Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler To Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process, 39089-39094 [E7-13845]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Notices The Commission’s related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 29, 2007. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this sixth day of July 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Catherine Haney, Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7–13537 Filed 7–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Background Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler To Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/ EFW Pump Inoperable Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of availability. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model license amendment request (LAR), model safety evaluation (SE), and model proposed no significant hazards consideration (NSHC) determination related to changes to Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. This change establishes a Completion Time in the Standard Technical Specifications for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. The purpose of these models is to permit the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to adopt the associated changes into plant-specific technical specifications (TS). Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which the models apply can request amendments confirming the applicability of the SE and NSHC determination to their reactors. DATES: The NRC staff issued a Federal Register Notice (72 FR 12845, March 19, 2007) which provided a model LAR, model SE, and model NSHC related to one steam supply to turbine driven auxiliary feedwater/emergency feedwater pump inoperable; similarly VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Jul 16, 2007 the NRC staff herein provides the model LAR, a revised model SE, and the model NSHC. The NRC staff can most efficiently consider applications based upon the model LAR, which references the model SE, if the application is submitted within one year of this Federal Register Notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trent L. Wertz, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O–12H2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, telephone 301–415–1568. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Jkt 211001 Regulatory Issue Summary 2000–06, ‘‘Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power Reactors,’’ was issued on March 20, 2000. The consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to improve the efficiency and transparency of NRC licensing processes. This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) (NUREGs 1430—1434) in a manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP directs the NRC staff to evaluate any comments received for a proposed change to the STS and to either reconsider the change or proceed with announcing the availability of the change to licensees. Those licensees opting to apply for the subject change to TS are responsible for reviewing the NRC staff’s evaluation, referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant specific information. Each amendment application submitted in response to the notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures. This notice involves establishing a Completion Time in the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This notice also involves two additional changes to the STS that establish specific Conditions and Action requirements: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 39089 inoperable at the same time and; (2) for when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The changes were proposed by the Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) in TSTF Traveler TSTF–412, Revision 3, which is accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html (Accession No. ML070100363). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff by telephone at 1–800– 397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Applicability This change is applicable to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE). To efficiently process the incoming license amendment applications, the NRC staff requests that each licensee applying for the changes use the CLIIP to submit a License Amendment Request (LAR) that conforms to the enclosed Model Application (Enclosure 1). Any deviations from the Model Application should be explained in the licensee’s submittal. Significant deviations from the approach, or inclusion of additional changes to the license, will result in staff rejection of the submittal. Instead, licensees desiring significant variations and/or additional changes should submit a LAR that does not claim to adopt TSTF–412. Variations from the approach recommended in this notice may require additional review by the NRC staff and may increase the time and resources needed for the review. Public Notices The staff issued a Federal Register Notice (72 FR 12845, March 19, 2007) that requested public comment on the NRC’s pending action to establish a Completion Time in the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This notice also involves two additional changes to the STS that establish specific Conditions and Action requirements: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; (2) for E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 39090 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Notices when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. In particular, following an assessment and draft safety evaluation by the NRC staff, the staff sought public comment on proposed changes to the STS, designated TSTF– 412 Revision 3. In response to the notice soliciting comments from the interested members of the public about NRC’s pending action to establish a Completion Time in the Standard Technical Specifications for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train, the staff received one comment (from a licensee). The comment on the model SE is summarized and discussed below: 1. COMMENT: The first sentence in the third paragraph under ‘‘STS 3.7.5, Condition C (as Proposed),’’ in Section 3.0 of the Proposed Model Safety Evaluation states the following: ‘‘The STS typically allows a 72 hour Completion Time for Conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure.’’ Since there are several TSs in the STS that allow a longer Completion time than 72 hours for conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure (such as seven days in TS 3.5.2, 3.6.6, and 3.7.10 in NUREG–1432), it is recommended that the sentence be changed to the following: ‘‘The STS typically allows a 72 hour or longer Completion Time for Conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure.’’ Response: The NRC staff agrees with the comment and has modified the model SE. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of July, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Timothy J. Kobetz, Chief Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The following example of a license amendment request (LAR) was prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate the adoption of Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–412, Revision 3 ‘‘Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/ EFW Pump Inoperable.’’ The model VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Jul 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 provides the expected level of detail and content for a LAR to adopt TSTF–412, Revision 3. Licensees remain responsible for ensuring that their plantspecific LAR fulfills their administrative requirements as well as NRC regulations. llllllllllllllllll l PROPOSED MODEL LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555. SUBJECT: PLANT NAME DOCKET NO. 50– APPLICATION FOR TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION IMPROVEMENT TO REVISE ACTIONS FOR ONE STEAM SUPPLY TO TURBINE DRIVEN AUXILIARY FEEDWATER / EMERGENCY FEEDWATER PUMP INOPERABLE USING THE CONSOLIDATED LINE ITEM IMPROVEMENT PROCESS Gentlemen: In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is submitting a request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for [PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.]. The proposed amendment establishes Conditions, Required Actions, and Completion Times in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven Auxiliary Feedwater/ Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In addition, this amendment establishes changes to the STS that establish specific Actions: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; (2) for when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The change is consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF–412, Revision 3, ‘‘Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.’’ The availability of this technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [DATE OF NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY] as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). Enclosure 1 provides a description of the proposed change and confirmation of applicability. Enclosure 2 provides the existing TS pages marked-up to show the proposed change. Enclosure 3 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 provides the existing TS Bases pages marked-up to reflect the proposed change. There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this proposed change. [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment by [DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X DAYS]. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application, with enclosures, is being provided to the designated [STATE] Official. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that I am authorized by [LICENSEE] to make this request and that the foregoing is true and correct. [Note that request may be notarized in lieu of using this oath or affirmation statement]. If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact [ ]. Sincerely, Name, Title Enclosures: 1. Description and Assessment 2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes 3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes cc: NRR Project Manager Regional Office Resident Inspector State Contact llllllllllllllllll l Enclosure 1 to Model License Amendment Request Description and Assessment 1.0 DESCRIPTION The proposed License amendment establish a new Completion Time in Standard Technical Specifications Section [3.7.5] where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This amendment also establishes specific Conditions and Action requirements: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; (2) for when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The changes are consistent with NRC approved Industry/Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler, TSTF–412, Revision 3, ‘‘Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.’’ The availability of this E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Notices technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). 2.0 ASSESSMENT 2.1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation [LICENSEE] has reviewed the safety evaluation published on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. This verification included a review of the NRC staff’s evaluation as well as the supporting information provided to support TSTF–412, Revision 3. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the justifications presented in the TSTF proposal and the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NOS.] and justify this amendment for the incorporation of the changes to the [PLANT] Technical Specifications. 2.2 Optional Changes and Variations [LICENSEE] is not proposing any variations or deviations from the technical specification changes described in TSTF–412, Revision 3, or the NRC staff’s model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]). 3.0 REGULATORY ANALYSIS A description of the proposed change and its relationship to applicable regulatory requirements and guidance was provided in the Notice of Availability published on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]). [Pre-General Design Criteria plants need to include applicable plant specific regulatory requirements]. 3.1 No Significant Hazards Determination [LICENSEE] has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination published on [DATE] as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the proposed determination presented in the notice is applicable to [PLANT] and the determination is hereby incorporated by reference to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(a). sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 3.2 Verification and Commitments There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this proposed change. 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in the model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Jul 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 39091 Specifications (TS). Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(c), TS are required to include items in the following categories: (1) Safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for operation (LCOs); (3) surveillance requirements (SRs); (4) design features; and (5) administrative controls. The rule does Enclosure 2 to Model License not specify the particular requirements Amendment Request: PROPOSED to be included in a plant’s TS. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION Also, in 10 CFR 50 Appendix A the CHANGES Commission established regulatory llllllllllllllllll l requirements related to Auxiliary Feedwater Systems. General Design Enclosure 3 to Model License Criteria 34 and 44 state that the AFW Amendment Request: CHANGES TO TS system is required to assure (1) the BASES PAGES capability to transfer heat loads from the llllllllllllllllll l reactor system to a heat sink under both normal operating and accident PROPOSED MODEL SAFETY conditions; (2) the redundancy of EVALUATION components for performance of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission safety function under accident Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation conditions, assuming a single active Consolidated Line Item Improvement component failure; and (3) the Technical Specification Task Force capability to isolate components, Traveler TSTF–412, Revision 3, Provide subsystems, or piping if required to Actions for One Steam Supply to the maintain system safety function. Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump 3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION Inoperable TS 3.7.5, Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW)/ 1.0 INTRODUCTION Emergency Feedwater (EFW) System By application dated [DATE], The AFW/EFW System is designed to [LICENSEE NAME] (the licensee), automatically supply sufficient water to submitted a request for changes to the the steam generator(s) to remove decay [PLANT NAME], Technical heat upon the loss of normal feedwater Specifications (TS) (Agencywide supply with steam generator pressure at Documents Access and Management the set point of the Main Steam Safety System (ADAMS) Accession No. [MLxxxxxxxxx]). The requested changes Valves (MSSVs). Subsequently, the AFW/EFW System supplies sufficient adopt TSTF–412, Revision 3, ‘‘Provide water to cool the unit to Residual Heat Actions for One Steam Supply to the Removal (RHR) System entry Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump conditions, with steam being released Inoperable.’’ NRC approval of these through the Atmospheric Dump Valves changes was announced in the Federal (ADVs). Register on [DATE] [xx FR xxxxx]. The AFW/EFW Systems typically consist requested change would establish a of two motor driven AFW/EFW pumps Completion Time for the Condition and one steam turbine driven pump where one steam supply to the turbine configured into three trains. The driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable capacity of the motor driven and steam concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW pumps can vary by driven AFW/EFW train and establish plant. Motor driven pumps typically specific Conditions and Required provide 50% or 100% of the required Actions: (1) When two motor driven AFW/EFW flow capacity as assumed in AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the the accident analysis. Motor driven same time and; (2) when the turbine AFW/EFW pumps are typically driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable powered from an independent Class 1E either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other power supply and each pump train typically feeds half of the steam than one inoperable steam supply. generators, although each pump has the These changes were described in a capability to be realigned from the Notice of Availability published in the control room to feed other steam Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR generators. The steam turbine driven xxxxx]). AFW/EFW pump provides either 100% 2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION or 200% of the required capacity to all steam generators. The steam turbine In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission driven pump receives steam from two established its regulatory requirements main steam lines upstream of the main related to the content of Technical FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the NRC staff’s findings presented in that evaluation are applicable to [PLANT] and the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this application. llllllllllllllllll l PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 39092 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Notices steam isolation valves. Each of the steam feed lines will supply 100% of the requirements of the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES LCO 3.7.5 Condition A (as proposed) Condition A is modified to refer to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/ EFW train due to an inoperable steam supply, instead of referring to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/ EFW pump. This change is being proposed in order to make Condition A train oriented instead of component oriented, consistent with the other Conditions that are included in STS 3.7.5. The train oriented approach is consistent with the preferred approach that is generally reflected in the STS, and therefore the proposed change is considered to be acceptable. STS 3.7.5, Condition C (as proposed) A new Condition C with two possible Required Actions (C.1 OR C.2) is proposed for the turbine driven AFW/ EFW train being inoperable due to one inoperable steam supply and one motor driven AFW/EFW train being inoperable at the same time. Required Action C.1 requires restoration of the affected steam supply to operable status within either 24 or 48 hours, depending on the capability of the motor driven AFW/ EFW train that remains operable. Alternatively, Required Action C.2 requires restoration of the inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train within either 24 or 48 hours, again depending on the capability of the motor driven AFW/EFW train that remains operable. New Condition C provides two proposed Completion Times that are dependent upon the capacity of the remaining operable motor driven AFW/ EFW train to provide AFW/EFW to the steam generators. A proposed 24 hour Completion Time is applicable to plants that may provide insufficient flow to the steam generators (SGs) in accordance with accident analyses assumptions if a main steam line break (MSLB) or feedwater line break (FLB) were to occur that renders the remaining steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable (a concurrent single failure is not assumed). Insufficient feedwater flow could result, for example, if a single motor driven AFW/EFW train does not have sufficient capacity to satisfy accident analyses assumptions, or if the operable pump is feeding the faulted SG (i.e. the SG that is aligned to the operable steam supply for the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump). øThis would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump having less than 100% of the required VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Jul 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 flow.¿ A proposed 48 hour Completion Time is applicable when the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is capable of providing sufficient feedwater flow in accordance with accident analyses assumptions. øThis would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump having greater than or equal to 100% of the required flow.¿ The STS typically allows a 72 hour or longer Completion Time for Conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure. In this particular case, a 24 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where the AFW/EFW system would be able to perform its function for most postulated events, and would only be challenged by a MSLB or FLB that renders the remaining operable steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable. Additionally, depending on the capacity of the operable motor driven AFW/EFW pump, it may be able to mitigate MSLB and FLB accidents during those instances when it is not aligned to the faulted SG. The selection of 24 hours for the Completion Time is based on the remaining operable steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump and the continued functionality of the turbine driven AFW/EFW train, the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train, and the low likelihood of an event occurring during this 24 hour period that would challenge the capability of the AFW/EFW system to provide feedwater to the SGs. The proposed Completion Time for this particular situation is consistent with what was approved for Waterford 3 by License Amendment 173 for a similar Condition (ADAMS Accession No. ML012840538), and it is consistent with the STS in that the proposed Completion Time is much less than the 72 hours that is allowed for the situation where accident mitigation capability is maintained. Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed 24 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this particular situation. A 48 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where the remaining operable motor driven AFW/ EFW train is able to mitigate postulated accidents in accordance with accident analyses assumptions without assuming a concurrent single active failure. The selection of 48 hours is based on the continued capability of the AFW/EFW system to perform its function, while at the same time recognizing that this Condition represents a higher level of degradation than one inoperable AFW/ EFW train which is currently allowed PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 for up to 72 hours by STS 3.7.5. The proposed 48 hour Completion Time represents an appropriate balance between the more severe 24 hour situation discussed in the previous paragraph and the less severe Condition that is afforded a 72 hour Completion Time by the current STS. Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed 48 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this particular situation. STS 3.7.5, Condition D (as proposed) The current Condition C is renamed as Condition D. This Condition has been modified to incorporate changes brought on by the addition of new Condition C. The first of the two listed Conditions under Condition D has been modified and now applies to the situation where the Required Action and associated Completion Time of Condition A, B, or C are not met. This section of Condition D is modified to also apply to the new Condition C when the Completion Time that is specified for new Condition C is not met. The NRC staff considers this to be appropriate and consistent with existing STS 3.7.5 requirements to place the plant in a mode where the Condition does not apply when the Required Actions are not met. The second listed Condition under Condition D (following the first ‘‘OR’’) is modified from ‘‘Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3’’ to ‘‘Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3 for reasons other than Condition C.’’ This change is necessary to recognize the situation specified by Condition C (as proposed) where one motor driven AFW/EFW train is allowed to be inoperable at the same time that the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable due to an inoperable steam supply to the pump turbine. Therefore, the NRC staff considers the proposed change to be acceptable. The Required Actions associated with this Condition were renamed from C.1 AND C.2 to D.1 AND D.2 but not otherwise changed. Required Action D.1 requires the plant to be in Mode 3 in 6 hours, and Required Action D.2 requires the plant to be in Mode 4 in 18 hours. This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, this proposed change is acceptable. STS 3.7.5, Condition E (as proposed) Because current Condition C is renamed as Condition D, current Condition D is renamed as Condition E. This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable. E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Notices STS 3.7.5, Condition F (as proposed) Because current Condition D is renamed as Condition E, current Condition E is renamed as Condition F. This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable. 4.0 STATE CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission’s regulations, the [STATE] State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the following comments—with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff]. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been [(1) no public comment on such finding (2) the following comments with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff ([xx FR xxxxx, DATE]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 6.0 CONCLUSION The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission’s regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. The proposed changes are consistent with NRC practices and policies as generally reflected in the STS and as reflected by applicable precedents that have been approved. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that the proposed VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Jul 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 changes to STS 3.7.5 should be approved. MODEL NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION Description of amendment request: The requested change, applicable to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE), would provide changes to the Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater / Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. The proposed change is described in Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard TS Change Traveler TSTF–412, Revision 3, and was described in the Notice of Availability published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]). Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated? Response: No The Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) System is not an initiator of any design basis accident or event, and therefore the proposed changes do not increase the probability of any accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes to address the condition of one or two motor driven AFW/EFW trains inoperable and the turbine driven AFW/ EFW train inoperable due to one steam supply inoperable do not change the response of the plant to any accidents. The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to perform their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The proposed changes do not affect the source term, containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological consequences of any accident previously evaluated. Further, the proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts of radioactive effluent that may be released offsite, nor significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational/public radiation exposures. PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 39093 Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any 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 result in a change in the manner in which the AFW/EFW System provides plant protection. The AFW/EFW System will continue to supply water to the steam generators to remove decay heat and other residual heat by delivering at least the minimum required flow rate to the steam generators. There are no design changes associated with the proposed changes. The changes to the Conditions and Required Actions do not change any existing accident scenarios, nor create any new or different accident scenarios. The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, the changes do not impose any new or different requirements or eliminate any existing requirements. The changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice. Therefore, the changes do 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 changes do not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not impacted by these changes. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Based on the above, the proposed change involves no significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and accordingly, a finding of no significant hazards consideration is justified. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this th day of , 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch [ ] E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 39094 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 17, 2007 / Notices Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation [FR Doc. E7–13845 Filed 7–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Review of a Revised Information Collection; Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Open Season Express; Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Notice. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) intends to submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review of a revised information collection. The Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Open Season Express Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System and the Open Season Web site, Open Season Online, are used by retirees and survivors. They collect information for changing FEHB enrollments, collecting dependent and other insurance information for self and family enrollments, requesting plan brochures, requesting a change of address, requesting cancellation or suspension of FEHB benefits, asking to make payment to the Office of Personnel Management when the FEHB payment is greater than the monthly annuity amount, or for requesting FEHB plan accreditation and Customer Satisfaction Survey information. Comments are particularly invited on: Whether this information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the Office of Personnel Management and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate and based on valid assumptions and methodology; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. We receive approximately 215,000 responses per year to the IVR system and the online Web. Each response takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. The annual burden is 35,833 hours. For copies of this proposal, contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on (202) 606– VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Jul 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 8358, FAX (202) 418–3251 or via e-mail to: MaryBeth.Smith-Toomey@opm.gov. Please include a mailing address with your request. DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received within 60 calendar days from the date of this publication. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to— Ed Foelster, Chief, Methods and Procedures Branch, Operations Support Group, Center for Retirement and Insurance Services, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room 3349, Washington, DC 20415–3540. For Information Regarding Administrative Coordination— Contact: Cyrus S. Benson, Team Leader, Publications Team, RIS Support Services/Support Group, (202) 606– 0623. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Approximately 500 OPM Form 1530 will be completed annually. We estimate it takes approximately 90 minutes to complete the form. The annual burden is 750 hours. For copies of this proposal, contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on (202) 606– 8358, FAX (202) 418–3251 or via e-mail to: MaryBeth.Smith-Toomey@opm.gov. Please include a mailing address with your request. DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received within 60 calendar days from the date of this publication. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to— Pamela S. Israel, Chief, Operations Support Group, Center for Retirement and Insurance Services, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room 3349, Washington, DC 20415–3540. For Information Regarding Administrative Coordination— Contact: Cyrus S. Benson, Team Leader, Publications Team, RIS Support Services/Support Group, (202) 606– 0623. Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection: OPM 1530 U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Tricia Hollis, Chief of Staff. [FR Doc. E7–13761 Filed 7–16–07; 8:45 am] U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Tricia Hollis, Chief of Staff. [FR Doc. E7–13760 Filed 7–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325–38–P BILLING CODE 6325–38–P Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) intends to submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for extension of a currently approved information collection. OPM Form 1530, Report of Medical Examination of Person Electing Survivor Benefit Under the Civil Service Retirement System, is used to collect information regarding an annuitant’s health so that OPM can determine whether the insurable interest survivor benefit election can be allowed. Comments are particularly invited on: Whether this information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the Office of Personnel Management, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 19h–1; SEC File No. 270–247; OMB Control No. 3235–0259. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. • Rule 19h–1 (17 CFR 240.19h–1): SRO notification of admission and/or continuance despite statutory disqualification. Rule 19h–1 (‘‘Rule’’) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39089-39094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13845]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler To Provide Actions for One 
Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable Using the 
Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model license amendment 
request (LAR), model safety evaluation (SE), and model proposed no 
significant hazards consideration (NSHC) determination related to 
changes to Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) 
relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater/
Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. This change establishes 
a Completion Time in the Standard Technical Specifications for the 
Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is 
inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train.
    The purpose of these models is to permit the NRC to efficiently 
process amendments that propose to adopt the associated changes into 
plant-specific technical specifications (TS). Licensees of nuclear 
power reactors to which the models apply can request amendments 
confirming the applicability of the SE and NSHC determination to their 
reactors.

