friday, September 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54776-54778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-5086]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No.: 50-483]


Callaway Plant, Unit 1; 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-30 issued to the Union Electric Company (the licensee) for 
operation of the Callaway Plant, Unit 1, in Callaway County, Missouri.
    The proposed amendment, submitted in the licensee's application 
dated September 9, 2005, would revise Surveillance Requirements (SRs) 
3.7.3.1 and 3.7.3.2 and add SR 3.7.3.3 in Technical Specification (TS) 
3.7.3, ``Main Feedwater Isolation Valves (MFIVs).'' The new SR 3.7.3.3 
would add Figure 3.7.3-1, the acceptable valve closure time versus the 
steam generator pressure for the MFIVs, to the TSs.
    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 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 
accordance

[[Page 54777]]

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. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No. Revision of the MFIV stroke time limit has no 
impact on the frequency of occurrence of those events for which 
feedwater isolation is credited or assumed. The MFIVs themselves are 
not part of the initiating mechanisms or failure modes for such 
events (such as steamline break or feedwater line break). Therefore, 
the proposed change has no impact on the probability of occurrence 
of such events and does not involve a significant increase in the 
probability of an accident previously evaluated.
    With regard to consequences of previously evaluated accidents, 
evaluations were documented in References 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3 [(the 
licensee's letters to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated June 
27 and December 12, 2003, and September 17, 2004, respectively)] 
that assessed the impact of the change in MFIV actuators and an 
associated 15-second MFIV stroke time (for operating conditions that 
include secondary system pressures above the reference pressure that 
corresponds to [the] P-11 permissive) on LOCA [loss-of-coolant 
accident] mass and energy releases; main steamline break mass and 
energy releases; LOCA and LOCA related transients; non-LOCA 
transients; LOCA hydraulic forces and steam releases used for 
radiological consequence calculations. The consequences of those 
evaluations are not adversely affected by the proposed change to an 
increasing MFIV stroke time limit where appropriate for lower 
secondary system pressures. The evaluations discussed in Section 4.0 
[of Attachment 2 to the licensee's application dated September 9, 
2005,] demonstrate that such an increase in the MFIV stroke time 
from the 15 seconds assumed in the analyses performed in support of 
the Callaway RSG [Replacement Steam Generator] Program (Reference 
7.3) to a higher bounding stroke time value of 90 seconds where 
appropriate for lower secondary system pressures is acceptable with 
respect to the impacted accident analyses. The resulting 
interpolated TS curve proposed as TS Figure 3.7.3-1 provides an MFIV 
stroke time limit that is pressure dependent but bounding, as it 
ensures the applicable FSAR [Callaway Final Safety Analysis Report] 
Chapter 15 events that credit MFIV closure remain bounding.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not result in a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No. The proposed changes do not involve any hardware 
or design changes [n]or any changes in the methods by which safety-
related plant systems perform their safety function. No new accident 
scenarios, transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting 
single failures are introduced as a result of this request. There 
will be no adverse effect or challenges imposed on any safety-
related system as a result of the proposed change.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No. The proposed changes to incorporate a pressure-
dependent MFIV surveillance stroke time limit and to delete the 
Notes on SR 3.7.3.1 and SR 3.7.3.2 do not affect any safety analysis 
acceptance criteria nor involve any change to a safety analysis 
limit, limiting safety system setting, or safety system performance 
criterion. There will be no effect on the manner in which safety 
limits or limiting safety system settings are determined nor will 
there be any effect on those plant systems necessary to assure the 
accomplishment of protection functions. The radiological dose 
consequence acceptance criteria will continue to be met. There will 
be no significant impact on the overpower limit, departure from 
nucleate boiling ratio limits, heat flux hot channel factor (FQ), 
nuclear enthalpy rise hot channel factor (F-delta-H), loss[-]of[-
]coolant accident peak cladding temperature (LOCA PCT), peak local 
power density, or any other margin of safety. The radiological dose 
consequence acceptance criteria listed in the Standard Review Plan 
will continue to be met.
    Therefore, the proposed change 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 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 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment 
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the 
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day 
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, 
for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the 
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment 
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a 
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place 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. Documents may 
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room 
(PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, 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 2.309, which is available at the 
Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 
available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room 
on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for

[[Page 54778]]

leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a 
presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the 
Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, 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 general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone 
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the 
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the 
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's 
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the 
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the 
proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest. The petition must 
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor 
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue 
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the 
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for 
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/requestor 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. 
The petition must include 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/requestor 
who fails to satisfy 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.
    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.
    Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding 
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, 
request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing 
of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(I)-(viii).
    A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must 
be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the 
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications 
Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: 
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; 
or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: 
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification 
number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and 
petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of 
the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by 
means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725 or by e-mail to 
OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and petition 
for leave to intervene should also be sent to the John O'Neill, Esq., 
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20037, attorney for the licensee.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated September 9, 2005, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White 
Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be 
accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's 
(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 
site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents 
located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by 
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of September, 2005.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-5086 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P