ML19343B739
| ML19343B739 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/17/1980 |
| From: | Lewis S NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Lochstet W, Sholly S, Trowbridge G AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343B741 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OLA, NUDOCS 8012300189 | |
| Download: ML19343B739 (14) | |
Text
i I?
[
o
'(
8 3,
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES "jg WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l
%,,,,, h December 17, 1980 o
George F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Mr. Steven C. Shcily 304 South Market Street 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055 Mr. William A. Lochstet 119 E. Aaron Drive State College, Pennsylvania 16801 In the Matter of
. ~2 Metropolitan Edison Company, et al.
(ThreeMileIslandNuclearStation7Lfnit2)
Docket No. 50-320 OLA c
"M i
Gentlemen:
h C
~ d G
Enclosed are the papers the Staff has prepared to put before the Licensing Board our jointly proposed stipulation for the dismissal of Mr. Sholly from the proceeding and the dismisiol of Mr. Lochstet's Contention 1.
review the enclosed documents and I will be in telephone contact with you Please the week of December 15 to discuss the procedures for executing the stipulat The Staff has discussed with Mr. Lochstet the possibil specific proposed modifications to the Technical Specifications.
able to resolve that contention in a timely manner, the stipulation can be If we are amended appropriately.
Otherwise, we would propose to proceed with the present stipulation and deal with Lochstet Contention 2 separately.
By copy of this letter I am also requesting Dr. Johnsrud to review ECNP Contention 5 (records retention) to determine whether the modifica to Technical Specifications 6.10.1 and 6.10.2 set forth in the attached stipulation provide the basis for dismissal of that contention.
Since:ely, i
Steph H. Lewis Counsel for NRC Staff
Enclosures:
- 1. Joint Motion to Approve Stipulation
- 2. Stipulation Regarding Settlement of Issues
- 3. Order Granting Joint Motion to Approve Stipulation i
- 4. Amendment of Order (with Attachment A, Safety l
Evaluation and Draft Modifications to Technical i
Specifications cc w/ enclosures: See page 2 8012300
e
-2 cc: John f. Wolf, Esq.
Dr. 4 scar H. Paris Mr. Frederick J. Shon Ms. Karin W. Carter Dr. Judith H. Johnsrud Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel Docketing and Service Section l
l i
l l
i e
i a
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDIS0N CON ANY, et _al.
)
Docket No. 50-320 OLA
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station,
)
Unit 2)
)
JOINT MOTION TO APPROVE STIPULATION For the purpose of resolving all of the issues advanced by Intervenor Steven Sholly and one of the issues advanced by Intervenor William Lochstet relative to the captioned proceeding, the Metropolitan Edison Company (Met Ed), Steven C. Sholly, William A. Lochstet and the Staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC Staff) have entered into the attached
" Stipulation Regarding Settlement of Issues". Pursuant to the provisions of this Stipulation, the parties thereto hereby move the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) to enter an Order taking the following action:
1.
Approve the subject Stipulation; 2.
Dismiss Mr. Steven Sholly from the proceeding; 3.
Dismiss proposed contention 1 contained in the supplement to the request for hearing of Mr. William Lochstet; and 4.
Modify proposed Technical Specifications 2.1.3, 3.3.3.5, 3.4.9.1, 6.10.1, and 6.10.2 set forth in an attachment to the February 11, 1980 Order issued by the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation in accordance with the revisions specified in the proposed Amendment 4
of Order attached to the subject Stipulation upon entry of that Amend-ment of Order.
L
i
-2 A propose 5 Ordbr granting the instant motion is provided for the Board's consideration.
Respectfully submitted Stephen H. Lewis Counsel for NRC Staff Steven C. Sholly pro se William A. Lochstet pro se George F. Trowbridge Counsel for Metropolitan Edison Company Dated at Bethesda, Maryland
i i
4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDIS0N COMPANY, e_t d.
Docket No. 50-320 OLA t
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station
)
Unit 2)
)
1 STIPULATION REGARDING SETTLEMENT OF ISSUES l
For the purpose of resolving all of the issues advanced by Intervenor Steven Sholly and one of the issues advanced by Intervenor killiam Lochstet relative to the captioned proceeding, the Metropolitan Edison Company (Met Ed), Steven C. Sholly, William A. Lochstet and the Staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC Staff) hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
1.
In consideration of NRC modification of the proposed Technical Specifications in accordance with the attached proposed Amendment of Order, Intervenor Sholly agrees to withdraw his " Request for i
Hearing," dated March 21, 1980, and the contentions advanced in his pleading, entitled, " Contentions of Steven C. Sholly (Supplement to Petition to Intervene, Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. I 2.714),"
l dated June 19, 1980.
