ML17333A022

Lists Remaining Items & Rationale for Not Incorporating Items in Next Rev of Offsite Dose Calculation Manual

ML17333A022
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	07/28/1988
From:	Booker J GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
RBG-28342, NUDOCS 8808120058
Download: ML17333A022 (43)

Text

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPA2VF July 28, 1988 RBG-28542 File No. G9.5 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:

River Bend Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-458 By letter I dated February 29, 1988, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission transmitted a Technical Evaluation Report (TER) prepared by EG&G Idaho, Inc. of River Bend Station's Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM),

Revision l. Each of the discrepancies/suggestions in the TER have been revieved. Gulf States Utilities Company (GSU) vill revise the ODCM to incorporate 14 of the-20 items listed in the conclusion section by July 30, 1988. The remaining items and the reasons for not incorporating them in the nex>> ODCM revision are listed below':

1. Coaunent: "In Section 2.4, the DF should be defined as the total dilution vater volume huring the reporting period instead of the dilution volume during the release period vhich may result in overly conservative calculated doses."

GSU Response: The DF based on the dilution volume during the release period ks a conservative method of calculating liquid pathvay doses. GSU vill consider in a future revision incorporating a DF based on the total dilution volume during the zeportikg period.

2. Comment: "In Section 3.3.1.2.1, the X/Q ie evaluated at the unrestricted area boundary which may result in overly conservative calculated dose rates for noble gases instead of being evaluated at the site boundary."

GSU Response! The X/g evaluated at the unrestricted area boundary is a conservative method of calculating does rates for noble gases. Th'is location allovs dose projection calculations and comparisons at a location that is monitored by the River Bend Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

P I

I'

) q 7I J

r'i

3. Comment: "In Section 3.4.1.2.a, the X/Q referenced in Appendix E is evaluated at the unrestricted area boundary (instead of being evaluated at the site boundary) which may result in overly conservative calculated doses to air."

GSU Response: See item no. 2.

4. Comment: "In Section 3.3.1.2.1 and 3.3.1.2.2, data from the FSAR are used for gaseous effluent radionuclide mix in the dose rate calculations instead of using actual plant data."

GSU Response: Due to River Bend's high fuel integrity, current radionuclide mixes and inconsistent release rate levels have not allowed the use of actual plant data.

5. Comment: "In Section 3.3.2.2.a.i, the X/Q used to determine the noble gas monitor setpoint is defined and evaluated at or beyond the unrestricted area boundary instead of at or beyond the site boundary as required in Technical Specification 3.11.2.1."

GSU Response: See item no. 2.

6. Comment: "In Section 2.3.2.1, it may be prudent to include a low level alarm for the liquid radwaste monitor with a setpoint slightly above the spurious alarm setting."

GSU Response: At RBS, lower tier procedures prescribe a low level (ALERT) alarm setpoint as a fraction of the HIGH alarm setpoint.

If you have any questions, please contact our Mr. James W. Cook at (504) 381-4151.

Sincerely,

p. e. A~+

J. E. Booker Manager-River Bend Oversight River Bend Nuclear Group JEB/ E/ C/ch cc: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, TX 76011 NRC Resident Inspector Post Office Box 1051 St. Francisville, LA 70775

I, I'u II

4. CONCLUSIONS The Licensee's ODCH Revision 1 for the River Bend Station Unit 1 was reviewed. It was determined that the ODCH uses methods that are, in general, consistent with the guidelines of NUREG-0133. However, it is recommended that another revision to the ODCH be submitted to address the discrepancies identified in the review.

The following are considered to be major discrepancies:

o In Section 2.4, the DFl should be defined as the total dilution water volume during the reporting period instead of the dilution volume during the release period which may result in overly conservative calculated doses.

o In Section 2.4, the dilution volume should be adjusted in accordance with the recommendations of Section 4.3 of NURfG-0133.

In Section 3.3.1.2.1, the X/g is evaluated at the unrestricted area boundary which may result in overly conservative calculated dose rates for noble gases instead of being evaluated at the .site boundary.

~4' In Section 3.3.1.2.3, the dose rate is determined for the infant age group instead of the child age group. The child age group is the limiting age group and is the required age group as defined in the bases statement of Technical Specification 3.11.2.l.b.

o In Section 3.4.1.2.a, the X/g referenced in Appendix E is evaluated at the unrestricted area boundary (instead of being evaluated at the site boundary) which may result in overly conservative calculated doses to air.

13

t 4

The following are additional discrepancies:

o In Section 2.4, it is not clear if Equation 2.4.2-1 determines the dose due to liquid effluents for the release of a single batch or for a series of batches.

o In Section 2.4.2, Equation 2.4.2-2 should use an index other than "i" in order not to confuse it with the radionuclide "i" used in Equation 2.4.2-1.

o In Sections 2.5 and 3.5, a different definition should be considered for XD, since it appears that the existing definition will result in overly conservative dose projections.

o In Section 3.3.1.2.1 and 3.3.1.2.2, data from the FSAR are used for the gaseous effluent radionuclide mix in the dose rate

. ca)culations instead of'sing actual plant data.

o In Section 3.3.1.2, Equations 3.3.1.2.2-1 and 3.3.1.2-2 have units of mrs!/sec instead of mrems/year. The mrems/year are

'required for consistency with Technical. Specification 3.11.2.1.

f Therefore, a constant must be included in the equations to adjust the calculated result to mrems/year.

C

~ l o -

Section,3.3,1,.2.3 references Table.E for X/gD instead of-the values from Table F. The data in Table F should be used in the dose calculations due to the release of I-131, I-133, particulates with half lives greater than eight days, and tritium.

~ oq' ~

o In Section 3.3.2.2, the expressions on each side of the equal signs are not equal'ecause of the 0.8 factor and the effective dose factor on one side of the equation.

o In Sections 3.3.2.2.a.i and 3.3.2.2.a.ii, it is not clear which setpoint is the actual high alarm setpoint.

14

0 4 l

,'I

v o

~ i In Section 3.3.2.2.a.i, the X/Q used to determine the noble gas monitor setpoint is defined and evaluated at or beyond the unrestricted area boundary instead of at or beyond the site boundary as required in Technical Specification 3.11.2.1.

o In Section 3.3.2.2.a.i.~Ste , it is not clear what $ s meant by the "monitor's loop accuracy".

o Figures 2 and 4 illustrating the liquid and gaseous radwaste treatment systems are illegible and should be replaced.

o A figure illustrating the solid waste treatment system is not included in the ODCH.

' ~ ~

i,s *~ si The following are not discrepancies in the ODCH, but are suggestions that should be brought to the attention of the Licensee:

o In Section 2.3.2.1, it I may be prudent to include a low level alarm for the liquid radwaste monitor with a setpoint slightly above the spurious alarm setting.

o In Section 3.3.1.2.3, tritium is not addressed and "Radioiodines" Eis stated which implies all radioiodines instead of only 'I-131 and I-133" as required fn Technical Specification 3.11.2.1.

o In Section 4.0, Table 4.1 under "Airborne Particulates and Radioiodines" specifies "radioiodines" instead of only "I-131".

r,~

t

I'llHIQy wp DISTRIBUTION

~~@.~, g 0

-.i ~c UNITED STATES Docket File n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PD 5 0

I Ol

~ .

1 C WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 JLee Hay 25, 1989

"+*I>> g DOCKET NO. 5P+97 Regulatory Publications Branch MEMORANDUMFOR: Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Office of Administration and Resources Management FROM: ONce of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM NUCLEAR PROJECT NO 2 One signed original of the Federal Register Notice identified below Is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. Additional conformed copies ( 5 ) of the Notice are enclosed for your use.

Notice of Receipt of Application for Construction Permit(s) and Operating License(s).

Notice of Receipt of Partial Application for Construction Permit(s) and Facility License(s): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.

0 Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License. (Call with .day Insert dato).

Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility License(s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; and Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility License(s) and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing.

LJ Notice of Availability of NRC Draft/Final Environmental Statement.