DATES: The NRC staff issued a Federal Register Notice (72 FR 12845, 
March 19, 2007) which provided a model LAR, model SE, and model NSHC 
related to one steam supply to turbine driven auxiliary feedwater/
emergency feedwater pump inoperable; similarly the NRC staff herein 
provides the model LAR, a revised model SE, and the model NSHC. The NRC 
staff can most efficiently consider applications based upon the model 
LAR, which references the model SE, if the application is submitted 
within one year of this Federal Register Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trent L. Wertz, Technical 
Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O-12H2, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone 301-415-
1568.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item 
Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification 
Changes for Power Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The 
consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to 
improve the efficiency and transparency of NRC licensing processes. 
This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the Standard 
Technical Specifications (STS) (NUREGs 1430--1434) in a manner that 
supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes 
an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS 
following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that 
the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP 
directs the NRC staff to evaluate any comments received for a proposed 
change to the STS and to either reconsider the change or proceed with 
announcing the availability of the change to licensees. Those licensees 
opting to apply for the subject change to TS are responsible for 
reviewing the NRC staff's evaluation, referencing the applicable 
technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant specific 
information. Each amendment application submitted in response to the 
notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance 
with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
    This notice involves establishing a Completion Time in the Limiting 
Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the Condition where 
one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable 
concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This notice 
also involves two additional changes to the STS that establish specific 
Conditions and Action requirements: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/
EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; (2) for when the 
turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one 
inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one 
inoperable steam supply. The changes were proposed by the Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) in TSTF Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, 
which is accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html 
(Accession No. ML070100363). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or 
who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, 
should contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff by 
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

