ML20062H677

Request for Hearing & Petition for Leave to Intervene.* Requests Hearing on Seven Contentions,Including That License Amends Considered Major Federal Action Significantly Affecting Quality of Human Environ & Require EIS

ML20062H677
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	11/28/1990
From:	Saporito T NUCLEAR ENERGY ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20062H666	List: ML20062H663 ML20062H677 ML20062H683 ML20062H689
References
OLA-6, NUDOCS 9012050228
Download: ML20062H677 (18)

Text

.

o.. * ~

l

(<'9?7%

NUCLEAR ENERGY'ACCOUNTABgTY PROJECT i

L P

Post Office Box 129 Jupiter. Florida 33468 0129 (407).743-0770 Environmental Protection Involvement gtiggrginppa@n-48lLld

-p,,.

UNITED' STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 00CKETCO USNHC In the Matter of

.)

.i

')-

F1orida Power & Light Company

)

Oom9a%CFl$ [5ptX50-

)

~

50-251:

i Turkey. Point Nuclear Plant

)

, n g.,

)-

Units.3 and 4

)

3

)

i

- )

' Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

Washington, D.C.

20555 l

Attention: Docketing and Service-Branch s

l Re: Opportunity for Hearing on Federal Register: Notice"datedi

[

Wednesday,.-September 126,.1990 and contained in Volume 55, No. 187, at pages 39331 through 39338.

Consideration:of.-

a Issuance of-Amendments-To' Facility.?OperatingiLicenses and'

~

1 Proposed No Significant. Hazards.ConsiderationiDetermination and Opportunity for Hearing.,

.i REQUEST FOR HEARING-AND= PETITION'FOR LEAVE'TO' INTERVENE COMES NOW,nthe-Nuclear' Energy Accountability Pro, ject ~(NEAP)

~

j and Thomas J. Saporito 'Jr.,E(herinafter'" Petitioners,"),"and d

s

-request a hearing and leave-to intervene in-'.the.above-styled' license amendment proceeding. pursuant to the Commission's "Rulesc of. Practice..for Domestic: Licensing Proceedings"fset' out'in 10 1

C.F.'R.

2.714.

9012050228 902128

.PDR ADOCK 05000250f' O

PDR L,

.h

- ~..-,,

'L

~ -

jn ',:

-0 t

)

STANDING.

t i

1.

NEAP is a corporation with'its1' principal--place of j

business in Jupiter,-Florida and'ite auxiliary; place.of-business in Miami, Florida.- NEAP.is an environmental organization'with specific and primary purposes ~to operate for'the advancement of' i

~

i the environment and for-other educai,ional' purposes, by,the-(

distribution of its' funds for'suchi-purposes',.and'particularly;

~

for research relative to'the envi.ronment'and.;the-imp rte d technology on the environment.:

- i

., ~

i 2.

NEAP conducts a.majorityrof.its business at'its-auxiliary office in Miami, Flori.da'and thereforefis/

\\

significantly and' adversely affected and:otherwise' aggrieved'by

l the aforementioned license actions.

The' interests of' NEAP could-L be sign,ificantly and adversely'affected(if aLaerious nuclear-i accident occurred at the T.urkey_ Point) nuclear plant.asca direct

-j or indirect result of the aforementionedblicense-actions.

3.

Thomas?J.-Sapor'ito,lJr. lives an'd works.iniandlabout1 the City-of Miami, Florida ~asithe'ExecutiveJDirector ofiNEAP?and

as a self.-employedji.ndividualbwithethe3 Airflow (Servicen

~

c Corporation.: - The:interes_tsLof.Mr. Sapor $olcou'Id be significantly.-and adversely affactedLif?a seriousinucleare

~

r accident occurred atithe Turkey Point l nuclear plantiah"a directi

~

or' indirect result ofath's aforementionedi1icens's; actions'.;

s.

)

3

.).

t W

m -

'l s

'5 4

[

g

3-

]

i

(

I,.

l-i CONTENTION 1 i

The 1icense amendments sought by the F1orida Power _and-Light Company-(Applicant), in this proceeding are a: major I

J Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the-human' l

.i environment and therefore require an env_ironmental_ impact' statement.