Notice of Limited Work Authorization.

Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.

Notice of Issuance of Construction Permit(s).

Notice of Issuance of Facility Operating License(s) or Amendment(s).

Order.

Exemption.

Notice of Granting Exemption.

E Environmental Assessment.

0 Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.

Receipt of Petition for Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.

Issuance of Final Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.

Other:

Enclosure:

As stated

Contact:

Je+> Lee Phone:

OI I IcEe R PD5....

OURNAMKW oATK 5/2 89 ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e

~ ~ ~

NRC PORM 3IS IIO/eo) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY f) d~

n 0 L 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY. SYSTEM DOCKET NO. 50-397 NUCLEAR. PROJECT-NO. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING-OF.NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Opera'ting License No. NPF-21 issued to Washington Public Power Supply System (the licensee), for operation of Nuclear Project No. 2, located in Benton County, Washington.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification. of Pro osea.Action:

The proposed amendment revises the battery load profi les shown in Technical Specification 3/4.8.2.1, "D.C. Sources - Operating." The surveil-lance requirement includes a table showing the minimum amperage which each battery must be capable of delivering as a function of time when called upon to deliver emergency loads. The licensee has recalculated these emergency loads and the resulting battery profiles to account for current safety equip-ment configurations. The amendment inserts currently applicable values into the table.

In making the calculation, the licensee used a different aging factor for the 250 volt batteries than for the 24 volt and 125 volt batteries. The surveillance requirement is revised to include separate criteria applicable to the 250 volt batteries for the periodic performance discharge tests.

1

,(l

The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated March 18, 1988, as supplemented by letter dated April 12, 1989.

The Need for the Pro osed Action:

The proposed amendment is required to ensure. that the batteries are capable of providing emergency loads. The periodic surveillance required by the technical specifications is intended to show that the batteries are capable of meeting the actual expected loads. The licensee has recently reevaluated emergency loads and has recomputed the battery requirements for these loads. The amendment wi 11 place these up-to-date values into the technical specifications.

Environmental Im acts of the Pro osed Action:

This action does not involve a change to equipment or to operating procedures. It is limited to a revision to the calculated emergency battery loads. An existing license requirement would be amended to reflect the new calculations. The staff has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed amendment and finds the change acceptable.

The proposed action does not involve a significant change in the probabi lity or consequences of any accident previously evaluated, nor does it involve a new or different kind of accident. Consequently, any radiological releases resulting from an accident would not be significantly greater than previously determined. The proposed amendment does not otherwise affect routine radiological plant effluents. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment. The Commission also concludes that the proposed

h action will not result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

With regard to nonradiological impacts, the proposed amendment does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.

Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradio-logical environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.

Alternatives to the Pro osed Action:

Because the Commission h'as concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, there is no need to examine alternatives to the proposed action.

Alternative Use of Resources:

This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the Final Environmental Statement related to operation of Nuclear Project No. 2, dated December 1981.

A encies and Persons Consulted:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's request that supports the proposed amendment. The NRC staff did not consult other agencies or persons.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment.

Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission concludes the the proposed action will have no significant adverse effect on the quality of the human environment.

fl t

4 The Notice ot Consideration of Issuance of Amendment and Opportunity for tl i"gi ti ih hi i pblihdi h ~Fd" 1R May 18, 1988 (53 FR 17810). No request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene was filed following this notice.

For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 18, 1988 and supplement dated April 12, 1989, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW., Washington', DC 20555, and at the Richland City Library, Swift and Northgate Streets, Richland, Washington 99352.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this25th day of May 1989.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION George . Knight~ Director Project Directorate V Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

It I

I I

Vl 4y (ggps NLcp 0

t n

O t UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 DISTRIBUTION t"Docket File JLee

/y May 10, 1989 RSamwotth

~a*a" DOCKET NO. 50-397 Regulatory Publications Branch MEMORANDUMFOR: Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Ofnce of Administration and Resources Management FRONL: Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation I

SUBJECT:

One signed original of the Federal Register Notice Identified below Is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. Additional conformedh copies ( 5 ) of the Notice are enclosed for your use.