1 2.
In consideration of NRC modification of proposed Technical Speci-fications 2.1.3 and 3.4.9.1 in accordance with the attached proposed Amendment of Order, Intervenor Lochstet agrees to withdraw proposed Contention 1 advanced in his " Supplement to Request for Hearing and Petition for Leave to Intervene", dated ~ June 17, 1980.
l l
J-
4 l
a i
-8 i
3.
The proposed Amendment of Order revises certain requirements contained in several proposed technical specifications set i
forth in an attachment to the February 11, 1980 Order issued by the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation. These revisions 1
were undertaken to satisfy the concerns advanced by the named 1
Intervenors in their proposed contentions.
~
4.
This agreement is contingent upon the grant of the " Joint Motion.
to Approve Stipulation", which accompanies this Stipulation, by j
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.
Dated this day of
, 1980 hRC 5taff By Dated this day of
, 1980 Steven C. Sholly i
Dated this day of
, 1980 William A. Lochstet Dated this day of
, 1980 i
Metropolitan Edison Co.
By 1
i
}
4 l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA j.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al.
Docket No. S0-320 OLA (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station,
)
Unit 2)
)
ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO APPROVE STIPULATION On
,1980, this Atomic Safety and Licensing Board was served with a Joint Motion filed by several parties to the captioned proceeding requesting approval of the " Stipulation Regarding Settlement of Issues" attached thereto. According to the Joint Motion, the subject stipulation was entered into by Intervenors Steven Sholly and William Lochstet, the NRC Staff and the Licensee for the purpose of resolving all of the issues advanced by Mr. Sholly and one of the issues advanced by Mr. Lochstet relative to this proceeding. The stipulation contains the basis upon which an agree-ment was reached among the parties by which the issues in question are deemed settled.
The Licensing Board regards the Joint Motion and subject Stipulation as furthering the principles of settlement and compromise of NRC litigation.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
P
,. I l
1.
The Joint" Motion is granted; i
2.
The " Request for Hearing" of Steven C. Sholly dated March 21, 1980, I
i and supplement thereto, dated June 19, 1980, are deemed withdrawn and Mr. Sholly thereby dismissed from the proceeding; 3.
Proposed Contention I contained in the supplement to the request for hearing of Mr. William Lochstet, dated June 17, 1980, is deemed withdrawn; and 4.
Proposed Technical Specifications 2.1.3, 3.3.3.5, 3.4.9.1, 6.10.1, and 6.10.2 set forth in an attachment to the February 11, 1930 Order issued by the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation, shall be modified in accordance with the revisions specified in the proposed Amendment of Order attached to the " Stipulation Regarding Settlement of Issues" upon entry of that Amendment of Order.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD John F. Wolf, Esq., Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland
I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
METROPOLITAN EDISDN COMPANY, et al Docket No. 50-320 OLA (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2)
)
AMENDMENT OF ORDER I.
Metropolitan Edison Company, Jersey Central Power and Light Company and Pennsylvania Electric Company (collectively, the Licensee) are the holders of Facility Operating License No. DPR-73, which had authorized operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (TMI-2) at power levels up to 2772 megawatts thennal.
The facility, which is located in Londonderry Township, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, is a pressurized water reactor pre-viously used for the commercial generation of electricty.
By Order for Modification of License, dated July 20, 1979, the Licensee's authority to operate the facility was suspended and the Licensee's authority was limited to maintenance of the facility in the present shutdown cooling mode (44 Fed. Reg. 45271).
By further Order of the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, dated February 11, 1980, a new set of formal license requirements were imposed to reflect the post-accident condition of the facility and to assure the continued maintenance of the current safe, L2
t
- l stable, lo'ng-tem cooling condition of the facility (45 Fed. Reg.11282).
These requirements were memorialized in the fom of proposed Technical Specifications set forth in an attachment to the Order.
II.
Several requests for a hearing have been filed in connection with the Order.
An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board established to rule on such requests and to preside over the proceeding in the event that a hearing is ordered has, by Memorandum and Order, dated August 29, 1980, admitted Messrs. Steven Sholly and William Lochstet, and another, as intervenors. Mr. Sholly has sought to introduce as contentions a number of issues involving the proposed Technical Specifications. These include concerns regarding the reactor coolant system pressure safety limit (proposed Technical Specification 2.1.3), remote shutdown monitoring instrumentation (proposed Technical Specification 3.3.3.5), reactor coolant system pressure temperature limits (proposed Technical Specification 3.4.9.1), and record retention (proposed Technical Specifications 6.10.1 and 6.10.2). Mr. Lochstet has also sought to introduce a contention regarding proposed Technical Specification 2.1.3.
