ML20057A498
| ML20057A498 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 09/02/1993 |
| From: | De Agazio A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20057A499 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9309140306 | |
| Download: ML20057A498 (9) | |
Text
..
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTH ATLANTIC ENERGY SERVICE COMPANY. ET AL.
DOCKET NO. 50-443 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 issued to North Atlantic Energy Service Company (the licensee) for operation of the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1, located in Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
The proposed amendment would revise a requirement with respect to a surveillance requirement relating to the Refueling Water Storage Tank (RWST) narrow range level transmitters. Specifically, the proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification 4.3.2.1, Table 4.3-2, Functional Unit 8.b by deleting the requirement to perform a CHANNEL CHECK at least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> i
and by adding a new requirement to perform a TRIP ACTUATING DEVICE OPERATIONAL TEST (TAD 0T) at least once per 92 days. A note would be added to clarify that setpoint verification would not be applicable to the TADOT.
On August 25, 1993, North Atlantic representatives requested the NRC to exercise its discretion not to enforce compliance with Seabrook Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.3.2.1, Table 4.3-2, Functional Unit 8.b, CHANNEL CHECK, commencing on August 25, 1993.
The request for enforcement discretion was presented during a teleconference between NRC and North Atlantic representatives.
The request also was submitted by letter q
I 9309140306 930902 PDR ADOCK 05000443 p
PDR l
J
j
( i dated August 26, 1993, along with the proposed amendment. The licensee requested expeditious review of the proposed amendment consistent with the provisions of Appendix C,Section VII.
[
On August 24, 1993, North Atlantic determined that the present design of the RWST narrow range level instrumentation precludes performing an adequate i
CHANNEL CHECK. Thereupon, North Atlantic substituted an operational check (which meets the intent of the CHANNEL CHECK) on each of the four level I
channels. To perform the operational check requires that the channel being tested be placed in the tripped condition. This could contribute to premature 4
switchover of the Residual Heat Removal suction path from the RWST to the containment sump during accident conditions. The performance of the operational checks every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> is undesirable because this activity has the potential to reduce the level of protection to the health and safety of the public, increases occupational exposure, and has the potential to contaminate l
personnel with radioactive water.
Furthermore, the frequent manipulation of equipment to perform the operational checks greatly increases the potential j
for equipment malfunction and human error.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations.
I Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine 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 (1) involve a i
i i 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.
l As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analys:
of the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis against the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c).
The NRC staff's review is presented below.
1)
The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the i
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated (10 Cid 1
50.92(c)(1) because they do not involve a change in the design or i
operation of the facility, nor do they affect the response of the l
facility to an accident.
Since the proposed changes merely involve a l
surveillance requirement for devices which are used in the mitigation an accident, they will not affect the operation of the equipment.
Furthermore, none of the failure modes of the instruments are accident initiators, and any failure would be detected during the proposed quarterly TAD 0T or during calibrations. The revised surveillance requirements will continue to provide adequate assurance that the equipment will perform its specified function if called upon to do so.
2)
The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated (10 CFR 50.92(c)(2)) because the changes do not affect the manner by which the facility is operated or involve any changes to equipment or features which affect the operational characteristics of the facility.
i l
. 3)
The changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety (10 CFR 50.92(c)(3)) because they do not affect the manner by which the facility is operated or involve any changes to equipment or features which affect the operational characteristics of the facility.
Based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied.
Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 15 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final dete rmination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 15-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice perioo, such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission 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 consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written coments may be submitted by mail to the Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, 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 coments received 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 October 12, 1993
, the licensee may file a request for a I
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.
)
4 Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed j
in accordance with the Comission'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 Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local public document room located at the Exeter Public Library, 47 Front Street, Exeter, New Hampshire 03833.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Comission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the
i 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 shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the I
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 folicwf ng 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 should also identify the specific aspect (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 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 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.
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 i
. l l
explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the l
alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.
The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and 1
documents of which the 9etitioner is awars W on which the petitioner i
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 scope of the amendment under l
consideration.
The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle l
l the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement l
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.
1 If the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.
If a hearing is requested, 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 immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
l If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before i
the issuance of any amendment.
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 Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 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 requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following message addressed to John F. Stolz: petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page number 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, DC 20555, and to Thomas Dignan, Esquire, Ropes & Gray, One International Place, Boston Massachusetts 02110-2624, 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 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)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d).
l s
i
-g-For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendnient dated August 26, 1993, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the local public document room, located at the Exeter Public Library, 47 Front Street, Exeter, New Hampshire 03833.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of September 1993.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h /A i
Albert W. De Agazio, Sr. Project Manager Project Directorate I-4 i
Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
F I
i
.