Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 9602-9604 [E8-3284]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9602-9604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-3284]



[[Page 9602]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-482]


Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; Notice of Consideration 
of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No 
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a 
Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission, or the NRC) 
is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License 
No. NPF-42 to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee) 
for operation of the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS), which is 
located in Coffey County, Kansas.
    The proposed amendment in the licensee's application dated February 
8, 2008, would revise Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.9, ``Steam 
Generator (SG) Program,'' and TS 5.6.10, ``Steam Generator Tube 
Inspection Report.'' For TS 5.5.9, the amendment would replace the 
existing alternate repair criteria (ARC) in TS 5.5.9.c.1 for SG tube 
inspections that was approved in Amendment No. 169 issued October 10, 
2006, for refueling outage 15 (the outage for the fall of 2006) and the 
subsequent operating cycle. The new interim ARC would be for the 
upcoming refueling outage 16 (the outage for the spring of 2008) and 
the subsequent 18-month and 36-month eddy current inspection intervals, 
and would apply to service-induced crack-like flaws found below 17 
inches from the top of the tubesheet. For TS 5.6.10, three new 
reporting requirements are proposed to be added to the existing seven 
requirements.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission 
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment 
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the 
Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Sec.  50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 
accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or 
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required 
by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue 
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    (1) Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No
    Of the various accidents previously evaluated, the proposed 
changes only affect the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) event 
evaluation and the postulated steam line break (SLB), locked rotor 
and control rod ejection accident evaluations. Loss-of-coolant 
accident (LOCA) conditions cause a compressive axial load to act on 
the tube. Therefore, since the LOCA tends to force the tube into the 
tubesheet rather than pull it out, it is not a factor in this 
amendment request. Another faulted load consideration is a safe 
shutdown earthquake (SSE); however, the seismic analysis of Model F 
steam generators [the steam generators at WCGS] has shown that axial 
loading of the tubes is negligible during an SSE.
    At normal operating pressures, leakage from primary water stress 
corrosion cracking (PWSCC) below 17 inches from the top of the 
tubesheet is limited by both the tube-to-tubesheet crevice and the 
limited crack opening permitted by the tubesheet constraint. 
Consequently, negligible normal operating leakage is expected from 
cracks within the tubesheet region.
    For the SGTR event, the required structural margins of the steam 
generator tubes is maintained by limiting the allowable ligament 
size for a circumferential crack to remain in service to 214 degrees 
below 17 inches from the top of the tubesheet for the 18-month SG 
tubing eddy current inspection interval and to remain in service 183 
degrees below 17 inches from the top of the tubesheet for the 36-
month SG tubing eddy current inspection interval. Tube rupture is 
precluded for cracks in the hydraulic expansion region due to the 
constraint provided by the tubesheet. The potential for tube pullout 
is mitigated by limiting the allowable crack size to 214 degrees for 
the 18-month SG tubing eddy current inspection interval and to 183 
degrees for the 18-month SG tubing eddy current inspection interval. 
These allowable crack sizes take into account eddy current 
uncertainty and crack growth rate. It has been shown that a 
circumferential crack with an azimuthal extent of 214 degrees for 
the 18-month SG tubing eddy current inspection interval and an 
azimuthal extent of 183 degrees for the 36-month SG tubing eddy 
current inspection interval meet the performance criteria of NEI 
[Nuclear Energy Institute] 97-06, Rev. 2, ``Steam Generator Program 
Guidelines'' and [NRC] Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ``Bases for 
Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator Tubes.'' Likewise, a visual 
inspection will be conducted to confirm that a circumferential crack 
of greater than 294 degrees for the 18-month SG tubing eddy current 
inspection interval and a circumferential crack of greater than 263 
degrees for the 36-month SG tubing eddy current inspection interval 
do not remain in service in the tube-to-tubesheet weld metal in any 
tube mitigating the potential for tube pullout. Therefore, the 
margin against tube burst/pullout is maintained during normal and 
postulated accident conditions and the proposed change does not 
result in a significant increase in the probability or consequence 
of a SGTR.
    The probability of a SLB is unaffected by the potential failure 
of an SG tube as the failure of a tube is not an initiator for an 
SLB event. SLB leakage is limited by leakage flow restrictions 
resulting from the leakage path above potential cracks through the 
tube-to-tubesheet crevice. The leak rate during postulated accident 
conditions (including locked rotor and control rod ejection) has 
been shown to remain within the accident analysis assumptions for 
all axial or circumferentially oriented cracks occurring 17 inches 
below the top of the tubesheet. Since normal operating leakage is 
limited to 0.10 gpm (150 gpd), the attendant accident condition leak 
rate, assuming all leakage to be from indications below 17 inches 
from the top of the tubesheet would be bounded by 0.25 gpm. This 
value is within the accident analysis assumptions for the limiting 
design basis accident for WCGS, which is the postulated SLB event.
    Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI-97-06, Rev. 
2 and draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121 continue to be met and the 
proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    (2) Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No
    The proposed change does not introduce any changes or mechanisms 
that create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident. 
Tube bundle integrity is expected to be maintained for all plant 
conditions upon implementation of the interim alternate repair 
criteria. The proposed change does not introduce any new equipment 
or any change to existing equipment. No new effects on existing 
equipment are created nor are any new malfunctions introduced.
    Therefore, based on the above evaluation, the proposed 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 change maintains the required structural margins of 
the steam generator tubes for both normal and accident conditions. 
NEI 97-06, Rev. 2 and RG 1.121 are used as the basis in the 
development of the limited tubesheet inspection depth methodology 
for determining that steam generator tube integrity considerations 
are maintained within acceptable limits. RG 1.121 describes a method 
acceptable to the NRC staff for meeting GDC [General Design 
Criteria, of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50], 14, 15, 31, and 32 by 
reducing the probability and consequences of an SGTR. RG 1.121 
concludes that by determining the limiting safe conditions of tube 
wall degradation beyond which tubes with unacceptable

