Union Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 42134-42137 [E6-11832]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 25, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42134-42137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-11832]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-483]


Union 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 No. 
NPF-30, issued to Union Electric Company (the licensee), for operation 
of the Callaway Plant, Unit 1 (Callaway), located in Callaway County, 
Missouri.
    The proposed amendment would delete the (1) containment cooler 
condensate monitoring system and (2) containment atmosphere gaseous 
radioactivity monitor from the limiting

[[Page 42135]]

condition for operation in Technical Specification (TS) 3.4.15, ``RCS 
[reactor coolant system] Leakage Detection Instrumentation.'' The 
conditions, required actions, completion times, and surveillance 
requirements in TS 3.4.15 that are associated with both of these 
monitors would also be deleted from TS 3.4.15. This would remove these 
two monitors from the TSs as methods to detect an RCS leak rate of 1 
gallon per minute (gpm) in 1 hour. The licensee submitted its request 
to revise the TSs in its application dated July 19, 2006. This 
application supercedes the licensee's previous two applications dated 
August 26, 2005, and August 29, 2006, which proposed only to delete the 
containment atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor from TS 3.4.15.
    In its application, the licensee requested that the amendment be 
approved on an exigent basis, in accordance with Paragraph 50.91(a)(6) 
of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.91(a)(6)), by 
no later than August 8, 2006. The licensee provided the following basis 
for its request. On July 10, 2006, a Commission's resident inspector at 
Callaway identified a concern with the licensee using the containment 
cooler condensate monitoring system for RCS leakage detection in 
accordance with TS 3.4.15. Specifically, the resident inspector 
questioned the ability of the system to detect a 1 gpm RCS leak rate in 
1 hour based on realistic or normal plant conditions. The licensee 
stated that in subsequent reviews it was unable to establish that the 
system could meet this criteria and declared the system inoperable on 
July 10, 2006, at 15:44 in the afternoon. Because the containment 
atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor had previously been declared 
inoperable because it could not be shown to meet this criteria, TS 
3.4.15, with both monitors being inoperable, requires that the licensee 
analyze samples of the containment atmosphere, or verify RCS 
operational leakage is within limits by performance of an RCS watery 
inventory balance, once every 24 hours, and restore either of the two 
monitors within 30 days, or start shutting down. Since the licensee 
does not see the basis to justify that either of the two monitors can 
meet the criteria for TS 3.4.15, it has requested the exigent amendment 
to remove the two monitors from TS 3.4.15 and, thus, prevent the plant 
shut down starting 30 days after the containment cooler condensate 
monitoring system was declared inoperable (i.e., 30 days after July 10, 
2006, at 15:44). The licensee concluded that it could not have 
reasonably foreseen or anticipated this situation and, therefore, could 
not have avoided the need for the exigent amendment request.
    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; (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.
    The proposed change has been evaluated and determined to not 
increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated. The proposed change does not make any hardware changes and 
does not alter the configuration of any plant system, structure, or 
component (SSC). The proposed change will remove the containment cooler 
condensate monitoring system and the containment atmosphere gaseous 
radioactivity monitor as an option for meeting the OPERABILITY 
requirements for TS 3.4.15. The TS will continue to require diverse 
means of leakage detection equipment, thus ensuring that leakage due to 
RCS piping cracks would continue to be identified prior to propagating 
to the point of a pipe break and the plant shutdown accordingly. 
Therefore, the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated are not increased.
    (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 change does not involve the use or installation of new 
equipment and the currently installed equipment will not be operated in 
a new or different manner. No new or different system interactions are 
created and no new processes are introduced. The proposed changes will 
not introduce any new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident 
initiators not already considered in the design and licensing bases. 
The proposed change does not affect any SSC associated with an accident 
initiator. Based on this evaluation, the proposed change does not 
create the possibility of 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 change does not alter any Reactor Coolant System (RCS) 
leakage detection components. The proposed change will remove the 
containment cooler condensate monitoring system and the containment 
atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor as an option for meeting the 
OPERABILITY requirements for TS 3.4.15. This change is required since 
the level of radioactivity in the Callaway reactor coolant has become 
much lower than what was assumed in the [Callaway] FSAR [Final Safety 
Analysis Report] and the gaseous channel can no longer promptly detect 
a small RCS leak under normal conditions. Similarly, for certain 
combinations of essential service water (ESW) temperature, outside air 
temperature and relative humidity, the containment cooler condensate 
monitoring system's ability to detect an RCS leak rate of 1 gpm in one 
hour is also uncertain. The proposed amendment continues to require 
diverse means of leakage detection equipment with capability to 
promptly detect RCS leakage. Although not required by TS, additional 
diverse means of leakage detection capability are available as 
described in the FSAR Section 5.2.5. Early detection of leakage, as the 
potential indicator of a crack(s) in the RCS pressure boundary, will 
thus continue to be in place so that such a condition is known and 
appropriate actions taken well before any such crack would propagate to 
a more severe condition. Based on this evaluation, the proposed change 
does not involve a significant reduction in a 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 42136]]

    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 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, 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 and Issuance of Orders'' 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 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 requestor's/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/requestor is aware and on 
which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts 
or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor 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/
requestor 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

[[Page 42137]]

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 John 
O'Neill, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 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 July 19, 2006, which is available for 
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (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 electronically 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.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, or 301-415-4737, or by 
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of July 2006.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack Donohew,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E6-11832 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P