ML17289A451
| ML17289A451 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1992 |
| From: | Bill Dean Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17289A452 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9204100393 | |
| Download: ML17289A451 (14) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM DOCKET NO. 50-397
'OTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT 0
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiss1on (the Comm1ss1on) 1s cons1der1ng issuance of an amendment to Facil1ty Operating License No. NPF-21, 1ssued to Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS), for operat1on of the WPPSS Nuclear Project No.
2 (WNP-2) located in Benton County, Washington.
The proposed amendment would revise the technical specifications (TS) to incorporate a more direct method for determining the efficiency of the hydrogen recombiners associated with the Containment Atmospheric Control (CAC) system.
A temporary waiver of compliance was granted by the Commission on March 13, 1992, to allow the proposed TS amendment to be used in determ1n1ng the operability of the CAC system.
This allowed the 11censee to start up WNP-2 following a brief outage.
The amendment request is considered to meet the ex1gent criteria stated in 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) in that timely action is required to process the amendment and el1minate the need to rely on a temporary waiver of compl1ance to just1fy operab111ty of the CAC system.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission w1ll have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
9204i00393 920402 PDR ADOCK 05000397 P
PDR~
The Commiss1on has made a proposed determination that the amendment request 1nvolves no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commiss1on's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the fac111ty in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant 1ncrease in the probability or consequences of an accident prev1ously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a s1gn1ficant reduction in a margin of safety.
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a),
the licensee has provided its analysis of the 1ssue 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 recombiners are prov1ded as an accident mitigating feature
- and, as
- such, do not have potent1al to cause an accident.
In addition, the consequences of accidents are not increased.
The 25 ppmV acceptance cr1terion more adequately demonstrates operability of the CAC system as 1t is a more direct indication of recombiner operational efficiency and 1s not dependent on analytical methods of determining input parameters or temperature losses and temperature measurement inaccuracies.
Hence, there is no increase 1n the consequences of an accident 1ntroduced by this request as the proposed testing method 1s superior to that currently 1n the TS, as it better quantifies the conversion capability of the catalyst.
The existing testing method only confirms an efficiency of approximately 80 percent while the proposed method confirms a minimum efficiency of 99.75 percent for the minimum 1 percent hydrogen feed.
4 t
(2)
The proposed change does not create the possib1lity of a new or different kind of accident from any prev1ously evaluated.
No new methods of system operation are introduced by this request.
Accordingly, no new or different k1nd of accident is credible as a result of this request.
(3)
The proposed change does not 1nvolve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The proposed testing provides a more direct and rigorous acceptance cr1ter1on.
Sampling of the feed and product gases w111 be a more reliable indicator of catalyst performance thus assuring that the margin to unacceptable oxygen level is maintained.
Limiting the catalyst bed preheat temperature to less than that expected for a LOCA condition provides add1tional assurance that the margin of safety will be maintained.
- Hence, this request does not represent a decrease in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis
- and, based on th1s 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 sign1ficant hazards cons1deration.
The Comm1ssion 1s seek1ng publ1c comments on th1s proposed determination.
Any comments rece1ved within fifteen (15) days after the date of publ1cat1on of th1s notice will be cons1dered in mak1ng any f1nal determinat1on.
The Comm1ssion w111 not normally make a f1nal determ1nat1on unless 1t rece1ves a
request for a hearing.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules and Directives Review Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services,
1
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiss1on, Washington, DC
- 20555, and should cite the publicat1on date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice.
Written comments may also be delivered to Room P-223, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue,
- Bethesda, Haryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.
Federal Workdays.
Cop1es of wr1tten comments rece1ved may be exam1ned at the NRC Publ1c Document Room, the Gelman Build1ng, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20555.
The filing of requests for hear1ng and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By
, the licensee may f1le a request for a hear1ng with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by th1s proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hear1ng and a pet1tion 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 Licens1ng Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is available at the Comm1ssion's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local public document room located at the R1chland Publ1c Library, 955 Northgate
- Street, Richland, Washington 99352.
If a request for a hear1ng or pet1t1on for leave to 1ntervene is f1led by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licens1ng
- Board, des1gnated by the Commission or by the Cha1rman of the Atom1c Safety and
4 tk
Licensing Board, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licens1ng Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropr1ate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with part1cularity the 1nterest of the petitioner 1n the proceed1ng, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding.
The pet1t1on 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 wh1ch 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 1ntervene.
Any person who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been adm1tted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehear1ng conference scheduled 1n the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements descr1bed above.
Not later than f1fteen (15) days pr1or to the first prehear1ng conference scheduled in the proceed1ng, a petit1oner shall f1le a supplement to the petition to intervene wh1ch must include a list of the content1ons which are sought to be litigated in the matter.
Each content1on must cons1st of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be ra1sed or controverted.
In addit1on, the pet1t1oner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of
1
>> ii
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on wh1ch the petit1oner intends to rely 1n proving the contention at the hear1ng.
The pet1t1oner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of wh1ch the petitioner is aware and on which the petit1oner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opin1on.
Petitioner must provide sufficient 1nformat1on to show that a genuine d1spute exists with the applicant on a material 1ssue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters with1n the scope of the amendment under consideration.
The content1on must be one wh1ch, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief.
A petit1oner who fails to file such a
supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be perm1tted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceed1ng, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, 1ncluding the opportunity to present ev1dence and cross-examine witnesses.
If the amendment 1s issued before the expiration of 30-days, the Commiss1on w111 make a f1nal determination on the issue of no significant hazards cons1deration.
If a hearing 1s requested, the final determ1nation w111 serve to dec1de when the hear1ng is held.
If the final determinat1on is that the amendment request 1nvolves no significant hazards cons1derat1on, the Commission may 1ssue 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
li l i'
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Comm1ssion will not 1ssue the amendment unt11 the expiration of the 15-day not1ce period.
- However, should c1rcumstances change dur1ng the not1ce per1od, such that failure to act 1n a t1mely way would result, for example, 1n derat1ng or shutdown of the fac1lity, the Commiss1on may issue the license amendment before the exp1ration of the 15-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no s1gn1ficant hazards consideration.
The final determ1nation will cons1der all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take th1s action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance.
The Commission expects that the need to take this action w1ll occur very infrequently.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commiss1on, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention:
Docket1ng and Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Comm1ssion's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC
- 20555, by the above date.
Where petitions are filed dur1ng the last ten (10) days of the notice per1od, it is requested that the petit1oner promptly so 1nform the Commiss1on by a toll-free telephone call to Western Un1on at 1-(800) 325-6000 (1n Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700).
The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Ident1fication Number 3737 and the following message addressed to James E. Gagliardo, Act1ng Project Director:
petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page
/g l
I[
1
number of this FEDERAL REGISTER not1ce.
A copy of the pet1t1on should also be sent to the Office of the General
- Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiss1on, Washington, DC 20555, and to N1cholas S. Reynolds, Esq.,
Winston 8 Strawn, 1400 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20005-3502, attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to 1ntervene, amended petit1ons, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing w111 not be enterta1ned absent a determination by the Commission, the presid1ng officer or the presiding Atom1c Safety and Licensing Board Panel that the petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balanc1ng of the factors specif1ed 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 Harch 18, 1992, which 1s available for public inspection at the Commiss1on's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Wash1ngton, DC 20555, and at the local public document room, located at the Richland Public L1brary, 955 Northgate
- Street, Richland, Washington 99352.
Dated at Rockville, Haryland, this 2nd day of April, 1992.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMHISSION William H. Dean, Acting Project Hanager Project D1rectorate V
Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Off1ce of Nuclear Reactor Regulation