Applicability

    This change is applicable to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) 
designed by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion 
Engineering (CE). To efficiently process the incoming license amendment 
applications, the NRC staff requests that each licensee applying for 
the changes use the CLIIP to submit a License Amendment Request (LAR) 
that conforms to the enclosed Model Application (Enclosure 1). Any 
deviations from the Model Application should be explained in the 
licensee's submittal. Significant deviations from the approach, or 
inclusion of additional changes to the license, will result in staff 
rejection of the submittal. Instead, licensees desiring significant 
variations and/or additional changes should submit a LAR that does not 
claim to adopt TSTF-412. Variations from the approach recommended in 
this notice may require additional review by the NRC staff and may 
increase the time and resources needed for the review.

Public Notices

    The staff issued a Federal Register Notice (72 FR 12845, March 19, 
2007) that requested public comment on the NRC's pending action to 
establish a Completion Time in the Limiting Condition for Operation 
(LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the Condition where one steam supply to the 
turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable 
motor driven AFW/EFW train. This notice also involves two additional 
changes to the STS that establish specific Conditions and Action 
requirements: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are 
inoperable at the same time and; (2) for

[[Page 39090]]

when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due 
solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than 
one inoperable steam supply. In particular, following an assessment and 
draft safety evaluation by the NRC staff, the staff sought public 
comment on proposed changes to the STS, designated TSTF-412 Revision 3.
    In response to the notice soliciting comments from the interested 
members of the public about NRC's pending action to establish a 
Completion Time in the Standard Technical Specifications for the 
Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is 
inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train, 
the staff received one comment (from a licensee). The comment on the 
model SE is summarized and discussed below:
    1. COMMENT: The first sentence in the third paragraph under ``STS 
3.7.5, Condition C (as Proposed),'' in Section 3.0 of the Proposed 
Model Safety Evaluation states the following:
    ``The STS typically allows a 72 hour Completion Time for Conditions 
where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate postulated 
accidents without assuming a concurrent single active failure.'' Since 
there are several TSs in the STS that allow a longer Completion time 
than 72 hours for conditions where the remaining operable equipment is 
able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent 
single active failure (such as seven days in TS 3.5.2, 3.6.6, and 
3.7.10 in NUREG-1432), it is recommended that the sentence be changed 
to the following: ``The STS typically allows a 72 hour or longer 
Completion Time for Conditions where the remaining operable equipment 
is able to mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent 
single active failure.''
    Response: The NRC staff agrees with the comment and has modified 
the model SE.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of July, 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy J. Kobetz,
Chief Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and 
Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    The following example of a license amendment request (LAR) was 
prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate the adoption of Technical 
Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3 
``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump 
Inoperable.'' The model provides the expected level of detail and 
content for a LAR to adopt TSTF-412, Revision 3. Licensees remain 
responsible for ensuring that their plant-specific LAR fulfills their 
administrative requirements as well as NRC regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

PROPOSED MODEL LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, 
DC 20555.

SUBJECT: PLANT NAME

DOCKET NO. 50-

APPLICATION FOR TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION IMPROVEMENT TO REVISE ACTIONS 
FOR ONE STEAM SUPPLY TO TURBINE DRIVEN AUXILIARY FEEDWATER / EMERGENCY 
FEEDWATER PUMP INOPERABLE USING THE CONSOLIDATED LINE ITEM IMPROVEMENT 
PROCESS

    Gentlemen: In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 of 
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is 
submitting a request for an amendment to the technical specifications 
(TS) for [PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.].
    The proposed amendment establishes Conditions, Required Actions, 
and Completion Times in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for 
the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven Auxiliary 
Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) pump is inoperable concurrent 
with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In addition, this 
amendment establishes changes to the STS that establish specific 
Actions: (1) For when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at 
the same time and; (2) for when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is 
inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) 
due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The change is 
consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) 
Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply 
to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The availability of this 
technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal 
Register on [DATE OF NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY] as part of the 
consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP).
    Enclosure 1 provides a description of the proposed change and 
confirmation of applicability. Enclosure 2 provides the existing TS 
pages marked-up to show the proposed change. Enclosure 3 provides the 
existing TS Bases pages marked-up to reflect the proposed change. There 
are no new regulatory commitments associated with this proposed change.
    [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment by 
[DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X 
DAYS].
    In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application, with 
enclosures, is being provided to the designated [STATE] Official.
    I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United 
States of America that I am authorized by [LICENSEE] to make this 
request and that the foregoing is true and correct. [Note that request 
may be notarized in lieu of using this oath or affirmation statement].
    If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please 
contact [ ].

 Sincerely,

 Name, Title

    Enclosures: 1. Description and Assessment
2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes
3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes

cc: NRR Project Manager
    Regional Office
    Resident Inspector
    State Contact
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Enclosure 1 to Model License Amendment Request Description and 
Assessment

1.0 DESCRIPTION

    The proposed License amendment establish a new Completion Time in 
Standard Technical Specifications Section [3.7.5] where one steam 
supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with 
an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This amendment also 
establishes specific Conditions and Action requirements: (1) For when 
two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; 
(2) for when the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) 
due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other 
than one inoperable steam supply.
    The changes are consistent with NRC approved Industry/Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Change 
Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply 
to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The availability of this

[[Page 39091]]

technical specification improvement was announced in the Federal 
Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the consolidated line 
item improvement process (CLIIP).

2.0 ASSESSMENT

2.1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation

    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the safety evaluation published on [DATE ] 
([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. This verification included a 
review of the NRC staff's evaluation as well as the supporting 
information provided to support TSTF-412, Revision 3. [LICENSEE] has 
concluded that the justifications presented in the TSTF proposal and 
the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to 
[PLANT, UNIT NOS.] and justify this amendment for the incorporation of 
the changes to the [PLANT] Technical Specifications.

2.2 Optional Changes and Variations

    [LICENSEE] is not proposing any variations or deviations from the 
technical specification changes described in TSTF-412, Revision 3, or 
the NRC staff's model safety evaluation published in the Federal 
Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]).

3.0 REGULATORY ANALYSIS

    A description of the proposed change and its relationship to 
applicable regulatory requirements and guidance was provided in the 
Notice of Availability published on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]). [Pre-
General Design Criteria plants need to include applicable plant 
specific regulatory requirements].

3.1 No Significant Hazards Determination

    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination published on [DATE] as part of the CLIIP. 
[LICENSEE] has concluded that the proposed determination presented in 
the notice is applicable to [PLANT] and the determination is hereby 
incorporated by reference to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 
50.91(a).

3.2 Verification and Commitments

    There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this 
proposed change.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION

    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in 
the model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on [DATE 
] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that 
the NRC staff's findings presented in that evaluation are applicable to 
[PLANT] and the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this 
application.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Enclosure 2 to Model License Amendment Request: PROPOSED TECHNICAL 
SPECIFICATION CHANGES

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Enclosure 3 to Model License Amendment Request: CHANGES TO TS BASES 
PAGES

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

PROPOSED MODEL SAFETY EVALUATION

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Consolidated Line Item Improvement

    Technical Specification Task Force Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, 
Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to the Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump 
Inoperable
1.0 INTRODUCTION
    By application dated [DATE], [LICENSEE NAME] (the licensee), 
submitted a request for changes to the [PLANT NAME], Technical 
Specifications (TS) (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS) Accession No. [MLxxxxxxxxx]). The requested changes adopt TSTF-
412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to the Turbine 
Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' NRC approval of these changes was 
announced in the Federal Register on [DATE] [xx FR xxxxx]. The 
requested change would establish a Completion Time for the Condition 
where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable 
concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train and establish 
specific Conditions and Required Actions: (1) When two motor driven 
AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; (2) when the 
turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one 
inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one 
inoperable steam supply.
    These changes were described in a Notice of Availability published 
in the Federal Register on [DATE ] ([xx FR xxxxx]).
2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION
    In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission established its regulatory 
requirements related to the content of Technical Specifications (TS). 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(c), TS are required to include items in the 
following categories: (1) Safety limits, limiting safety system 
settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for 
operation (LCOs); (3) surveillance requirements (SRs); (4) design 
features; and (5) administrative controls. The rule does not specify 
the particular requirements to be included in a plant's TS.
    Also, in 10 CFR 50 Appendix A the Commission established regulatory 
requirements related to Auxiliary Feedwater Systems. General Design 
Criteria 34 and 44 state that the AFW system is required to assure (1) 
the capability to transfer heat loads from the reactor system to a heat 
sink under both normal operating and accident conditions; (2) the 
redundancy of components for performance of the safety function under 
accident conditions, assuming a single active component failure; and 
(3) the capability to isolate components, subsystems, or piping if 
required to maintain system safety function.
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

TS 3.7.5, Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW)/Emergency Feedwater (EFW) System

    The AFW/EFW System is designed to automatically supply sufficient 
water to the steam generator(s) to remove decay heat upon the loss of 
normal feedwater supply with steam generator pressure at the set point 
of the Main Steam Safety Valves (MSSVs). Subsequently, the AFW/EFW 
System supplies sufficient water to cool the unit to Residual Heat 
Removal (RHR) System entry conditions, with steam being released 
through the Atmospheric Dump Valves (ADVs).
    AFW/EFW Systems typically consist of two motor driven AFW/EFW pumps 
and one steam turbine driven pump configured into three trains. The 
capacity of the motor driven and steam driven AFW/EFW pumps can vary by 
plant. Motor driven pumps typically provide 50% or 100% of the required 
AFW/EFW flow capacity as assumed in the accident analysis. Motor driven 
AFW/EFW pumps are typically powered from an independent Class 1E power 
supply and each pump train typically feeds half of the steam 
generators, although each pump has the capability to be realigned from 
the control room to feed other steam generators. The steam turbine 
driven AFW/EFW pump provides either 100% or 200% of the required 
capacity to all steam generators. The steam turbine driven pump 
receives steam from two main steam lines upstream of the main

[[Page 39092]]

steam isolation valves. Each of the steam feed lines will supply 100% 
of the requirements of the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump.

LCO 3.7.5 Condition A (as proposed)

    Condition A is modified to refer to the inoperability of a turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train due to an inoperable steam supply, instead of 
referring to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/EFW pump. This 
change is being proposed in order to make Condition A train oriented 
instead of component oriented, consistent with the other Conditions 
that are included in STS 3.7.5. The train oriented approach is 
consistent with the preferred approach that is generally reflected in 
the STS, and therefore the proposed change is considered to be 
acceptable.

STS 3.7.5, Condition C (as proposed)

    A new Condition C with two possible Required Actions (C.1 OR C.2) 
is proposed for the turbine driven AFW/EFW train being inoperable due 
to one inoperable steam supply and one motor driven AFW/EFW train being 
inoperable at the same time. Required Action C.1 requires restoration 
of the affected steam supply to operable status within either 24 or 48 
hours, depending on the capability of the motor driven AFW/EFW train 
that remains operable. Alternatively, Required Action C.2 requires 
restoration of the inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train within either 
24 or 48 hours, again depending on the capability of the motor driven 
AFW/EFW train that remains operable. New Condition C provides two 
proposed Completion Times that are dependent upon the capacity of the 
remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train to provide AFW/EFW to the 
steam generators.
    A proposed 24 hour Completion Time is applicable to plants that may 
provide insufficient flow to the steam generators (SGs) in accordance 
with accident analyses assumptions if a main steam line break (MSLB) or 
feedwater line break (FLB) were to occur that renders the remaining 
steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable (a 
concurrent single failure is not assumed). Insufficient feedwater flow 
could result, for example, if a single motor driven AFW/EFW train does 
not have sufficient capacity to satisfy accident analyses assumptions, 
or if the operable pump is feeding the faulted SG (i.e. the SG that is 
aligned to the operable steam supply for the turbine driven AFW/EFW 
pump). [lsqbb]This would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW 
motor driven pump having less than 100% of the required flow.[rsqbb] A 
proposed 48 hour Completion Time is applicable when the remaining 
operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is capable of providing sufficient 
feedwater flow in accordance with accident analyses assumptions. 
[lsqbb]This would typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor 
driven pump having greater than or equal to 100% of the required 
flow.[rsqbb]
    The STS typically allows a 72 hour or longer Completion Time for 
Conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to mitigate 
postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single active 
failure. In this particular case, a 24 hour Completion Time is proposed 
for the situation where the AFW/EFW system would be able to perform its 
function for most postulated events, and would only be challenged by a 
MSLB or FLB that renders the remaining operable steam supply to the 
turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable. Additionally, depending on the 
capacity of the operable motor driven AFW/EFW pump, it may be able to 
mitigate MSLB and FLB accidents during those instances when it is not 
aligned to the faulted SG. The selection of 24 hours for the Completion 
Time is based on the remaining operable steam supply to the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW pump and the continued functionality of the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train, the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW 
train, and the low likelihood of an event occurring during this 24 hour 
period that would challenge the capability of the AFW/EFW system to 
provide feedwater to the SGs. The proposed Completion Time for this 
particular situation is consistent with what was approved for Waterford 
3 by License Amendment 173 for a similar Condition (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML012840538), and it is consistent with the STS in that the proposed 
Completion Time is much less than the 72 hours that is allowed for the 
situation where accident mitigation capability is maintained. 
Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed 24 hour Completion 
Time is acceptable for this particular situation.
    A 48 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where the 
remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is able to mitigate 
postulated accidents in accordance with accident analyses assumptions 
without assuming a concurrent single active failure. The selection of 
48 hours is based on the continued capability of the AFW/EFW system to 
perform its function, while at the same time recognizing that this 
Condition represents a higher level of degradation than one inoperable 
AFW/EFW train which is currently allowed for up to 72 hours by STS 
3.7.5. The proposed 48 hour Completion Time represents an appropriate 
balance between the more severe 24 hour situation discussed in the 
previous paragraph and the less severe Condition that is afforded a 72 
hour Completion Time by the current STS. Therefore, the NRC staff 
agrees that the proposed 48 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this 
particular situation.

STS 3.7.5, Condition D (as proposed)

    The current Condition C is renamed as Condition D. This Condition 
has been modified to incorporate changes brought on by the addition of 
new Condition C. The first of the two listed Conditions under Condition 
D has been modified and now applies to the situation where the Required 
Action and associated Completion Time of Condition A, B, or C are not 
met. This section of Condition D is modified to also apply to the new 
Condition C when the Completion Time that is specified for new 
Condition C is not met. The NRC staff considers this to be appropriate 
and consistent with existing STS 3.7.5 requirements to place the plant 
in a mode where the Condition does not apply when the Required Actions 
are not met.
    The second listed Condition under Condition D (following the first 
``OR'') is modified from ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, 
or 3'' to ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3 for 
reasons other than Condition C.'' This change is necessary to recognize 
the situation specified by Condition C (as proposed) where one motor 
driven AFW/EFW train is allowed to be inoperable at the same time that 
the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable due to an inoperable 
steam supply to the pump turbine. Therefore, the NRC staff considers 
the proposed change to be acceptable.
    The Required Actions associated with this Condition were renamed 
from C.1 AND C.2 to D.1 AND D.2 but not otherwise changed. Required 
Action D.1 requires the plant to be in Mode 3 in 6 hours, and Required 
Action D.2 requires the plant to be in Mode 4 in 18 hours. This change 
is purely editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, this 
proposed change is acceptable.

STS 3.7.5, Condition E (as proposed)

    Because current Condition C is renamed as Condition D, current 
Condition D is renamed as Condition E. This change is purely editorial 
as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is 
acceptable.

[[Page 39093]]

STS 3.7.5, Condition F (as proposed)

    Because current Condition D is renamed as Condition E, current 
Condition E is renamed as Condition F. This change is purely editorial 
as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed change is 
acceptable.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
    In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the [STATE] State 
official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The 
State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the following comments--with 
subsequent disposition by the NRC staff].
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
    The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the 
installation or use of a facility component located within the 
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance 
requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 
no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the 
types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is 
no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational 
radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed 
finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards 
consideration, and there has been [(1) no public comment on such 
finding (2) the following comments with subsequent disposition by the 
NRC staff ([xx FR xxxxx, DATE]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the 
eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 
51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact 
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection 
with the issuance of the amendment.
6.0 CONCLUSION
    The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed 
above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and 
safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the 
proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance 
with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the 
amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or 
to the health and safety of the public.
    The proposed changes are consistent with NRC practices and policies 
as generally reflected in the STS and as reflected by applicable 
precedents that have been approved. Therefore, the NRC staff has 
determined that the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5 should be approved.

MODEL NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION

    Description of amendment request: The requested change, applicable 
to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Babcock and Wilcox 
(B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering (CE), would provide 
changes to the Actions in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) 
relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Auxiliary Feedwater / 
Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable. The proposed change is 
described in Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard TS 
Change Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, and was described in the Notice 
of Availability published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR 
xxxxx]).
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis of the issue 
of no significant hazards consideration is presented below:
    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No
    The Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) System is not an 
initiator of any design basis accident or event, and therefore the 
proposed changes do not increase the probability of any accident 
previously evaluated. The proposed changes to address the condition of 
one or two motor driven AFW/EFW trains inoperable and the turbine 
driven AFW/EFW train inoperable due to one steam supply inoperable do 
not change the response of the plant to any accidents.
    The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or 
precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and 
configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is 
operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely affect 
the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to perform 
their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences of an 
initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The proposed 
changes do not affect the source term, containment isolation, or 
radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological 
consequences of any accident previously evaluated. Further, the 
proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts of radioactive 
effluent that may be released offsite, nor significantly increase 
individual or cumulative occupational/public radiation exposures.
    Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of any 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 result in a change in the manner in 
which the AFW/EFW System provides plant protection. The AFW/EFW System 
will continue to supply water to the steam generators to remove decay 
heat and other residual heat by delivering at least the minimum 
required flow rate to the steam generators. There are no design changes 
associated with the proposed changes. The changes to the Conditions and 
Required Actions do not change any existing accident scenarios, nor 
create any new or different accident scenarios.
    The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant 
(i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a 
change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, 
the changes do not impose any new or different requirements or 
eliminate any existing requirements. The changes do not alter 
assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are 
consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant 
operating practice.
    Therefore, the changes do 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 changes do not alter the manner in which safety 
limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for 
operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are 
not impacted by these changes. The proposed changes will not result in 
plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis.
    Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not 
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    Based on the above, the proposed change involves no significant 
hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), 
and accordingly, a finding of no significant hazards consideration is 
justified.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this th day of , 2007.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Project Manager
Plant Licensing Branch [ ]

[[Page 39094]]

Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

 [FR Doc. E7-13845 Filed 7-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P