ML20034D609

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amend to Licenses NPF-68 & NPF-81 Proposed NSHC Determination & Opportunity for Hearing

ML20034D609
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	02/11/1993
From:	Hood D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20034D610	List: ML20034D609
References
NUDOCS 9302230147
Download: ML20034D609 (8)

Text

'

7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DALTON. GEORGIA DOCKET NOS. 50-424 AND EO-425 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-68 and NPF-81 issued to the Georgia Power Company, et al. (the licensee), for operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in Burke County, Georgia.

The proposed amendments supersede previous amendments proposed by the licensee August 31, 1992 (see 57 FR 45084 dated September 30,1992).

The Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical-Specifications (TS) require, in part, that the diesel generators (DGs) be i

tested at least once per 18 months, during shutdown, by operating the DGs at specified loads for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.8.1.12.h.7).

Within 5 minutes after completing this 24-hour test, the DGs are to be I

subjected to another test by simulating a loss of offsite power (LOOP) in conjunction with an engineered safety feature actuation system (ESFAS) test signal and verifying the loading sequence. The DG is to be operated for at least 5 minutes while loaded with the emergency loads (SR 4.8.1.1.2.h.6).

I j[4 -

D 0

P

'i

• However, if the second test is not successfully completed, the 24-hour test does not have to be repeated.

Instead, the DG may be operated at the load specified by SR 4.8.1.1.2.a.5 (6800-7000 kW) for I hour or until the DG-operating temperature has stabilized, prior to reperforming the LOOP /ESFAS.

j t

test.

The proposed change would revise TS 4.8.1.1.2.h.7 and its associated i

footnote ##.

The change would remove the requirement to~ perform the l

LOOP /ESFAS test within 5 minutes after completing the 24-hour test and substitute the requirement to start the DG in accordance with TS 4.8.1.1.2.a.4 l

a within 5 minutes after the 24-hour test.

TS 4.8.1.1.2.a.4 requires.that the l

DGs be verified to start using one of several specified start signala and that i

the generator achieve specified voltage and frequency within a certain time.

The proposed change to footnote ## to TS 4.8.1.1.2.h.7 would require that, if.

f the start after the 24-hour test was unsuccessful, then prior to repeating the start pursuant to SR 4.8.1.1.2.a.4, the DG is to be operated ~at the. load i

t specified by SR 4.8.1.1.2.a.5 "for a minimum of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />."

This footnote 3

presently specifies an operating period of "I hour or until operating temperature has stabilized." As provided in the existing footnote, the i

24-hour test would not have to be repeated simply because the subsequent start i

was unsuccessful.

'f Before 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 Commission's regulations.

The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment j

request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission s regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in l

1

4 L

accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) cr< sate 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. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

Separating the 24-hour test from the LOOP /ESFAS test and revising footnote ## will have no effect on the initiating events assumed for any existing accident analysis. The basis for the existing requirement is

{

to ensure the hot restart capability of the DGst The proposed change in

~

requirements will continue to demonstrate that capability, and the DGs will remain able to perform their safety function as assumed in the accident analyses.

Should the hot re., tart test subsequent to the 7

24-hour test fail, the change to footnote ## will provide additional assurance that the DG has achieved full-load operating temperature prior to repeating the hot restart test.

Therefore, the DGs will continue to be able perform their safety function and there will be no effect on the consequences of any existing accident analysis.

The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or

'I different kind of accidet from any accident previously evaluated.

i d

The change does not introuce any new equipment into the plant or i

require any existing equipment to be operated in a manner i

different than that for which it was designed to' operate.

The i

proposed change will continue to demonstrate the hot restart capability of the DGs.

Therefore, the performance, reliability, or capability of the DGs to perform their design function will not be affected.

The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a i

margin of safety.

The basis for the existing requirement is to ensure.the hot restart capability of the DGs. The proposed change will continue to ensure that capability, thereby maintaining the margin of safety afforded by the existing surveillance requirements.

The f4RC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three st:ndards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied.

1

. 3 Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request i

involves no 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.

Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules Review &

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications l

Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 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-223, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of written comments received t

may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555.

The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.

By March 22, 1993

, 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 a hearing and a petition 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 Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.

Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 3

1

I t

u,

i Building, 2120 L Street, f!W., Washington, DC 2'J555 and at the local public' l

document room located at Burke County Public Library, 412 F.ourth Street, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830.

If a request for a hearing or petition for leave l

to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or'an' Atomic Safety.

1 and Licensing Board, designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the

~

1 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or.the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing.

I 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 l

forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the ptoceeding.

The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be '

l i

permitted with particular reference to the following factors:

(1) the nature j

of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made party to the proceeding; j

i (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 should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the f

proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene.

Any person'who has l

t 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 15 days i

prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in-the proceeding, but such i

i an amended petition m st satisfy the specificity requirements described above.

l

.l flot later than 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 -

j q

l y

~

i

]

u

! l sought to be litigated in the matter.

Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or' controverted.

In addition, the petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of l

the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion l

which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.

The petitioner must also provide q

references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those. facts or i

expert opinicn.

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 scope 'of the amendment i

j i

under consideration.

The contention must be one which, i_f proven, would f

entitle the petitioner to relief.

A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one f

contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject j

to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the oppor+ unity 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 Commission will make a final f

determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideratien.

The final

-determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.

i If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no

~

significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and l

make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.

Any i

hearing held would take place af ter issuance of the amendrent.

i I

l

Ia I If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a i

significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.

'l Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the i

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.

l result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the. Commission-j may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice-period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves-i no significant hazards consideration.

The final determination will consider all public cnd State comments received.

Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance and f

provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance.

The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very inf requently.

.f A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be

{

filed with the Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

.i Ccmmission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention:

Docketing.and Services Branch,

!j or may be delivered to the Commission's Pubiic Document Room. the Gel. nan j

Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, by the.above'date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the notice period, it is.

.l q

requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a. toll-free i

telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri l-(800) 342-6700).

The Western Union operator should be given Datagram ldentification i

Humber N1023 and the following message addressed to David B. Matthews:

j q

petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition was mailed, plant name, l

t and publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice.

A copy i

I

[

i i

, of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S.

Nuclear Regulafory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Mr. Arthur H.

Domby, Esquire, Troutman Sanders, NationasBank Plaza, Suite 5200, 600 Peachtree Street, NW., Atlanta, Georgia 30308-2210, attorney 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 Boa *-d 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 amendments dated August 31, 1992, as superseded February 2, 1993, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the i

Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at tne local l

public document room located at Burke County Public Library, 412 Fourth Street, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of February 1993.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f

n'Lk Darl S. Hood, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 9

!