Notice of Receipt of Application for Construction Permit(s) and Operating License(s).

Notice of Receipt of PartIal Application for Construction Permit(s) and Facility License(s): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.

a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License. (Call with .day insert date).

Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility License(s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; and Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility License(s) and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing.

Notice of Availability of NRC Draft/Final Environmental Statement.

Notice of Limited Work Authorization.

Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.

Notice of Issuance of Construction Permit(s).

Notice of issuance of Facility Operating License(s) or Amendment(s).

Order.

Exemption.

Notice of Granting Exemption.

Environmental Assessment.

Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.

Receipt of Petition for Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.

Issuance of Final Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.

g Other CORRECTION TO BIWEEKLY NOTICE

Enclosure:

As stated Contempt: Jean Lee x21365 OFFICE~ PD5/I'DRSP SURNAME JLee DATE 5f/10/89 NRC FORM Sle uo/eol NRCM 0240 OF'FI CIAl RECORD COPY

P I IC 7590-01 CORRECTION TO BIWEEKLY NOTICE APPLICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING LICENSES INVOLVING NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS The above notice was published on April 19, 1989 (54 FR 15820). A sentence was omitted in the following part of this notice: Page 15841, second column, heading entitled "Washington Public Power Supply System, Docket No.

50-397, Nuclear Project No. 2, Benton County, Washington." The subsection describing the request should read as follows:

Descri tion-of. amendment re uest: License condition 2.C.(16), Attachment 2, Item 3(b), Wide Range Neutron Flux Monitor, requires the licensee to implement the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev. 2 for flux monitoring prior to startup following the fourth refueling outage. The requested amendment would defer the requirement for flux monitoring to the end of the fifth refueling outage.

Robert Samworth,.Project Manager Project Directorate No. V Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation PM:PD5 e RSamworth ton 5 89 5/8/89 5 L}/89

Il W I h h W hf WWC O h ~

~ 'Wh gh,)ci)f W,l h Pl h

hh h e h

~

7590-01 CORRECTION TO BIWEEKLY NOTICE APPLICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING LICENSES INVOLVING NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS The above notice was published on April 19, 1989 (54 FR 15820). A sentence was omitted in the following part of this notice: Page 15841, second column, heading entitled "Washington Public Power Supply System, Docket No.

50-397, Nuclear Project No. 2, Benton County, Washington." The subsection describing the request should read as follows:

Descri tion of amendment re uest: License condition 2.C.(16), Attachment 2, Item 3(b), Wide Range Neutron Flux Monitor, requires the licensee to implement the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev. 2 for flux monitoring prior to startup following the fourth refueling outage. The requested amendment would defer the requirement for flux monitoring to the end of the fifth refueling outage.

Robert Samworth, Project Manager Project Directorate No. V Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

gAS ~<C/I/ DISTRIBUTION UNITED STATES Cy 0

-'~i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I Docket File n JLee 0 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555

~:

Ih 0

Hay 2, 1989

+~ ~O

+ l1**"

DOCKET NO. 50-397 Regulatory Publications Branch MEMORANDUMFOR: Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Office of Administration and Resources Management FROM: Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation SULIECT MPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 One sIgned original of the Federal Register Notice Identified below is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. Additional conformed copies ( 5 ) of the Notice are enclosed for your use.

Notice of Receipt of Application for Construction Permit(s) and Operating License(s).

Notice of Receipt of Partial Application for Construction Permit(s) and Facility License(s): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.

0 Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License. (Call with .day insert dato).

Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility License(s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; and Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility License(s) and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing.

Notice of Availability of NRC Draft/Final Environmental Statement.

Notice of Limited Work Authorization.

Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.

Notice of Issuance of Construction Permit(s).

Notice of issuance of Facility Operating License(s) or Amendment(s).

Order.

Exemption.

D Notice of Granting Exemption.

Erlvlronmental Assessment.

Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.