'I i

BASIS FOR CONTENTION 1.

10 C.F.R. 51.20(a),.defin'es-_libens ng.and regulatory

~

actions requiring an environmental; impact-r,tatement.

2.

Although the determination ~whether'toVis' sue aniimpact L

statement falla initially.upon the! staff, that determination may be made an' issue in'an4 adjudicatory"proce'eding.. See 10=NRC'108 t

L (1979) --

L' 3.

The staff has'not submittedEaiNo:Significant" Hazards Evaluation for the Applicant's license EamendmeriOreques'tsbut-l' 1

L.G

.L.

L has merely affirmed the' Applicant'sLaubmittal(of No Significant' i

Hazards.

h 4.

The license.amendmentsfreguestied bytthesA'plicant would p

q q

< provide-for a4significant relaxation 4of ex'i t'ing o$ rational:

safety margins.

The relaxation'of theselsafetyimargins could-result.in un' safe-plant operat' ion'and airelease Of' radioactive l :-

fi saion products-into Jthe-.~ envi ronment'. -

t r,

-t 7

1 s

n s

.s

-3'

-l

-l

<w

_ z =.

O' l*

I CONTENTION 2 The license and regulatory actions subject-to the applicant's license amendment requests require'an enviromental-assessment.

BASIS FOR CONTENTION 2 r

1.

Licensing and reguiatory actions requiring'an:

y environmental' assessment are' defined-in 10 C.F.R. 51.21.

~

2.

As provided in110 C.F.R' 51.22(b), the: Commission may,

)

in special' circumstances, prepare an-envaronmental assessment on an action coverediby a categorical' exclusion.

3.

The' staff has:not submitted {n No Significant Hazards Evaluation,for the:' Applicant's: 1icense amendment., requests'but~

t

.f t

has merely affirmed,the Applicant's-submittal,of No Significant.

n Hazards..

i 4.

The: license amendments - rcquestaciiby the? Applicant wouldL l

provide for-a significantgrela.ation.:of Lexistingtoperational l

safety margins.

The relaxation ofLthe n -safety 1 margins'could, E

result in unsafe plant. operation. and a' release. of radioai::tive.

'l e s fission productsiinto thefenvironment..

b I

r I

t 4

j-(

eso aim i

t

'g 2-i.

4 s

cy -(

-t

~

1

+.

I.

CONTENTION 3'-

The design of the Applicant's: Emergency Power System.

}

provides for an intertie between the two Turkey Point nuclear I

s units supplying an alternate,AC power supply-to a blackout unit i;

through the use of an operating' Emergency Diesel Genera'or (EDG) t l-1 on the non-blackout unit.

i d 1

i

.The' Applicant..fai. led!to address-the' alternate AC;intertie in their Technical Specifications.

. h

.T e failure.of thishintertie to operate. properly when challenged couldiresult in a_ serious L

nuclear accident releasing fission: products 1:into.theienvironment.

because the Applicant <cannot ensure..the'operabilityfof the

-)

necessary Station Blackout < equipment.-

i BASIS FOR~ CONTENTION: 4

p 1.

Florida Power and' Light Company, EPS Enhancement t

Report, Supplement'No. 3 ReVi sion J 0 - dated fJul y,- ;1990'.t j

i 2.

NRC-Safety Evaluation Report.(SER)L. dated.: J une - 15 ', 1990'.*

' Station Blackout. ' concerns' h AEC' letterida'ted : August ;14', _

3.

y x

a 1974 to'A. Giambusso, NRC Deputy (Dir'ectoriforfReactoroProjects,'

[

o

1 from Olan-D. Parr,.NRC Chief,=LightfWater1 Reactors l.

o

2..

..a 4.

.NRC Emergency Diesel'GeneratorJLoad'iSafety.. Evaluation J

Turkey Point' Units 3 andL4 - TACT UmbersL6121f and 61212 dated'-

N iDecember"15, 1986.:

M t

4 5.

