ML19325D917
| ML19325D917 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1989 |
| From: | Wigginton D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19325D918 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8910270161 | |
| Download: ML19325D917 (9) | |
Text
_
~t-i 7590-01 UNITED STA,TE,5 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-382 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUA,NCE_OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cou.ission (the Commission) is considering issuarce of an amendment to facility Optrating License No. NPF-38, issued to Louisiana Power arid Light Compary (the licensee), for operation of the Waterfor6 Steam Electric St6 tion, Unit No. 3 located in St. Charles Parish, Louisiana.
TheamendmentwouldrevisetheTechnicalSpecificatior.(TS)onboron j
i dilution and charging pumps - operating to permit changing plant operation frcr Mode 3 to Mode 2 by deborating the reactor coolant system. This change cctrects the actions required by License Amendment ho. 48 issued on December 14, 1986 which are correct for startup by pulling control element l
assentlics but inadvertently precluded startup by deboration.
l The conflict with the TS issued by Amendment No. 48, which would preclude 1
reactor startup by deboration, was first discovered by reactor operators.
i L
Discussions within the licensee organization began on correcting the conflict by license amendment but no inmediate urgency was deemed necessary. During a l
l so:o270161 e92of6 fDR ADock oso003e2 PDC
t 1
4 2
subsequent management review, the licensee staff learned that the upcoming l
startup following the ongoing refueling would use deboration to reach critically. This method is best for detennining certain physics parameters for operation in Cycle 3 and 4.
The licensee notified the NRC staff of the urgent need for the license amendment, arranged a special Safety Review Committee meeting to approve the request, and submitted the proposed TS change promptly thereafter. The licensee currently plans to enter Mode 2 on.
l l
November 15, 1989 which will not allow the full 30 days for comments on the proposed action. A delay in issuing the amendment will, on the current restart schedule, delay the restart.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Cone.ission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act)andtheCommission'sregulations.
l The Commission has made a proposed determination that the anendment
~ '
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 (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evalua.
ted; 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.
In order to perform reactor startup physics tests by deborating the reactor coolant system, the licensee must examine the current boron dilution analysis and assumptions. The current TS based on the approved analysis
'A Y,
assumes the dilution alarms are not operable and that an additional 30 minutes is required to analyze samples. This results in the requirement that charging pumps are not operating.
However, for the reactor startup by deborating to occur, the charging pumps must be available. The licensee has chosen to revise the assumption for the approved boron dilution analysis to achieve pump operation; this condition would require the two dilution alarms to be I
operable. The TS change is to add a condition for dilution alarms and pumps operable. There is no change to the dilution analysis methods art all l
l conservatiset end trargins remain as before; The proposed change to the TS would also allow the plant to operate in the condition found acceptable before Amendment No. 48 was issued in December 1988.
The dilution analysis methods for Waterford 3 remain unchanged; the assurption for the analysis have been corrected for the case where dilution alarms and charging pumps are operable. The analysis results do not significantly change the conservatisms found acceptable for Waterford nor does the change in operation differ to ar.y extent from that previously found acceptable. Therefore, the change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change will involve an operational condition for dilution alarms and pumps operable and this condition was found acceptable for Waterford 3 at startup. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
w,---
a.
c.
b v
'9.The current analysis includes a 30 minute delay for coolant sample analysis because the dilution alarms are not operable. With the two dilution alarms operable, the 30 minutes is not required by the analysis. The proposed l
change is analyzed to the acceptable methods, therefore, it does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Accordingly, the Comission proposes to determine that this change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The Comission is seeking public coments on this proposed determination.
Any conur.ts received within 15 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. The Comission l
will nut norrnelly inake a final deterrninatien unless it receives a request for e hearing.
Written cont..ents may be subtitted by n. ail to the Regulatory Publications Branch, Division of Freedom of Infernation and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission,. Washington, D.C. 20555, and shculd cite the publication date and page number of the FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written corrents may aisc be delivered to Room P-223, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Dethesda, Maryland, f rom 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.
Copies of written coments received r.ay be examined 6t the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By November 7, 1989 the licer.::ee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the ainendment to the subject facility operating licer.se and any person whose interest inay be affected by this proceedire
t L,
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 Consnission's " Rule of Practice for Donestic Licensing Proceedings' in 10 CFR Part 2.
Interested persons should consult a current copy of 20 CFR 2.714 which is available at the Consnission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, P120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20555 and at the Local Public Document Roon located at The University of New Orleans Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New Orleans, Louisiana 70122.
If a request for a hearing or petitiori for leave to intervene is filed by the abovc date, the Cone.ission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designeted by the Cone.ission or by the Chairnian of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Scard Far.el, 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 shall set J
forth with particularity the interest of the petitior.er in the proceeding, and how that interest o.ay be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petitiur, should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors:
(1) the nature of the petittorier'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 petitioritr's interest. The petition should also identify the
specificaspect(s)ofthesubjectsatteroftheproceedingastowhich petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person who has filed a petition for leave L
to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend'the petition without requestingleaveoftheBoarduptofifteen(15)dayspriortothefirstpre-hearing 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 e supplement to the petitior tc intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are sought te be litigeted in the retter.
Each contention slust consist cf a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted.
In adcition, the petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of the centention and a concise st6tement of thc alleged facts er expert opinion l
which support the contention and en which the petitioner intends to rely in l
proving the contertion at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and er which the petiticner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner must provide 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 secpe of the amendments under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirenents with respect to at least one contention will net 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 opporturity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
If the amendment is issued before the expiration of 30-days, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consider-ations.
If a hearing is requested, the final determinaticr will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determinatier. is that the amendoent request it.vcives no sist.ificant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendrent and nake it effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuence of the amendment.
If the final determinatiori is that the an;endnent request involves signifi.
cant hazards censideraticr,s, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of cr.y anendment.
Horna11), the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration cf the 15-day notice period, however, shculd circumstances change during the nctice period, such that failute to act in a tinely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commissior; may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 15-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards considerations. The final determination will consider all public and State
-.. ~ -
r
')
" cont.ents received. Should the Comission take this action, it will publish a
- notice of issuance. The Comission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Cossnission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Comission's Public Document Roon, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., by the abcve date. Wherc petitioris are filed durirg ttt-lastten(10)daysofthenoticeperiod,itisrequestedthatthe.
petitiour promptly so inferii. the Comission by a toll-free telephone call tc 4
Western L'nion at 1-(800) 325-6000 (in Missouri 1-(800)342-6700). The Westerr.
Urien operator shc.uld be given Datagram Identification Number 3737 and the follcwing ressage addressed to Frederick J. Hebdon:
petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition was railed; plant name; and publication date and l
page numbcr of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, and to Bruce W. Churchill, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037, attorney for the l
licensee.
l Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, l
supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Comission, the presiding officer or the presiding Atomic 1
1 l
l
3 is
.g.
Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted baseduponabalancingofthefactorsspecifiedin10CFR2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) l and2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 5, 1989, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20550, and at the Local Public Docunent Rcom, I
University of New Orleans Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New Orleans, Louisiana 70122.
' Dated at Rockvillt, Maryland, this 16th day of October 1989.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. r l
l.
Dcvid L. Wi on Project Manager l
Project Directorate IV Division of Reactor Projects - Ill IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
_ _ _ _ _ _. _. -. _ -. _. -. _ _ _ -.. _.., _ _.... _.. -