ML20059M695
| ML20059M695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1990 |
| From: | Erickson P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059M690 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9010050200 | |
| Download: ML20059M695 (9) | |
Text
- _ - -
l 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMP 11SSION SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRIvi DOCKET NO. 50-312' NOTICE 0" CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT:TO FACillTY OPERA,'ING LICENSE AMD-PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATIO$_DETERMINATIONANDOPPORTUNITYFORHEARING.
j The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-54 issued to i
Sacramento Municipal Utility District'(the licensee)(the District), for operation of the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station located in Sacramento County, California. The request for amendment was submitted by letter dated-April 26, 1990, supplemented June 13, 1990.
i The proposed amendment would change the Rancho-Seco Physical Security 3
Plan. The proposed amendnent would revise paragraph 2.C.(3) to the Rancho a
Seco license allowing the removal of vital areas and other modifications that l
a would allow the licensee to reduce the size of the Rancho-Seco facility's security force.
i~
The licensee based the amendment request on the following:
1)the reactor was permanently shut down on June 7.1989,2) the reactor was defueled on December 8,1989 and all fuel is currently stored in the onsite spent fuel pool. 3) the premise that a radiological release would not result in a whole body dose in excess of 10 CFR Part 100, and 4) that an act of sabotage that would result in a dose in excess of these limits.is not.a credible event.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will 1
have made findings required by the ' Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
9010050200 900914 PDR ADOCK 05000312 P
_- _ - _ __ -_ ~_ -
i l
+.
l The concission has ciade a proposed determination that the request for amendnent involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Consnission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this neans 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 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.
The licensee provided an analysis that addressed the above three standards in the amendment application.
The District has reviewed the proposed Security Plan against each of the criterion of 10 CFR 50.92 and concluded that the proposed changes as described and evaluated do not:
(1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
There are only two credible accidents in the Defueled Mode, a fuel handling accident and a Loss ofOffsitePower(LOOP). The changes proposed do not increase the probability of either of these accidents since the LOOP is not controllable by the plant, and the requirements for testing of the fuel handling bridge remain unchanged. The consequences of these two accident types are bound by the previous analysis for these accidents.
The fuel handling accident scenario remains unchanged, but the consequences of this type of accident are reduced due to the extent of the radioactive decay of the irradiated fuel.
- - - - -~
-.. = -. _.
The calculated doses performed by the District, using conserva-l tive' assuniptions from the Updated Safety Analysis Report; Chaptet 14, t
are well within the guidelines of 10 CFR Part 100. The doses were calculated for a distance of 100 meters from the release point at the Fuel Storage Building to the nearest location of the fence surrounding-the Industrial Area and using a decay time from June 7,1989, when.
the reactor' was shutdown, until March 28, 1990.
Due to the long decay time and no production mechanism, the inventory of Iodine-131 (half-life of eight days) which is the prin-cipal contributor to the thyroid dose, _is essentially zero. _The calculated whole body dose is 13.1 mrem with Krypton-85 (half-life of 10.7 years) as the principal contributor.
With regard to_ potential acts of radiological sabotage, the-District has determined that there are no credible acts in the long-term defueled condition that could result in a radiological release for which the calculated doses exceed the exposure guidelines
~
of 10 CFR Part 100.
(2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes to the Security Plan and amendment to the Operating License apply only when the reactor is in the Defueled Mode. Therefore, only those activities and potential accidents associ6ted with the spent fuel pool'(SFP) need-be considered. Because the ability to maintain an adequate shutdown-margin in the SFP is not affected, no physical changes-to the SFP or l
l
3 4
1 Spent Fuel Cooling are being made, and systems required to safely.
store the spent fuel in the Long-Term Defueled Mode will continue.to a
be maintained, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident -
-i from any accident previously evaluated is not created.
(3)
Ir,volve a significant reduction in a margin of safety since the margin of safety for the Security Plan was'never credited as a margin of safety for a LOOP or a dropped fuel assembly. The revised Security Plan does not involve any alteration to any site structures or equipment important to safety, and since potential acts of radiologi--
cal sabotage are not credible in the'Long Term Defueled Condition that could result in a radiological release greater than-those values of 10 CFR Part 100, the change to the Security Plan will not reduce the margin of safety previously evaluated.
f Based on the evaluation provided above the_ District has' concluded that the proposed changes to the Security Plan do not constitute a.
significant hazard to the public and do not endanger the-public's' health ano safety.
The Comission has reviewed the licensee.'s no significant hazards consideration determination and agrees with the licensee.'s analysis.
L, I
Therefore, the Comission proposes to determine that the _ proposed amendment I:
-involves no significant hazards consideration.
I The Comission is seeking public coments on this proposed detennination.
1 '
-Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this 1
L l-
~... -
..m..
5-notice will be considered in making any final determination.
The Comission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing.
Written coments may be submitted by mail. to the Regulatory Publications
[.
Branch, Division of Freedom of Infomation and Publications services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
- 20555, and should cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERA!
'G15~1 CR notice. Written connents may also os delivered to Room P-223, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Neryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.
Copies of written coments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By october 22, 1990, 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 petition for leave to intervene. Request for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed 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, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20555 and at the Local Public Document Room located at the Martin Luther King Regional Library, 7340 24th Street Bypass, Sacramento, California 95882.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to inter-vene is filed by the above date, the Comission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Comission or by the Chaiman of the Atomic
l
[
t l
6.
Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition erd the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
1 As required by 10 CFR 62.714, a petitiun for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the 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 following factors:
(1)thenature l
3 I
of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2)thenatureanti 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 l
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 fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy 1... specificity requirements described above.
Not later than fifteen (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 centention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or faci to be raised cr controverted.
In i
.,w
.~c.
~
j 7
addition, the petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and cn which the petitioner intends to rely in H
proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide 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 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.
Cor.tentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment 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 requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.-
Thuse permitted to intervene become parties to'the proceeaing, subject j
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.
If a hearing is requested,-the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards considerations. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held, 1
If the final determination is that the request for amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, the Conunission may issue the. amendment and-make it effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.- Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the avndnent.
l
1
?
If a final determination is that the anendment involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 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 result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-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 coments received. Should the Comis. tion take this action, it will publish a I
notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for-a hearing after issuance.
The Commission 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 i
filed with the Secretary of t.ie Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing atid Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 21PO L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last ten (10) days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Comission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800)325-6000(inMissour: 1-(800)342-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number 3737 and the following message addressed to Seymour H. Weiss: (petitioner's name and
l
~
-9 telephone nurber), (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 Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, and to Jan Schort, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 6201 S Street, P. O. Box 15870, Socramento, l
California 95813, attorney for the licensee.
l Nontimely filings of petitions for lease to intervene, amended petitions, 1
supplemental petitions and/or requests for h(aring will not be entertained absent a determination by the Comission, _the presiding officer or the 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) and2.714(d).
i For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated April 26, 1990, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington,-D.C. 20555 and at the Local Public Docusent Room located at the Martin Luther King Regional Library, 7340 24th Street Bypass, Sacramento, California 95882.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of September 1990.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPfilSSION eter B. Erickson, Acting Director l
Non-Power Reactor, Decommissioning and Environmental Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i