NRC Memorandum dated March'21, 1990'- Vogtle:

Declaration of Site Area Emergency.

I i

h t

g_

.i

.g

+

" Ce l in I

.,l-i j iji

+.

j 3

.1 1

i CONTENTION 4 The Applicant's amendment request would:' relax existing

i i

plant safety margins at TG 3/4 ~.8.1.1. AC. SOURCES '- OPERATING

which currently require the:testingnof-the' redundant Emergency-f

.Diese1' Generators after any failure or any problem which: renders the EDG' inoperable.

?

BASIS FOR' CONTENTION 4-f 1.

The current requirement to. test.the redundant.EDG(s) after any failure or any problem which;rendersithetEDG t

inoperable'.is to demonstrate that the redundant EDG(s)'are',:in-l fact, fully operational and free from;any similar;' problem;or any.

new problem which may-bave been created'as:a direct or indirect result' of the repair to'the failed EDG.

2.

Therefore,~it=is1not acceptable to provide an: exemption, oq to this testing when.an-'EDGis takeniout of service for J

[

preplanned preventive maintenancef or,.. testing'.' 'Si nce', EDG( s ) are-t essential safety equipmentJrequired-to' mitigate a.) serious 3

-nuclear accident, thereiisfansincrease n-the probabi,11ty=of'a j

L L

previously analyzed accident.

\\

i 1

1 1

t i

7,

-y, 4

1 I

L: i n

g. -

}

6

+

c 4

.-t.

p k,

+

k f-4 I

1

.}

in W

i$

-6 g

y Jf.

i" o

, A t x r

s L.

1-

. ".. -=..

,1 -

u a

{

4' CONTENTION 5

, r-n t

As evidenced at page-27 of~the; Applicant's NSHE, TS 3/4.8.1.1 AC SOURCES - OPERATING.provides for. a--deletion -

1..

Verification.of the: cranking l diesel generators OPERABILITY 1has-dy been removed.from ACTIONS "a" and "d".-

The, requirement to l

repeat EDG OPERABILITY. demonstrations ~.on a124!hou,rcfrequency, to:

l veri.fy compliance with-LCO 3.8.2.1', andito implementia dual unit y

shutdown is deleted f rom-ACTIONS,

"b" and ' "d".

- The dual unit-shutdown requirement inEACTION "c",.'which addresses the' a

l inoperability of a EDG-due'to the performanceLof' Surveillance i

Requirement 4.8.1.1'2c,=is deleted-in-its e'ntirety.

This 1

L deletion is a relaxation-ofran exist'ng plant safety. margin and' J{

1 therefore should not be -permitted.

i

-BASIS FOR CONTENTION 5-

~

1.

The elimination of andual' unit = shutdown,Ewh'ere-appropriate, involves a reduction.in the margin?ofJsafetyfof.

plant opera' tion.

~

2.

Operation.of the 'acilityfin.accordanceLwith-the f

proposed amendment would involve a significant'reductionEin a i

margin of. safety.

The ; ranking diesels'wil-1-*emain; electrically'

?

connected withJthe. plants safety! systems and ';herefore this equipment ;should Lnot' be deleted f romCthe TS. :

[

q<

9 i

' l N

y

(. :.

l' j

n!

r J

m.

4

^

\\

f 10NTENTION 6' As evidenced in the Applicants NSHE"atlpage.37, l

a i

relaxation of an existing; plant-safety margin w'ill1 be q

incorporated in the TS 3/4'8.1.1 AC SOURCES - OPERATIONS._

r l

Relaxations - Surveillance 4.8.1.1:.2a.3 which required-j i

verification that aafuel" transfer. pump startedLand_: transferred-fuel from the-storage, tank to the day tank in'accordance with-I r

.)

the frequency of Table ~4.8-1:isfrevised and renumberedtas i

4.8.1.1.2b.

This revised version-requires'aidemonstrationLon a-92 day frequency with:an automatic start.

i fiSIS:FOR CONTENTION 6.

1.

The intent of this. surveillance.'is to, ensure that the-

/

b fue1 transfer system will.1.. function <as: designed.byiautomatically_

L f

transferring c fuell 'f rom the: storageLt'ank sto the _. day ftarik when-a.

Lt 1

l-predetermined inw level-:is reach'ed";i_n-theiday? tank. 'T$efsystem:

Lt is designed to automatical:1ygmaintainoanJadequateifuelisupplyfto.

'l the EDG:during extended operation.

The most important' aspect of'this; surveillance isTth 4

e frequency of testing.to ensure properLoperabi1i_tyjoffthe L4 o

automatic function of~_thefdesigntandstojensure:alproper. fuel-

~

o.

i supply inithe day' tank..

Therefore, : the r f requency-- offtestsing -

t should1 remain ; unchanged anditheflengthi of the(:EDGL test run:

4

(

- shouldibe increasedeto permit.the; fundtional[ testing 1off the:i j

- automatic" design feature-:of the system. "i-a

q

~. b " '

3. :

0 s, 3 I

7

)

.p 3

i s

I

~

kj 8

i

-.6:

D6 i

i

}

4 I

l I

CONTENTION 7

.\\

'As evidenced.in the Applicant's NSHE at~page 59,

~

Surveillances'4;8.2.1ciand e have been. deleted.

Surveillances 4.8.2.1c requiredLrotating'the piloticell and: checking water.

level'every 31 days.

Surveillance'4.8L2.1e; required performance-of a battery chargerLvisualyinspection. quarterly.. ;Also.fthe p.-

requirement-to verify:a batteryfcharaer' equalizing charge'is started, found~in Notes 11?and 2 ofMTable 4.8-2,"has beenf h

s+

deleted..These. deletions represent aisignificantfreduction'.of.

'S the safety margin-currently;establishediin the TS andLcould u

result-in the failure!of:the'EDG when: challenged.-

i BASIS FOR' CONTENTION 7:-

t 4

- 1.

The probability;;or conseq'uencesLof-a4 previously,

~

y o

evaluated accident!is significantly; increase'd:asJa. direct result:

i of this TS' deletion.

i 2.

TheLApplicant~fai. led 5to. address;anyfparameters;or.

.1 4

1 indicators.by which the plantfoperators'would be: required.to j

initiate an equalizing; charge on the? batteries'.

J 1

3.

The current requirement.to rotate (th'eipildticell-and.

~

-check battery' water > level,'very 31': day'jis' essential infensuring e

s

'that'the batteries'are maintained /iniai satisfacioryl state-oft P

readiness and that.theyewi:ll) perform when?chal-lenged.

4

(

J N

g a

a m

q mr

+

e.+

s.

I

..,;s

'i P

r For all the foregoing reasons and because= operation of the s"

i l

Turkey Point' nuclear plant in the manner sought-by the Applicant, through their amendment request, could result in the.

l failure of accident mitigating equipment when. challenged, and could result in a core meltdown:' accident that could-' kill:'and

{

,-(

injure tens of thousands of people in'the Miami-area,

[

Petitioners request.that the' Commission' grant their_requestLfor a hearing and Petition'for Leave to' Intervene.

1, I

For ; the L env.i ronment,

(

I ThomasiJ. J aporito,~-)NEAPi:

S r.

Executive Director :

t

'I i

4 Nuclear 1 Energy Accountabi1ityi P roj ect-.- '.

PostJoffice Box.1129.

I

": Jupiter, Florida 733468-0129; (407)':743-0770. Palm 4 Beach q"

.(305) 661-4529 Miami-i cls/ts.

1

.i

- Signed this 25th' day ofcOctoberE1990.in' Miami.. Florida,.

.j 7

3 s

t k

4

?

k Li

.i 3

,1

_3n_;

d w

9 u i m

y y

' 1 s

Federal Rrgist:r / Vcl. 55 Ns.187 / ' Wednesday September'26,1990 / Notices '

39331 5

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, emergency diesel generators, two any accident previously evaluated; or [3]

lolin N. Hannoe.

