11914 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 

applicants for employment is reviewed 

by professional personnel of the Office 

of Human Resources, in conjunction 

with other information in the NRC files, 

to determine the qualifications of the 

applicant for appointment to the 

position under consideration. 

Submit, by May 14, 2007, comments 

that address the following questions: 

1. Is the proposed collection of 

information necessary for the NRC to 

properly perform its functions? Does the 

information have practical utility? 

2. Is the burden estimate accurate? 

3. Is there a way to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected? 

4. How can the burden of the 

information collection be minimized, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology? 

A copy of the draft supporting 

statement may be viewed free of charge 

at the NRC Public Document Room, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Room O–1 F21, Rockville, MD 

20852. OMB clearance requests are 

available at the NRC worldwide Web 

site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ 

doc-comment/omb/index.html. The 

document will be available on the NRC 

home page site for 60 days after the 

signature date of this notice. 

Comments and questions about the 

information collection requirements 

may be directed to the NRC Clearance 

Officer, Margaret A. Janney, Mail Stop: 

T–5F52, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, by telephone at 301–415–7245, or 

by Internet electronic mail to 

InfoCollects@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day 

of March, 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Margaret A. Janney, 

NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information 

Services. 

[FR Doc. E7–4672 Filed 3–13–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Opportunity for Comment on 

Model Safety Evaluation for 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: Request for comment. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) has prepared a 

model safety evaluation (SE) relating to 

proposed 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 would 

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 NRC staff has also prepared 

a model application and model no 

significant hazards consideration 

(NSHC) determination relating to this 

matter. 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. The NRC staff is requesting 

comments on the Model SE, Model 

Application and Model NSHC 

determination prior to announcing their 

availability for referencing in license 

amendment applications. 

DATES: The comment period expires 30 

days from the date of this publication. 

Comments received after this date will 

be considered if it is practical to do so, 

but the Commission can only ensure 

consideration for comments received on 

or before this date. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted either electronically or via 

U.S. mail. 

To submit comments or questions on 

a proposed standard technical 

specification change via the Internet, 

use Form for Sending Comments on 

NRC Documents, then select Proposed 

Changes to Technical Specifications. If 

you are commenting on a proposed 

change, please match your comments 

with the correct proposed change by 

copying the title of the proposed change 

from column one to the previous table 

into the appropriate field of the 

comment form. 

Submit written comments to: Chief, 

Rulemaking, Directives and Editing 

Branch, Division of Administrative 

Services, Office of Administration, Mail 

Stop T–6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001. 

Hand deliver comments to 11545 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 

between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on 

Federal workdays. 

Copies of comments received may be 

examined at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room, located at One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland. 

Comments may be submitted by 

electronic mail to CLIIP@nrc.gov. 

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 for comment 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. In addition, this 

notice for comment involves changes to 

the STS that establish specific 

Conditions and Action requirements for 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 11915 

two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are 

inoperable at the same time and 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 proposed change to adopt TSTF–

412 is applicable to all pressurized 

water reactors (PWRs) designed by 

Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), 

Westinghouse, and Combustion 

Engineering (CE). If approved, to 

efficiently process the incoming license 

amendment applications, the NRC staff 

will request that each licensee applying 

for the changes addressed by TSTF–412, 

Revision 3, 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 

This notice requests comments from 

interested members of the public within 

30 days of the date of publication in the 

Federal Register. Following the NRC 

staff’s evaluation of comments received 

as a result of this notice, the NRC staff 

may reconsider the proposed change or 

may proceed with announcing the 

availability of the change in a 

subsequent notice (perhaps with some 

changes to the SE or proposed NSHC 

determination as a result of public 

comments). 

If the NRC staff announces the 

availability of the change, licensees 

wishing to adopt the change will submit 

an application in accordance with 

applicable rules and other regulatory 

requirements. The NRC staff will in turn 

issue for each application a notice of 

proposed action, which includes a 

proposed NSHC determination. A notice 

of issuance of an amendment of 

operating license will also be issued to 

announce the adoption of TSTF–412 for 

each plant that applies for and receives 

the requested change. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day 

of March, 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 plantspecific 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 when two motor driven 

AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same 

time and 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 NRCapproved 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 when two motor driven 

AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the 

same time and 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. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
11916 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 

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 

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 

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 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 when two motor 

driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable 

at the same time and 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. 

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 

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 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 11917 

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). [This 

would typically apply to plants with 

each AFW/EFW motor driven pump 

having less than 100% of the required 

flow.] Likewise, 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. 

[This 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 

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 commensurate 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 Condition 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 Condition following the 

first ‘‘OR’’ in Condition D 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. 

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. 

STS 3.7.5, Bases (as Proposed) 

Though changes to the STS Bases do 

not require NRC approval per se, 

changes to the STS Bases were reviewed 

to assess their consistency with the 

proposed changes to STS 3.7.5. The 

proposed changes to the STS Bases 

appeared to be consistent with the 

proposed changes to STS 3.7.5. 

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 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
11918 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 

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 xx day 

of xxxxxxx, 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Project Manager. 

Plant Licensing Branch [ ], Division of 

Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E7–4675 Filed 3–13–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

Board of Governors; Sunshine Act 

Meeting 

Board Votes To Close March 6, 2007, 

Meeting 

At its teleconference meeting on 

February 27, 2007, the Board of 

Governors of the United States Postal 

Service voted unanimously to close to 

public observation its meeting 

scheduled for March 6, 2007, in 

Washington, DC, via teleconference. The 

Board determined that prior public 

notice was not possible. 

ITEM CONSIDERED: Postal Regulatory 

Commission Opinion and 

Recommended Decision in Docket No. 

R2006–1, Postal Rate and Fee Changes. 

GENERAL COUNSEL CERTIFICATION: The 

General Counsel of the United States 

Postal Service has certified that the 

meeting was properly closed under the 

Government in the Sunshine Act. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Requests for information about the 

meeting should be addressed to the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES