ML15314A574
| ML15314A574 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/2014 |
| From: | NRC/OGC |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-250-LA, 50-251-LA, ASLBP 15-935-02-LA-BD01, RAS 28499 | |
| Download: ML15314A574 (4) | |
Text
NRC-041 Submitted Nov. 10, 2015 PUBLIC NOTICE NRC STAFF PROPOSES TO AMEND RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES AT THE TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 3 AND 4 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, or the Commission) staff has received an application from Florida Power & Light Company (the licensee), for emergency amendments to the operating licenses for the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 (Turkey Point),
located in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The application was dated July 10, 2014, as supplemented by letters dated July 17, July 22 (two letters), July 24, July 26, July 28, and July 29, 2014 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Nos. ML14196A006, ML14202A392, ML14204A367, ML14204A368, ML14206A853, ML14210A374, ML14211A507, and ML14211A508, respectively). The letters can be found by searching ADAMS using the instructions at the end of this notice.
The proposed amendments would increase the ultimate heat sink (UHS) water temperature limit in the Turkey Point Technical Specifications (TSs), add a surveillance requirement to monitor the UHS temperature more frequently if the UHS temperature approaches the new limit, and increase a surveillance requirement frequency related to the component cooling water (CCW) system heat exchangers.
In its letters dated July 10, and July 17, 2014, the licensee stated that the UHS temperature has approached the current TS limit. The licensee stated that the UHS temperature has been trending higher than historical averages in part because of reduced water levels caused by unseasonably dry weather and because of reduced cooling efficiency caused by an algae bloom of concentrations higher than previously observed. The licensee requested a timely review of its application to avoid a dual unit shutdown that could affect grid reliability. Therefore, the licensee requested that the NRC process the license amendment requests under emergency circumstances in accordance with paragraph 50.91(a)(5) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). The NRC staff determined that although the licensee requested that the NRC process the license amendment requests under emergency circumstances, there was sufficient time to publish a prior notice and opportunity for public comment. Therefore, the NRC staff determined that the provisions of 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) were applicable for processing the licensees request under exigent circumstances. The notice was published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2014 (79 FR 44214).
The licensees supplements dated July 22, July 24, and July 26, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staffs original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2014. However, on July 29, 2014, the licensee supplemented its amendment request with a proposed change that increased the scope of the request and affected the proposed no significant hazards consideration published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2014. Therefore, the NRC is issuing this notice to announce the availability of the revised license amendment application and the opportunity to comment.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6), for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC has made a proposed determination that the license amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. The Commissions regulation at 10 CFR 50.91(a)(1) requires that, at the time a licensee requests an amendment, the licensee must provide to the Commission the licensees analysis about the issue of no significant hazards consideration using the standards in § 50.92, which concern whether the proposed amendment (1) involves a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) creates the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involves a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Accordingly, the licensee provided the following information in its letters dated July 10 and July 29, 2014.
- 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The ultimate heat sink (UHS) is not an accident initiator. An increase in UHS temperature will not increase the probability of occurrence of an accident. The proposed change will allow plant operation with a UHS temperature less than or equal to 104ºF. Maintaining UHS temperature less than or equal to 104ºF ensures that accident mitigation equipment will continue to perform its required function, thereby ensuring the consequences of accidents previously evaluated are not increased. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Testing a CCW heat exchanger is not an accident initiator. An increase in the frequency of performing the CCW heat exchanger performance test will not increase the probability of occurrence of an accident. The proposed change will be an increase in the monitoring of CCW heat exchanger capability to remove heat during normal and accident conditions to support both reactor and containment heat removal requirements, and spent fuel cooling requirements. Maintaining CCW heat exchanger capability ensures that accident mitigation equipment will continue to perform its required function, thereby ensuring the consequences of accidents previously evaluated are not increased. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
- 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change will not install any new or different equipment or modify equipment in the plant. The proposed change will not alter the operation or function of structures, systems or components. The response of the plant and the operators following a design basis accident is unaffected by this change. The proposed change does not introduce any new failure modes and the design basis heat removal capability of the safety related components is maintained at the increased UHS temperature limit. Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed change will not install any new or different equipment or modify equipment in the plant. The proposed change will not alter the operation or function of structures, systems or components. The response of the plant and the operators
following a design basis accident is unaffected by this change. The proposed change does not introduce any new failure modes and the design basis heat removal capability of the safety related components is maintained and ensured by more frequently verifying CCW heat exchanger capability. Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
- 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?
Response: No.
The increase in UHS temperature will not adversely affect design basis accident mitigation equipment performance. It was determined that adequate margin exists in the CCW system such that post-accident CCW system supply and return temperatures would remain as currently analyzed in the containment integrity analyses such that the peak containment pressure is not altered by the proposed TS change. The technical evaluation confirmed that adequate CCW design margin would remain under the proposed operating conditions to allow a reasonable degree of equipment degradation to occur while demonstrating that the affected safety related components could continuously perform their design function as currently analyzed. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
An increase in the frequency of performing the CCW heat exchanger performance test does not affect design basis accident mitigation equipment performance.
Increasing the frequency of performance of the existing test has no impact on the margin of safety associated with the CCW system or any system that it serves. The test confirms the capability of the CCW system to perform its safety function.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The NRC staff reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration.
The NRC is seeking public comments on this proposed determination that the license amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. All comments received through Tuesday, August 5, 2014, will be considered in reaching a final determination. This comment period supersedes the comment period provided for in the July 30, 2014, Federal Register notice (79 FR 44214). The Commission may issue the amendments prior to the expiration of the comment period should circumstances change 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 the comment period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. Before any issuance of the proposed license amendments, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRCs regulations.
If the staff decides in its final determination that the amendments do involve a significant hazards consideration, a notice of opportunity for a prior hearing will be published in the Federal Register and, if a hearing is granted, it will be held before the amendments are issued.
Comments on the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration may be (1) telephoned to Audrey Klett, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2 by collect call to 301-415-0489, or by facsimile to 301-415-2102, (2) e-mailed to Audrey.Klett@nrc.gov, or (3) submitted in writing to the Chief, Rules, Announcements and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN-06-A44MP, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. All comments received by close of business (i.e., 4:15 p.m.) on August 5, 2014, will be considered in reaching a final determination.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
A copy of the application may be examined electronically through the NRCs ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the Commissions Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. To begin the search, select ADAMS Public Documents and then select Begin Web-based ADAMS Search. 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, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
NRC-041 Submitted Nov. 10, 2015 PUBLIC NOTICE NRC STAFF PROPOSES TO AMEND RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES AT THE TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 3 AND 4 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, or the Commission) staff has received an application from Florida Power & Light Company (the licensee), for emergency amendments to the operating licenses for the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 (Turkey Point),
located in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The application was dated July 10, 2014, as supplemented by letters dated July 17, July 22 (two letters), July 24, July 26, July 28, and July 29, 2014 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Nos. ML14196A006, ML14202A392, ML14204A367, ML14204A368, ML14206A853, ML14210A374, ML14211A507, and ML14211A508, respectively). The letters can be found by searching ADAMS using the instructions at the end of this notice.
The proposed amendments would increase the ultimate heat sink (UHS) water temperature limit in the Turkey Point Technical Specifications (TSs), add a surveillance requirement to monitor the UHS temperature more frequently if the UHS temperature approaches the new limit, and increase a surveillance requirement frequency related to the component cooling water (CCW) system heat exchangers.
In its letters dated July 10, and July 17, 2014, the licensee stated that the UHS temperature has approached the current TS limit. The licensee stated that the UHS temperature has been trending higher than historical averages in part because of reduced water levels caused by unseasonably dry weather and because of reduced cooling efficiency caused by an algae bloom of concentrations higher than previously observed. The licensee requested a timely review of its application to avoid a dual unit shutdown that could affect grid reliability. Therefore, the licensee requested that the NRC process the license amendment requests under emergency circumstances in accordance with paragraph 50.91(a)(5) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). The NRC staff determined that although the licensee requested that the NRC process the license amendment requests under emergency circumstances, there was sufficient time to publish a prior notice and opportunity for public comment. Therefore, the NRC staff determined that the provisions of 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) were applicable for processing the licensees request under exigent circumstances. The notice was published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2014 (79 FR 44214).
The licensees supplements dated July 22, July 24, and July 26, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staffs original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2014. However, on July 29, 2014, the licensee supplemented its amendment request with a proposed change that increased the scope of the request and affected the proposed no significant hazards consideration published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2014. Therefore, the NRC is issuing this notice to announce the availability of the revised license amendment application and the opportunity to comment.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6), for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC has made a proposed determination that the license amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. The Commissions regulation at 10 CFR 50.91(a)(1) requires that, at the time a licensee requests an amendment, the licensee must provide to the Commission the licensees analysis about the issue of no significant hazards consideration using the standards in § 50.92, which concern whether the proposed amendment (1) involves a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) creates the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involves a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Accordingly, the licensee provided the following information in its letters dated July 10 and July 29, 2014.
- 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The ultimate heat sink (UHS) is not an accident initiator. An increase in UHS temperature will not increase the probability of occurrence of an accident. The proposed change will allow plant operation with a UHS temperature less than or equal to 104ºF. Maintaining UHS temperature less than or equal to 104ºF ensures that accident mitigation equipment will continue to perform its required function, thereby ensuring the consequences of accidents previously evaluated are not increased. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Testing a CCW heat exchanger is not an accident initiator. An increase in the frequency of performing the CCW heat exchanger performance test will not increase the probability of occurrence of an accident. The proposed change will be an increase in the monitoring of CCW heat exchanger capability to remove heat during normal and accident conditions to support both reactor and containment heat removal requirements, and spent fuel cooling requirements. Maintaining CCW heat exchanger capability ensures that accident mitigation equipment will continue to perform its required function, thereby ensuring the consequences of accidents previously evaluated are not increased. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
- 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change will not install any new or different equipment or modify equipment in the plant. The proposed change will not alter the operation or function of structures, systems or components. The response of the plant and the operators following a design basis accident is unaffected by this change. The proposed change does not introduce any new failure modes and the design basis heat removal capability of the safety related components is maintained at the increased UHS temperature limit. Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed change will not install any new or different equipment or modify equipment in the plant. The proposed change will not alter the operation or function of structures, systems or components. The response of the plant and the operators
following a design basis accident is unaffected by this change. The proposed change does not introduce any new failure modes and the design basis heat removal capability of the safety related components is maintained and ensured by more frequently verifying CCW heat exchanger capability. Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
- 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?
Response: No.
The increase in UHS temperature will not adversely affect design basis accident mitigation equipment performance. It was determined that adequate margin exists in the CCW system such that post-accident CCW system supply and return temperatures would remain as currently analyzed in the containment integrity analyses such that the peak containment pressure is not altered by the proposed TS change. The technical evaluation confirmed that adequate CCW design margin would remain under the proposed operating conditions to allow a reasonable degree of equipment degradation to occur while demonstrating that the affected safety related components could continuously perform their design function as currently analyzed. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
An increase in the frequency of performing the CCW heat exchanger performance test does not affect design basis accident mitigation equipment performance.
Increasing the frequency of performance of the existing test has no impact on the margin of safety associated with the CCW system or any system that it serves. The test confirms the capability of the CCW system to perform its safety function.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The NRC staff reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration.
The NRC is seeking public comments on this proposed determination that the license amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. All comments received through Tuesday, August 5, 2014, will be considered in reaching a final determination. This comment period supersedes the comment period provided for in the July 30, 2014, Federal Register notice (79 FR 44214). The Commission may issue the amendments prior to the expiration of the comment period should circumstances change 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 the comment period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. Before any issuance of the proposed license amendments, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRCs regulations.
If the staff decides in its final determination that the amendments do involve a significant hazards consideration, a notice of opportunity for a prior hearing will be published in the Federal Register and, if a hearing is granted, it will be held before the amendments are issued.
Comments on the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration may be (1) telephoned to Audrey Klett, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2 by collect call to 301-415-0489, or by facsimile to 301-415-2102, (2) e-mailed to Audrey.Klett@nrc.gov, or (3) submitted in writing to the Chief, Rules, Announcements and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN-06-A44MP, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. All comments received by close of business (i.e., 4:15 p.m.) on August 5, 2014, will be considered in reaching a final determination.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
A copy of the application may be examined electronically through the NRCs ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the Commissions Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. To begin the search, select ADAMS Public Documents and then select Begin Web-based ADAMS Search. 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, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.