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

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 Generating Station (WCGS)

located in Coffey County, Kansas.

The proposed amendment request dated November 8, 1999, would revise

several sections of the Improved Technical Specification (ITSs) to

correct 15 editorial errors made in the application dated May 15, 1997

(and supplementary letters) for the ITSs or in the certified copy of

the ITSs that was submitted in the licensee's letter of March 26, 1999.

The ITSs were issued by the staff's letter of March 31, 1999, and will

be implemented to replace the current TSs by December 31, 1999. The

licensee has also requested four corrections to Table LG, ``Details

Relocated from Current Technical Specifications,'' that was attached to

the safety evaluation that supported the issuance of the ITS.

The proposed changes to the ITSs are the following.

(1) The correct abbreviation in the table of contents, page ii,

Section 3.3.7, is ``CREVS'' instead of ``CREFS''.

(2) The correct reference to an action condition of the limiting

condition for operation (LCO) in Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.3.1

is ``Condition D'' instead of ``Condition C,'' on ITS page 3.6-12.

(3) The logical connector ``and'' between the E.1 and E.2 required

actions for LCO 3.7.10 is being correctly located on ITS page 3.7-22.

(4) The correct reference to a penetration in SR 3.9.4.1 is ``P-

98'' instead of ``P-68,'' on ITS page 3.9-6.

(5) The correct reference to a standard in ITS 5.5.11.e is ``ANSI''

instead of ``ASME,'' on ITS page 5.0-20.

(6) The word ``least'' is added to the definition of e-average

disintegration energy on ITS page 1.1-3, which was in the application

but was not included in the issued ITSs

(7) The font of the section headers on ITS pages 3.2-6, 3.2-7, and

3.2-8 is corrected.

[[Page 62232]]

(8) The allowable value with the columns for Function Unit 2.b on

ITS page 3.3-15 of Table 3.3.1-1 is properly aligned.

(9) The correct header for the SRs on ITS page 3.3-29 is added.

(10) The word ``not'' is added to the LCO title header on the top

of ITS pages 3.4-17 and 3.4-18, which was in the application but not in

the ITS, to state the correct title as ``RCS Loops--MODE 5, Loops Not

Filled''.

(11) The double line at the top of the actions table on ITS page

3.6-7 for LCO 3.6.3 is added to follow the ITS format.

(12) The spelling of the word ``enrichment'' is corrected, which

was correctly spelled in the application but not in the issued ITSs, on

ITS page 4.0-1 of ITS Section 4.3.1.1.a on fuel storage.

(13) The form of the verb ``grant'' is corrected from ``granted''

to ``granting,'' which was correct in the application but not in the

issued ITSs, to have a correct sentence on ITS page 5.0-3 of Section

5.2.2.d, second paragraph, on unit staff requirements.

(14) The word ``emergency'' in the title ``Control Room emergency

Ventilation System--Filtration,'' is capitalized which was capitalized

correctly in the application but not capitalized in the issued ITSs, on

ITS page 5.0-19 of Section 5.5.11.b on the Ventilation Filter Testing

Program.

(15) A space between ``Manual'' and ``(ODCM)'' is placed to

correctly have ``Manual (ODCM)'' instead of ``Manual(ODCM)'' in the

sentence on ITS page 5.0-25 of the first paragraph of Section 5.6.2 on

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report.

The proposed corrections to Table LG of the safety evaluation are

the following.

(1) The information to be relocated for change number 8-08-LG on

page 14 of the table will be relocated to the ITS Bases for SR 3.6.6.4

instead of the inservice testing (IST) program, and the change control

process identified in the table will be corrected;

(2) The information to be relocated for change number 9-09-LG on

page 18 of the table (requirements to perform an analog channel

operational test) will be relocated to the updated safety analysis

report (USAR) instead of the ITS Bases, and the change control process,

and characterization of the information being relocated will be

corrected;

(3) The information to be relocated for change number 10-26-LG on

page 18 of the table will be relocated to the ITS Bases for SR 3.7.10.3

instead of the USAR, and the change control process will be corrected;

(4) The information to be relocated for change number 1-20-LG on

page 19 of the table will be relocated to the ITS Bases instead of the

USAR, and the change control process will be corrected.

The proposed changes to Table LG will affect the implementation of

the ITSs that were issued on March 31, 1999, because a license

condition issued with the ITSs required the relocation of information

and requirements from the previous technical specifications in

accordance with certain tables attached to the safety evaluation,

including Table LG.

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 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 amendment does not involve a significant

increase in the probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed changes involve corrections to the ITS that are

associated with the original conversion application and supplements

or the certified copy of the ITS. The changes are considered as

administrative changes and do not modify, add, delete, or relocate

any technical requirements of the Technical Specifications [not

previously approved]. As such, the administrative changes do not

effect initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of

accident or transient events. Therefore, this change does not

involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of

an accident previously evaluated.

2. The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a

new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

The proposed changes do not involve a physical alteration of the

plant (no new or different kind of equipment will be installed) or

changes in methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed

changes will not impose any new or eliminate any old requirements.

Thus, the changes do not create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant

reduction in a margin of safety.

The proposed changes will not reduce a margin of safety because

they have no effect on any safety analyses assumptions. The changes

are administrative in nature. Therefore, the proposed changes do not

involve a significant reduction in the 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 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 the 30-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 30-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 and provide for opportunity for a hearing

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, 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.

[[Page 62233]]

The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to

intervene is discussed below.

By December 16, 1999, 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 accessible

electronically from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC Web

site, http://www.nrc.gov (the Electronic Reading Room). 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 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 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 a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The

final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.

If the final determination is that the amendment request involves

no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the

amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the

request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance

of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a

significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place

before the issuance of any amendment.

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 November 8, 1999, which is available

for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the

Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and accessible

electronically from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC Web

site, http://www.nrc.gov (the Electronic Reading Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of November, 1999.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Jack N. Donohew,

Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV and

Decommissioning, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 99-29841 Filed 11-15-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P