[[Page 9603]]

cracking, as established by inservice inspection, should be removed 
from service or repaired, the probability and consequences of a SGTR 
are reduced. This RG uses safety factors on loads for tube burst 
that are consistent with the requirements of Section III of the ASME 
Code.
    For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube 
burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For 
circumferentially oriented cracking in a tube or the tube-to-
tubesheet weld, Reference 6 [Westinghouse Electric Company 
proprietary report LTR-CDME-08-11-P submitted in the licensee's 
application] defines a length of remaining tube ligament that 
provides the necessary resistance to tube pullout due to the 
pressure induced forces (with applicable safety factors applied). 
Additionally, it is shown that application of the limited tubesheet 
inspection depth criteria will not result in unacceptable primary-
to-secondary leakage during all plant conditions.
    Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed changes do 
not result in any reduction of margin with respect to plant safety 
as defined in the Updated Safety Analysis Report or bases of the 
plant Technical Specifications.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of 
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 
determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment 
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the 
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day 
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, 
for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the 
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment 
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a 
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after 
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will 
occur very infrequently.
    Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking, 
Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, 
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and 
page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also 
be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. 
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 
O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the 
person's) may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of 
the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any 
person's) whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who 
wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written 
request via electronic submission through the NRC E-filing system for a 
hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing 
and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with 
the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing 
Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person's) 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 O1F21, 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 is aware and on which the 
petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. 
The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine 
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. 
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the 
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if 
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor 
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one 
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, 
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, 
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the 
hearing.
    If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final 
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The 
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If 
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no 
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the 
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing

[[Page 9604]]

held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final 
determination is that the amendment request involves a significant 
hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the 
issuance of any amendment.
    A request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be 
filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC 
promulgated on August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing process 
requires participants to submit and serve documents over the internet 
or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. 
Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they 
seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 
five (5) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor 
must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 
hearingdocket@nrc.gov, or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a 
digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal 
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) 
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances 
in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative) 
already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each petitioner/
requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM 
to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the 
E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is 
available at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-
viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-
submittals/apply-certificates.html. Once a petitioner/requestor has 
obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded 
the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for hearing or petition 
for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document 
Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC 
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A 
filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its 
documents through EIE. To be timely, an electronic filing must be 
submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on 
the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-
stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming 
receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail 
notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the 
General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the 
Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the 
filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. 
Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or 
representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate 
before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they 
can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.
    A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the 
``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line, 
which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, 
Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or 
locally, (301) 415-4737. Participants who believe that they have a good 
cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, 
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted 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; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth 
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville, Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for 
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered 
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing 
the document with the provider of the service.
    Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding 
officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition 
and/or request should be granted and/or the contentions should be 
admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 
2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, filings must be submitted no later 
than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
https://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant 
to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or 
a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal 
privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, 
or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted 
works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the 
adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, 
Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in 
their submissions.
    For further details with respect to this license amendment 
application, see the letter dated February 8, 2008, from the Wolf Creek 
Nuclear Operating Corporation, which is available for public inspection 
at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, File Public 
Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publicly available records will be accessible 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/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to 
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-
800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of February 2008.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Balwant K. Singal,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E8-3284 Filed 2-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P