[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 93 (Thursday, May 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26829-26831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12965]


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

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) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-42, issued to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the 
licensee), for operation of the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station, 
located in Coffee County, Kansas .
    The proposed amendment would add a new action statement to 
Technical Specification 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3-3, Functional Unit 7.b., 
Refueling Water Storage Tank Level--Low-Low Coincident with Safety 
Injection.
    On May 5, 1998, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (WCNOC) 
control room personnel were reviewing the technical specifications 
associated with the refueling water storage tank (RWST) level, 
instrumentation and the performance of surveillance procedure, STS IC-
201, ``Analog Channel Operational Test 7300 Process Instrumentation 
Protection Set 1 (Red).'' During that review, control room personnel 
identified that when the RWST level channel is taken into the test 
position, the channel is actually put in a tripped condition. However, 
the associated Technical Specification Action Statement (TS 3.3-2, 
Functional Unit 7.b, Action 16) for an inoperable channel indicates 
that the inoperable channel must be placed in the bypass condition. 
There is no time limit allowance for placing an inoperable channel in 
the bypass condition associated with Action 16. Since this surveillance 
would render the channel inoperable, and there is no way of performing 
the surveillance with the channel in the bypass condition, WCNOC 
personnel determined that a technical specification amendment would be 
needed to allow the surveillance test to be completed.
    The RWST level instrumentation analog channel operational test (STS 
IC-201) was last performed on February 5, 1998. The surveillance is 
required by Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.3.2.1 to 
be performed on a quarterly basis. Taking into account the extra 25 
percent allowance from Technical Specification 4.0.2, this surveillance 
would go overdue, rendering the channel inoperable, on May 31, 1998. 
The first surveillance test (STS IC-202) for an RWST level channel 
would go overdue on May 29, 1998, and another channel surveillance test 
(STS IC-203) will go overdue on May 30, 1998. With two channels being 
inoperable, entry into Technical Specification 3.0.3 would be required, 
forcing shutdown of Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS). The time 
between initial discovery of this event (May 5, 1998) and the date when 
a forced shutdown of WCGS (May 30, 1998) is less than 30 days; 
therefore, there is not enough time for normal processing of an 
amendment.
    WCNOC believes that, given the circumstances surrounding the 
discovery of this event and the complexity of the instrumentation 
function, WCNOC has made a best effort to submit a timely application 
for this amendment. WCNOC has not delayed any actions in order to 
create the need for exigency and therefore take advantage of the 
procedure described in 10 CFR 50.91 for exigent amendments. WCNOC 
believes that this exigent amendment is unavoidable and meets the 
criterion of 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for an exigent request.
    The staff finds the licensee acted in a timely manner, the licensee 
has not abused the exigent provisions and there is not sufficient time 
to process this amendment request in the routine manner as described in 
10 CFR 50.91 without causing an unnecessary plant shutdown.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission

[[Page 26830]]

will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under 
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment 
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the 
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of 
the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated; 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. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    The new Action Statement 30 for Functional Unit 7.b. of Table 
3.3-3, Automatic Switchover to Containment Sump or RWST Level Low-
Low Coincident with Safety Injection, reflects the current plant 
design and testing practices. As discussed in License Amendment No. 
43 and associated submittals, the increase in allowed outage time 
was evaluated and the associated unavailability and risk was shown 
to be equivalent to, or less than, that of other functional units 
evaluated in WCAP-10271, Supplement 2, Revision 1. The proposed 
change does not change any previously evaluated accident and 
therefore does not involve an increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The proposed change will not result in physical alteration to 
any plant system nor will there be a change in the method by which 
any safety-related plant system performs its safety function. The 
proposed change does not alter the functioning of the Engineered 
Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) or change the manner in 
which the ESFAS provides plant protection. Therefore, there is no 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    The proposed change does not alter any safety limits, limiting 
safety system settings, or limiting conditions for operation. The 
proposed change will not involve a significant reduction in any 
margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received by 4:30 p.m. eastern time on May 
28, 1998 will be considered in making any final determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances 
change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely 
way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, 
the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of 
the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that 
the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final 
determination will consider all public and State comments received. 
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal 
Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to 
take this action will occur very infrequently.
    Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of 
this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to 
Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of 
written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document 
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
    The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
intervene is discussed below.
    By June 15, 1998, the licensee may file a request for a hearing 
with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility 
operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this 
proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding 
must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to 
intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene 
shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice 
for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested 
persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is 
available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public 
document rooms located at the Emporia State University, William Allen 
While Library, 1200 Commercial Street, Emporia, Kansas 66801 and at the 
Washburn University School of Law Library, Topeka, Kansas 66621. If a 
request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by 
the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, 
designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety 
and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; 
and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.714, 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 factors: (1) the nature of the petitioner's right under the 
Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of 
the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the 
proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be 
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition 
should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of 
the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person 
who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been 
admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of 
the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference 
scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy 
the specificity requirements described above.
    Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference 
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to 
the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions 
which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must 
consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be 
raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a 
brief explanation of the bases of 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 must also provide references 
to those specific

[[Page 26831]]

sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the 
petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. 
Petitioner must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine 
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. 
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the 
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if 
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails 
to file such a supplement which satisfies 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, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-
examine witnesses.
    If the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day 
hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the 
issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is 
requested, the final determination will serve to decide when the 
hearing is held.
    If the final determination is that the amendment request involves 
no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the 
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendment.
    If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a 
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place 
before the issuance of any amendment.
    A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must 
be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public 
Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 
by the above date. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the 
Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to Jay Silberg, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, 
Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, 
attorney for the licensee.
    Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended 
petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not 
be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding 
officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the 
petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the 
factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(I)-(v) and 2.714(d).
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated May 8, 1998, as supplemented by letter 
dated May 11, 1998, which is available for public inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 
NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document rooms, located at 
the Emporia State University, William Allen While Library, 1200 
Commercial Street, Emporia, Kansas 66801 and at the Washburn University 
School of Law Library, Topeka, Kansas 66621.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of May 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kristine M. Thomas,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-12965 Filed 5-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P