Consistent with the Connission's position with respect to settlement of matters without resort to ; fomal adjudicatory process, the Licensee, NRC Staff and Messrs. Sholly and Lochstet have met in an effort to resolve their concerns in the above areas. As a result, the parties jointly propose to modify the proposed Technical Specifications in a manner agreed upon and described hereafter. The proposed modifications have been reviewed by the Staff and are consistent with the objective of providing reasonable assurance
t that the attivities authorized can be conducted without undue risk to the t
~
public health and safety.
First, proposed Technical Specification 2.1.3 has been eliminated. This provision had established a maximum pressure of 2750 psig as a safety limit for the reactor coolant system.
This conformed to the design criteria and associated ASME code requirenents which were applicable for the reactor pressure vessel and other components of the reactor coolant system prior to the March 28, 1979 accident. However, the accident subjected portions of the reactor coolant system to unknown environmental conditions and, therefore, the upper limit of the pressure retaining ability of the reactor coolant system is uncertain.
Section 50.36(1)(B)(ii)(A) of the Commission's regulations provides, in part, that "[w]here a limiting safety system setting is specified for a variable on which a safety limit has been placed, the setting shall be so chosen that autonatic protective action will correct the abnormal situation before a safety limit is exceeded."
Furthermore, access to the reactor coolant system valves cannot be obtained in order to reset the valves to a lower pressure limit.
Since the valves cannot be reset to lower the pressure limit to a point at which " automatic protective action" can be taken under the existing conditions, a safety limit lower than 2750 psig cannot be established without contravening 10 C.F.R.
(
5 50.36(1)(B)(ii)(A). Therefore, proposed Technical Specification 2.1.3 has m
been elimfnated.
At the same time, proposed Technical Specification 3.4.9.1 has been modified to explicitly identify the responsive action which must be taken if the pressure limit established for the reactor coolant system, 600 psig, is exceeded.
A description of this action was previously found in a separate proposed Technical Specification which had been referenced in proposed Technical Specification 3.4.9.1.
Second, proposed Technical Specification 3.3.3.6 has been modified to add a requirement to report the inoperability of a remote shutdown monitoring channel to the NRC within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
The requirement to restore the inoperable channel to operable status within 30 days is unchanged.
Lastly, it was contended that the time periods provided in proposed Technical Specifications 6%0.1 and 6.10.2 for the retention of certain records by the licensee were inadequate given the historical value some of these records might possess.
As a consequence, proposed Technical Specifications 6.10.1 and 6.10.2 have been modified to extend the time for which certain records must be retained by the Licensee.
Records specified in proposed Technical Specification 6.10.2 must now be retained as long as the licensee has an NRC license to operate or possess the TMI facility.
The Staff's safety assessment of this matter is set forth in the concurrently issued Safety Evaluation, This evaluation concluded, in material part, that these modifications do not involve a significant hazards consideration and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered thereby.
J2'
F
' t It was fur'ther' determined that the modification does not authorize a change i
in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
In light of this deter-mination, it was concluded that the instant action is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 9 51.5(d)(4),
that an environmental impact statement or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared herewith.
III.
Accordingly, pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the requirements imposed by the Director's Order of February 11, 1980 are modi-fied by elimination of proposed Technical Specification 2.1.3 and revision of proposed Technical Specifications 2.1.3, 3.3.3.5, 3.4.9.1, 6.10.1, and 6.10.2 attached thereto in the manner described in Section II of this Order and as set forth specifically in Attachment A hereto.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) Request for hearing from Steven C. Sholly, dated March 21,1980;(2) NRC Staff answer to request for hearing by Steven C. Sholly, dated April 10,1980;(3) Contentions of Steven C. Sholly, dated June 19,1980;(4) Supplement to Request for Hearing and Petition for Leave to Intervene by William A. Lochstet, dated June 17, 1980; and (5) the Director's Order of February 11, 1980. All of the above documents are available for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Commission's Local
~
j
. i i
Public Document Room at the State Library of Pennsylvania, Government t
Publications Section, Education Building, Commonwealth and Walnut Streets.
I Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17126.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOi Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulatior Effective date:
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this day of 1980 6
O e w we-g-ww
--wi g w r m
,w-r-,,,-,
-,y,
-,m
"