Receipt of Petition for Director's Decision Under10 CFR2.206.

Issuance of Final Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.

Q PthenNOTICE OF DENIAL OF ANENDh'IENT T PLEASE CALL DEBBIE ROBINSON WITH THE 30 DAY DATE ON PAGE 2 ON EXT. 23057.

Enclosure:

As stated

Contact:

Jean Lee I hone: XZM 21365 orrtcE QPQP/P$ 5....

SURNAME .JLee........".

OATE 5/2/89 NRC roRM s18 uo/cot NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY Ifti~>O )$1

NN Summer Plant File PAnderson JHayes April 28, 1989 DOCKET NO.

Rules and Procedures Branch MEMORANDUMFOR: Division of Rules and Records ONce of Administration and Resources Management ONce of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

One sIgned original of the Federal Register Notice identified below is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. Additional conformed copies ( ) of the Notice are enclosed for your use.

Notice of ReceIpt of Application for Construction Permit(s) and Operating License(s).

Notice of Receipt of Partial Application for Construction Permit(s) and Facility License(s): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License.

Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility License(s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; and Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility License(s) and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing.

Notice of Availability of NRC DraftlFlnal Environmental Statement.

Notice of Limited Work Authorization.

Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.

Notice of Issuance of Construction Permit(s).

Notice of issuance of Facility Operating License(s) or Amendment(s).

Order.

Exemption.

Notice of Granting Exemption.

Environmental Assessment.

Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.

P oeerÃOT E GF O L OF ANENONENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE ANO OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING SUMMER DOCKET 50-395 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As stated

Contact:

Pat AnderSOn Phone:

OFFICE> P

~ ~

SURNAME> PAnderson ohvE 5/2-/89 NRC FORM $ 1e 110/eoI NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

II

~ I f 44,,@': i F

FV' If lf

~ >FI I4 4>> ".'I f I'i> Ml' >l t Mfrr

>ft'I,, '>ip,'4 I!I'Itj I r

'8 Ilt,j" I>, 't,il I, F' Q>'I!>'f 4('i

!tt>t>

I I>

tt r .,>,i,l '44 2

f' tr M>gq p I>I

"<<t .>4 4> 'Mr, F

',>4>f ,

4,444K> 4 4 .' Ml.g

>I g 4 l* '

7' ir t Mf@f>1 ff>p f;4'!>ff*,> f)r> >M>4 444 (>> 4.4 4<<.",tf (! 44

'."4<3% I 5" 4'<<4 tg i,if; ". II

,frl~fl>f~pl'"0, f.',

" i>4t'>fjr$ ftr>;, rp> 'I,;, ) M 'ff*r ', lv>

I t (

'I 4 4

44>>>G'IMI>> >HI >6>'p'4"" 4'444",4 I4 >fr I 4>>il 43',

r 4, ~,

II ff!'r>Q '" K7 J4 I'I 44)

~ 4

DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File PD 5 JLee February 17, 1989 DOCKET NO.

Rules and Procedures Branch MEMORANDUMFOR: Division of Rules and Records Office of Admlnls(ration FROM: Office of Nucle'ar Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 One signed original ot the Federal Register Notice Identified below ls'enclosed for your, transmittal to the'Office of the for publication. Additional contormed copies ( 5 Federal'egister

) of the Notice are enclosed tor your use.

Notice'of Receipt of Application for Construction Permit(s) and Operating License(s).

Notice of Receipt of Partial Application for Construction Permit(s) and Facility License(s): Time tor Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License.

Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility License(s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; and Notice ot Consideration of Issuance of Facility License(s) and Notice ot Opportunity for Hearing.

Notice of Availability'of NRC PraftlFinal Environmental Statement.

Notice of Limited Work Authorization.

Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.

LJ Notice of Issuance of Construction Permit(s).

Notice of issuance of Facility Operating License(s) or Amendment(s).

Order.

Exemption.

Notice of Granting Exemption:

Environmental Assessment.

Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.

Other:

Otfice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NOTE: 30-day date to 'be inserted. on page 4. Please advise Debbie Robinson or Ruth Wade of date, Ext. 21372.

