ML042030500
| ML042030500 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 07/21/2004 |
| From: | Milano P NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1 |
| To: | Kansler M Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| Milano P, NRR/DLPM , 415-1457 | |
| References | |
| TAC MC0247 | |
| Download: ML042030500 (12) | |
Text
July 21, 2004 Mr. Michael Kansler President Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601
SUBJECT:
JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE FOR ONE-TIME EXTENSION OF CONTAINMENT INTEGRATED LEAKAGE TEST INTERVAL AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING (TAC NO. MC0247)
Dear Mr. Kansler:
Enclosed is a copy of a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity For a Hearing related to your application for an amendment dated July 28, 2003, as supplemented on May 20, 2004, for the James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification Section 5.5.6, ?Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, to allow a one-time extension of the interval between the Type A, integrated leakage rate tests, from 10 years to no more than 15 years.
This notice has been forwarded to the Office of Federal Register for publication.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Patrick D. Milano, Senior Project Manager,Section I Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-333
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page
July 21, 2004 Mr. Michael Kansler President Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601
SUBJECT:
JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE FOR ONE-TIME EXTENSION OF CONTAINMENT INTEGRATED LEAKAGE TEST INTERVAL AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING (TAC NO. MC0247)
Dear Mr. Kansler:
Enclosed is a copy of a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity For a Hearing related to your application for an amendment dated July 28, 2003, as supplemented on May 20, 2004, for the James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification Section 5.5.6, ?Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, to allow a one-time extension of the interval between the Type A, integrated leakage rate tests, from 10 years to no more than 15 years.
This notice has been forwarded to the Office of Federal Register for publication.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Patrick D. Milano, Senior Project Manager,Section I Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-333
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC C. Holden P. Milano C. Bixler, R-I PDI-1 Reading R. Laufer E. Cobey, R-I OGC LMarsh/JLyon DLPM DPR S. Little ACRS ADAMS Accession Number: ML042030500 NRR-106 OFFICE PDI-1/PM PDI-2/LA PDI-1/SC NAME PMilano SLittle RLaufer DATE 07/21/04 07/21/04 07/21/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant cc:
Mr. Gary J. Taylor Resident Inspector's Office Chief Executive Officer James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Entergy Operations, Inc. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1340 Echelon Parkway P.O. Box 136 Jackson, MS 39213 Lycoming, NY 13093 Mr. John T. Herron Ms. Charlene D. Faison Sr. VP and Chief Operating Officer Manager, Licensing Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
440 Hamilton Avenue 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. Theodore A. Sullivan Mr. Michael J. Colomb Site Vice President Director of Oversight Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 440 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 110 White Plains, NY 10601 Lycoming, NY 13093 Mr. William Maquire Mr. Kevin J. Mulligan Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance General Manager, Plant Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Box 110 P.O. Box 110 Lycoming, NY 13093 Lycoming, NY 13093 Mr. Andrew Halliday Mr. Danny L. Pace Manager, Regulatory Compliance Vice President, Engineering Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 440 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 110 White Plains, NY 10601 Lycoming, NY 13093 Mr. Brian OGrady Supervisor Vice President, Operations Support Town of Scriba Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Route 8, Box 382 440 Hamilton Avenue Oswego, NY 13126 White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. Charles Donaldson, Esquire Mr. John F. McCann Assistant Attorney General Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance New York Department of Law Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 120 Broadway 440 Hamilton Avenue New York, NY 10271 White Plains, NY 10601
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant cc:
Regional Administrator, Region I Ms. Stacey Lousteau U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Treasury Department 475 Allendale Road Entergy Services, Inc.
King of Prussia, PA 19406 639 Loyola Avenue Mail Stop L-ENT-15E Oswego County Administrator New Orleans, LA 70113 Mr. Steven Lyman 46 East Bridge Street Oswego, NY 13126 Mr. Peter R. Smith, President New York State Energy, Research, and Development Authority 17 Columbia Circle Albany, NY 12203-6399 Mr. Paul Eddy New York State Dept. of Public Service 3 Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12223-1350 Mr. John M. Fulton Assistant General Counsel Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. Ken L. Graesser BWR SRC Consultant 38832 N. Ashley Drive Lake Villa, IL 60046 Mr. Jim Sniezek Nuclear Management Consultant 5486 Nithsdale Drive Salisbury, MD 21801 Mr. Ron Toole BWR SRC Consultant 1282 Valley of Lakes Box R-10 Hazelton, PA 18202
7590-01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-333 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. DPR-59 issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) for operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant located in Oswego County, New York.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification Section 5.5.6, ?Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, to allow a one-time extension of the interval between the Type A, integrated leakage rate tests (ILRTs), from 10 years to no more than 15 years.
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), Section 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 change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously analyzed?
The change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously analyzed.
The proposed revision to Technical Specifications adds a one time extension to the current interval for Type A testing. The current test interval of ten years, based on past performance, would be extended on a one time basis to fifteen years from the last Type A test. The proposed extension to Type A testing cannot increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated since the containment Type A testing extension is not a modification and the test extension is not of a type that could lead to equipment failure or accident initiation.
The proposed extension to Type A testing does not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an accident since research documented in NUREG-1493 has found that, generically, very few potential containment leakage paths are not identified by Type B and C tests. The NUREG concluded that reducing the Type A (ILRT) testing frequency to one per twenty years was found to lead to an imperceptible increase in risk. These generic conclusions were confirmed by a plant specific risk analysis performed using the current FitzPatrick Individual Plant Examination (IPE) internal events model.
Testing and inspection programs in place at FitzPatrick also provide a high degree of assurance that the containment will not degrade in a manner detectable only by Type A testing. The last four Type A tests show leakage to be below acceptance criteria, indicating a very leak tight containment. Type B and C testing required by Technical Specifications will identify any containment opening such as valves that would otherwise be detected by the Type A tests.
Inspections, including those required by the ASME [C]ode [American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code] and the maintenance rule are performed in order to identify indications of containment degradation that could affect that leak tightness.
These factors in part and in aggregate show that a Type A test extension of up to five years will not represent a significant increase in the consequences of an accident.
- 2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously analyzed?
The change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously analyzed. The proposed revision to Technical Specifications adds a one time extension to the current interval for Type A testing. The current test interval of ten years, based on past performance, would be extended on a one time basis to fifteen years from the last Type A test. The proposed extension to Type A testing cannot create the possibility of a new or different [kind] of accident since there are no physical changes being made to the plant and there are no changes to the operation of the plant that could introduce a new failure mode creating an accident or affecting the mitigation of an accident.
- 3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in [a] margin of safety?
The change does not involve a significant reduction in [a] margin of safety. The proposed revision to Technical Specifications adds a one time extension to the current interval for Type A testing. The current test interval of ten years, based on past performance, would be extended on a one time basis to fifteen years from the last Type A test. The proposed extension to Type A testing will not significantly reduce the margin of safety. The NUREG 1493 generic study of the effects of extending containment leakage testing found that a 20 year extension in Type A leakage testing resulted in an imperceptible increase in risk to the public. NUREG -1493 found that, generically, the design containment leakage rate contributes about 0.1 percent to the individual risk and that the decrease in Type A testing frequency would have a minimal affect on this risk since 95% of the potential leakage paths are detected by Type C testing. This was further confirmed by a plant specific risk assessment using the current FitzPatrick Individual Plant Examination (IPE) internal events model that concluded the risk associated with this change is negligibly small and/or non-risk significant.
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, 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. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRCs Public Document Room, 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 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 Commissions Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commissions PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS)
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://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 requestors/petitioners right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding;
- 3) the nature and extent of the requestors/petitioners 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 requestors/petitioners 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 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.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)-(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed 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; 2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; 3) E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or 4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to Mr. David E.
Blabey, 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated July 28, 2003, as supplemented on May 20, 2004, 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 from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://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 21st day of July 2004.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA/
Patrick D. Milano, Senior Project Manager,Section I Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation