# 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

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-29841

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Notice
- **Published:** November 16, 1999
- **Citation:** 64 FR 62231

## Text

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-29841. Public record. Not legal advice.