Enclosure:

's stated Jean Lee phone Z-21365 OFFICEI D S IPD5 ~ ~ ~ i SURNAME% .JL ~ ~

DATE~ 2/.. 89 NRc FoRM sle llo/80I NRcM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

'I J

f u

7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONHISSION WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM DOCKET NO. 50-397 NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF NENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERtlINATION AND OPPORTUNITY fOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-21 issued to Washington Public Power Supply System (the licensee), for operation of Nuclear Project No. 2, located in Benton County, Washington. The request for amendment was submitted by letter dated December 2, 1988 and supplemented by

'ietter dated February I, 1989.

The proposed amendment would change Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2.e.7. which is part of the demonstration of operability of the emergency diesel generators. The surveillance requirement currently prescribes that upon loss of'oltage on the emergency bus concurrent with an emergency core cooling system (ECCS) actuation signal, all division 3 automatic diesel generator trips will be bypassed except engine overspeed, generator differential current, and emergency manual stop.

The proposed amendment would show that the bypass occurs on the ECCS actuation signal. It would also include the incomplete start sequence trip in the set of trips not bypassed.

In its application for the amendment, the licensee declared that the changes to the surveillance requirement are necessary to make the requirement consistent with the actual installed design of the automatic bypass function

of the diesel generator trips. The licensee contends that these changes were an oversight in the preparation of the MNP-2 technical specifications as the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) descriptions were filed with NRC before issuance of the technical specifications.

On February 2, 1989 the Commission issued a temporary waiver of compliance to the above technical specification in order to avoid shutdown of the reactor while the amendment application is undergoing review.

Prior to 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 Cgmmission'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 (I) 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.

The proposed changes do not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously reviewed because the objectives for bypassing diesel generator trips during an accident are met. The accident which the system is designed to protect against is the loss of coolant accident (LOCA). Exceptions to the requirement that trips be bypassed have been allowed if coincident logic is used to avoid spurious tr ips. In their February I, 1989 submittal, the licensee described redundant instrumentation

features which disable the incomplete starting sequence trip during normal operation of the diesel, precluding spurious trips. Therefore no increase in the probability or consequence of this accident will occur.

The proposed changes will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident because there is no change to emergency diesel generator system design or function.

The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The licensee has argued that the purpose of the incomplete start sequence trip is to preserve air if a starting sequence is unsuccessful. The circuitry assoqiated with the incomplete star ting sequence notifies the control room operator of a failure to start the diesel engine automatically and thus allows operator intervention.

On the basis of the above arguments, the Commission proposes to determine that these changes do not involve a 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. The Commission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing.

Comments should be addressed to the Regulatory Publications Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Mashington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room P-216, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, h)aryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Copies

fi),

of written comments may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NM., Washington, DC 20555. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.

By , 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 hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and petitions 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. 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 must 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 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 which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition

f q', t 1

, 1

should also identify the specific aspects(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 fifteen (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 fifteen (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, and the bases for each contention set forth reasonable specificity. Contentions shall be limited to matter s within the scope of the amendment under consideration. A petitioner who fai ls to

~ ~ >>~+A ~ %E t/ '.

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 Comoission may make a final determination on thu 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 effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.

)

J

If the final determination is that the amendment involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.

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 Coamission 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.

C The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish 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.

A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20555, by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last ten (10) days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner or representative for the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800) 325-6000 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number 3737 and the following message addressed to George W.

Knighton: petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER

~ ~

0 7 notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel-White Flint, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq., Bishop, Cook, Purcell and Reynolds, 1400 L Street NW., Washington, DC 20005-3502, and Mr. G. E. Doupe,

/

Esq., Washington Public Power Supply System, P.O. Box 968, 3000 George Washington Way, Richland, Washington 99352, attorneys 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 which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the Richland City Library, Swift and Northgate Streets, Richland, Washington 99352.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of February, 1989.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION George . Knigh, Pr oject Director Project Directorate V Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects

t ~

C I