ML19253B296
| ML19253B296 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/14/1979 |
| From: | Woodhead C NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910100674 | |
| Download: ML19253B296 (12) | |
Text
~,
' August 14, 1979
{
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD r
In the Matter of
)
/O
', L'c h f <: y h'q [9 h
y HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-466
.7
)
Q ff c~,
4~F C.
(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating
)
g, A-Station, Unit 1)
)
D p% U/
v //
N)
'T e% J \\e NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO CONTENTION #40 AND AMENDMENTS TO
/y,g PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED CONTENTIONS OF JOHN F. DOHERTY By pleading dated July 24, 1979, Intervenor John F. Doherty filed amendments to his previously submitted Contentions Nos. 23, 24 and 26, and also filed a new Contention No. 40.
By pleading of July 31, 1979, amendments to Contentions 28, 34 and 38 were submitted. E The NRC ' Staff responds tc the admissability of thsse contentions as follows:
Amendment to Contention No. 23
~The amendment to Contention 23 is not actually an amendment but simply a repetition of Contention 23 filed previously. The original contention asserted that a LOCA caused by pressure transient or coolant flow blockage had not been addressed in the design basis accident (DBA) and that the ACNGS ECCS design is inadequate to mitigate such an accident.
S The Staff previously filed a response to Mr. Doherty's contentions 9 through 39 on June 27, 1979.
x 1
1124 245',
7910100 g V
.J G
The " amendment" repeats the assertion that a pressure transient could cause e
a large or small pipe break LOCA and that the ECCS should be designed to mitigate such an accident.
To the extent'that the contention asserts that the provisions of Appendix X o' Part 50 are inadequate because they do not require accommodation of a pipe break at more than 1.02% power, this is a challenge to the regulations, not permitted in a licensing proceeding without a showing that the rule will not serve the purpose intended due to special circumstances.
Therefore, the amendment adds nothing to the original contention, and the Staff remains opposed to the admission of this contention as an issue in controversy.
Amendment to Contention 24 Thi.- is also essentially a repetition of Mr. Doherty's original Contention 24.
He alleges that in case of a control rod drop accident, there is a risk that the peak energy limit of 280 cal /gr. will be exceeded.
The basis for this contention appears to be Mr. Doherty's belief (based upon a reading of NEDO 10,527) that the maximum reactivity worth of each rod should be 1.4%.
- However, Mr. Doherty seems to have ignored the June 27, 1979 Staff response to this contention, which made clear that there is no issue to litigate with respect to rod worth. As the Staff stated:
s i124 246
- This contention has no factual basis and should be dismissed since Intervenor is misinformed as to the rod worth reactivity in ACNGS.
In the SER Supp. 2, 515.3.2, the maximum rod worth is shown as 1%.
This is less than the Intervenor asserts is necessary. Therefore, the Intervenor has not presented a litigable issue.
Therefore, we continue to oppose the admission of this contention as an issue in controversy.
Amendment to Contention 26 The amendment submitted here is not an amendment but, rather, an, entirely new contention. Therefore, the Staff assumes Mr. Doherty has withdrawn Contention 26 previously filed and has substituted a different one.
Contention No. 26 asserted in essence, that inspection procedures for the reactor vessel stud bolt integrity are inadequate.
The " amendment" submitted raises an issue about the quality assurance and integrity of the stud bolts themselves during ATWS.
The contention now asserted alleges that neither the magnitude of stress on the reactor head nor the adequacy of the maximum tensile stre".gth of the bolts has been sufficiently considered in connection with ATWS and therefore the safety analysis for ACNGS is deficient. The Staff supports (new) Contention 26 as valid for litigation in this proceeding.
Contention 40 This contention asserts that releases from an accident at the Allens Creek plant a
will exceed the 10 CFR 5100 guidelines.
The basis stated for this assertion is 1124 247
a Board notification concerning releases from TMI issued July 2,1979, and the statement that ACNGS and TMI are similar in regard to source terms and "other factors" not defined.
Since the Board notification states that the TMI releases could affect site suitability criteria and that no conclusion has been reached as to the reievancy of the infonration to other sites, the Staff supports this contention at this time.
Amendment to Contention 28
~
This amendment asserts an entirely new issue, not previously raised in the original contention.
Therefore, tr.e Staff considers the new allegation to be a substitution of subject matter for the former contention.
The new matter asserted here is the possibility that the control rod system would break loose from the reactor vessel due to cracks font.ed in welds and a subsequent rod ejection caused by pressure from the reactor vessel creating a reactivity insertion.
The basis stated is a report of cracks discovered in partial pene-tration welds at the Bign Rock Point nuclear plant.
The Staff opposes this contention since the Allens Creek design precludes such an event.
In the ACNGS SER Section 4.2.2, p. 4-10 it is stated:
v 1124 248 '
m A control-rod-ejection accident, to be distinguished from the rad" drop accident is precluded by a control rod housing support structure located below the reactor pressure vessel...
This structure limits the distances that a ruptured control rod drive housing can be displaced, so that any resulting nuclear transient will not be sufficient to cause fuel rod failure.
Thus, Applicant has met the design criteria set out by the Intervenor,-and no issue is raised by this contention. The Staff recommends that Contention 28 be denied.
Amendment to Contention 34 The only change submitted in this amendment is to allege that Intervenor's health and safety interests will be threatened if General Electric nuclear division goes out of business, whereas previously he had alleged that his economic interests were at risk.
Otherwise this amendment substantially repeats the speculation previously advanced.
No substance is provided for litigation.
In any event the Applicant would still be required to meet all safety regulations contained in 10 CFR whether or not GE continues its nuclear division.
For these reasons the Staff continues to oppose this contention.
Amendment to Contention 38 Intervenor asserts two. issues not previously raised by Contention 38 which alleged that the ACNGS RHR should be single failure proof without use of an alternative system.
Es
~
1124 249
6-Therefore, the Staff c,onsiders the Intervenor to have withdrawn the original contention No. 38 in order to substitute this most recent one.
The new contention submitted states that the RHR is inadequate because it fails to bring the plant to cold shutdown in twenty-four hours in violation of GDC 19 and 34; and that the " path through the automatic depressurization system valves to the suppression pool by the RHR provides an unnecessary and hazardous system interaction possibility."
The Staff opposes both allegations asserted in new Contention 38 for the following reasons.
GDC 19 and 34 do not specify any period of time required for cold shutdown capability.
Intervenor's reference to GESSAR-238 is insufficient to support his contention since the reference cited merely states that the design pro-vides for cold shutdown in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and that the RHR meets GDC 19 and 34.
It does not state that the 24-hour shutdown is required.
In the Allens Creek SER Supp. 2, Section 5.4.5, whicn Intervenor references, it is stated that ACNGS is designed for cold shutdown in 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> and that the design complies with GDC 19 and 34.
No showing is made that this statement is.in error. There is no basis for this part of the contention. The reference to NUREG-0152 (GESSAR
- ,ER) does not support the contention since the paragraph referenced has been misinterpreted as requiring 24-hour shutdown in order to comply with GDC 19 and 34.
-... -. ~.
,w a
m
.mo
&-mem
-J
~
11.24 250
_7-The second part of the contention, v>erein the Intervenor asserts that the
" path" of RHR through the automacic depressurization system (ADS) is hazardous, is entirely unclear.
It is impossible to ascertain what " path" the Intervenor supposes the RHR to take, or the nature of the interaction to which he refers.
Therefore, the issue proffered by Mr'. Doherty is so vague and unspecific as to be incapable of litigation.
For the above reasons, the NRC Staff supports the admission of Contentions 40 and 26 as amended, and continue's to oppose the admission of Contentions 23, 24, 28, 34 and 38 as amended.
Respectfully submitted,
(
Colleen P. Woodhead Counsel for NRC Staff 9
9 Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 14th day of August,1979.
~
s
~
~
1124 251
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO,MMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD r
'In'the Matter of HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY
)
Docket no.
50-466 (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating
)
Station, Unit 1)
~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO CONTENTION #40 AND AMENDMENTS TO PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED CONTENTIONS OF JOHN F. DOH2RTY" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission internal mail system, this 14th day of August,1979:
.Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esq., Chairman
- Jack Newman, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Lowenstein, Reis, Newman & Axelrad' Board Panel 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
200S7 Washington, D. C.
20555 1
Richard Lowerre, Esq.
Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum-Asst. Attorney General for the Route 3, Box 350A State of Texas Watkinsville, Georgia 30677 P. O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Austin, Texas 78711 htomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Hon. Jr Sliva, Mayor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission City o W='
's, Texas 77485 Washington, D. C.
20555 Hon.
. Mikeska R. Gordon Gooch, Esq.
Austii. Launty Judge Baker & Botts P. O. Box 310 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Bellville, Texas 77418 Washington, D. C.
20006 J. Gregory Copeland, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board
- Baker & Botts U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One Shell Plaza Washington, D. C.
20555 Houston, Texas 77002
' s
~
I124 252 p
.n.--
. Atomic Safety and Licensing Carro Hinderstein Board Panel
- 8739 Link Terrace U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cornission Houston, Texas 77025 Washington, DC 20555 Docketing and Service Section
- Texas Public Interest Office of the Secretary Research Group, Inc.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission c/o James Scott, Jr., Esq.
~
Washington, DC 20555 8302 Albacore Houston, Texas 77074 Mr. John F. Doherty 4438 1/2 Leeland Avenue Brenda A. McCorkle Houston, Texas 77023 6140 Darnell Houston, Texas 77074 Mr. and Mrs. Robert S. Framson 4822 Waynesboro Drive Mr. Wayne Rentfro Houston, Texas 77035 P.O. Fox 1335 Rosenberg, Texas 77471 i Mr. F. H. Potthoff, III 1814 Pine Village Rosemary N. Lemmer
~ Houston, Texas 77080 11423 Oak Spring Houston, TX 77043 D. Marrack 420 Mulberry Lane L' aura Lewis Bellaire, Texas 77401 1203 Bartlett #4 Houston, TX Mr. Jean-Claude De Bremaecker 2128 Addison Houston, Texas 77030 Mrs. Karen L. Stade Gregory J. Kainer P.O. Box 395 11118 Wickwood Guy, Texas 77444.
Houston, TX 77024 Jon D. Pittman, Sr.
Gayle De Gregori 2311 Bamore 2327 Goldsmith Rosenberg, Texas._77471 Houston, Texas 77030 Ms. Ann Wharton Mrs. W. S. Cleaves 1424 Kipling 8141 Joplin Street Houston, Texas 77006 Houston, Texas 77017 7-~
~
Ms.kathyMohnke
~
Barbara Karkaki 1411 Lamonte 1917 Wentworth Houston, Texas 77018 Houstan, TX 77004
' ~ ~ ~
-w
- ~..
1124 253
M. James H. Robinson Dick Day 1228 Bomar 3603 Drummond Houston, Texas 77024 Houston, Texas 77025 Ms. Bonny Wallace Niami Hanson 614 Meadowlawn 6441 1/2 Mercer LaPorte, Texas 77571 Houston, Texas 77005 Hr. and Mrs. Bruce A. Palmiter Mr. Robert C. Kuehm 9P.O. Box 183 1155 Curtin
-+
302 South Missouri Street Houston, Texas 77018 Orchard, Texas 77464 Ms. Dana Erichson Dr. Marlene R. Warner 327 Hedwig 6026 Beaudry Houston, Texas 77024
~
Houston, Texas 77035
'- ~
Ms. Nancy L. Durham Mr. Eugene E. Mueller Box 328 15602 Corsair Road Simonton, Texas 71476-Houston, Texas 77053 T. E. Elder Mr. William J. Schuessler 2205 Hazard 5810 Darnell Houston, TX 77019 Houston, Texas 77074 Helen Foley D. B. Waller, Jr.
3923 Law #16 1708 Kipling Houston, TX 77005 Houston, TX Marj,orie A. Gurasich Jeffery R. West Route 1, Box d10 10903 Sageberry Wallis, TX 77485 Houston, TX 77039 Mrs. R. P. Erichson Janice Blue 327 Hedwig Road 1708 "osewood Houston, TX 77024 Houston, TX 77004 Abraham Davidson Gabrielle Cosgriff 704 Hyde Park 5203 Crystal Say Houston, TX 77006 Houston, TX 77043 Susan G. McGuire Charles Andrew Perez 8837 Larston 1014 Montrose Blvd.
Houston, TX 77055 Houston, TX 77019 Margaret Bishop Leotis Johnston 11418 Oak Spring 1407 Scenic Ridge Houston, TX 77043 Houston, TX 77043 a
1124 254-
-4' Robin Griffith Barbara Blatt 1034 Sally Ann 4314 1/2 Bell Street Rosenberg, TX 77471 Houston, TX 77023 Ron Waters Laura Brode 3620 Washington Avenue 5422 Olana Drive No. 362 Houston, TX 77032 Houston, TX 77007
.Stephanie M. Brown Glen' Van Slyke 3510 E. Broadway #612 1739 Marshall Pearland, TX 77518 Houston, TX 77098 James Chilcoat J. Morgan Bishop 4319 Bell Street 11418 Oak Spring Houston, TX 77023 Houston, TX 77043 Barbara J. Ginn Mrs. Connie Wilson 4309 Bell 11427 Cak Spring Houston, TX 77023 Houston, TX 77043 Dorothy J. Ryan Patricia L. Streilein 4309 Bell Route 2, Box 398-C Houston, TX 77023 Richmon, TX 77469' Rachel Weinreb-Kuehm Carolina Conn 1155 Curtin 1414 Scenic Ridge Houston, TX 77018 Houston, TX 77043 John and Jeanette Beverage 13031 Hardin Houston, TX 77072 Mary L. Fuller Stephen A. Doggett, Esq.
614 Bienville Lane Pollan, Nicholson & Doggett Houston, TX 77015 P.O. Box 592 Rosenberg, TX 77471 Frances Pavlovic 111 Datonia J. Michael Ancarrow Bellaire, TX 77401 4310 Bell Houston, TX 77023 W. Matthew Perrenad 4070 Merrick Virginia Lacy Perrenad Houston, TX 77025 2704 Beatty #112 Houston, TX 77023 Bryan L. Baker 1118'Montrose Jeanne RoberLon Houston, TX 77019 23 Nueces Street Bay City, TX 77417 Fern Barnes
- s 2406 Morning Glory Pasadena, T) 77503 1124 255
5-James R. Piepmeier Roy E. Loyless 618 West Drew P,0. Box 249 Houston, TX 77006 Simonton, TX 77476 Elinore P. Cumings Donald D. Weaver 926 Horace Mann P.O. Drawer V Rosenberg, TX 77471 Simonton, TX 77476 Mr. and Mrs. Larry W. Scott Dorothy F. Carrick Route 2, Box 31 H.Q.
Box 409 Wagon Road Richmond ~, TX 77469 RFD #1 Mr. Robert R. Edgar Rt. 2 Box 31-HS Richmond, Texas 77469 Ms. Kathrya Ottie Rt. 2 Box 62L Richmond, Texas 77469 l M f.
Colleen P. Woodhead Counsel for NRC Staff
+
I
~e 9
1124 256
...