_ additional battery chargers. an involve a sigmficant reduction in a

,%rscior. Project Directomte Ill.J. Division o'f additional battery bank, and the -

margm of safety.

Reactorftweets-Ill. /V, VondSpecel associated support equipment and in Attachment 1 of its luly 2,1990

- ho/ects. O# ice o/NuclearReactor electrical distnbution equipment such as amendment request. the hcensee RegulatioA mot control centers load centers, and submitted its not significant hazards l'R Doc. W22*e6 Filed 9-25-90 6 45 am) switchgear.The amendments would also evaluation (NSHE)of the proposed on tmo caos reco et-es modify the Technical Specifications changes,in the context of the proposeo es to TS againsWe Grec (TS) primarily those concerning electric chanfards of 10 CFR 50.92 cited above, power supplies, so that they are stan

. Docket Nos. 50-250 and 80 2611 applicable to the improved design, The The licensee has identified and 1

i Florida Power and Ught Co.,.

proposed TS are consistent with characterized the changes (see Table 1)

CInsideration of lesuance of Standard Technical Specifications as belonging to five catesones:(1) EPS -

Amendments To Facility Operating -

(STS). where the Turkey Point design enhancements. (2) administrative L.lconses and Proposed No Significant permits, which are in general use in the changes,(3) changes that are more Hazards Consideration Determination

industry, restrictive,(4) changes that relax and Cpportunity for Hee'ing Before issuance of the proposed.

requirements, and (5) deletions of license amendments, the Commission requirements.

The U.S. Nuclear ReFulatory will have made findings required by the The staff reviewed the licensee's -

Commission (the Commission)is Atomic Energy Act of1954. as amended - NSHE provided in Attachment 1 of its '

considering issuance of amendments to (the Act) and the Co; anission's '

July 2,1990 license amendment.

Facility Operating 1.icense Nos. DPR regulations, proposal. Based on that review, the staff,

and DPR-411ssued to Florida Power and The Commission has made a proposed agrees with the licensee's conclusions Light Company (the licensee) for determination that the request for that the proposed amendments involve.

I operation of the Turkey Point Plant amendments involve no significant no significant hazards consideration.

l located in Dade County, Florida.

hazards consideration. Under the The staff has selected examples of the.

13y letter dated luly 2.1990, as Commission's regulations in 10 CFR proposed TS changes in each of the five :

supplemented September 6,1990, the 50.92, this ineens that operation of the..

categories of characterization licensee has proposed a number of facility in accordance with the proposed - (administrative, more restrictive, etc.)

dtsign changes as part ofits Emergency amendments would not:(1)lnvolve a employed by the licensee, and they are -

Power System (EPS) enhancement significant increase in the probability or discussed below.These examples are project.The proposed amendments consequences of an accident previously considered to be typical of the proposed l

w:uld modify the electrical power evaluated nr (2) create the possibility of changes.The staff's evaluation of no systems, including the addition of two a new or different kind of accident from : significant hazards is presented below, TABLE l. CATEGORIZATION OF CHANGES TO THE TECH SPsc8 i

pegH s Proposed TS No.

Ucensed TS No.4 -

'1 3123...

312.3 6

64!

l

- ~. - - -

31.2.3. Acton 3113 Actone e c 2.6 67

(

Table 3 3-3 Nom 7b.c_-

. Tabte 13-3. hem 7 tlc 1

8 i

~.

~

3 3.3 4. Acton b,c 3.3.14 Acton D.c

'2

-11

~..

iable 3 34. Fro sono 26 1

9 si Tabte 3 34. Fro sones 72 76

. Tante 3.3-4. Fro aones 72 76 -

1.2

- S.10 f abao 13-4. Fire sense 72.73 Tobis 3 34, Fro sones 72.73

-2 Io

. i Tobis 3.34 footnote "*

'6 to Table 3.34. Fire aonos133 136,136 141 1

0' 3 61a.

1614 e ~

_- m _ -

m 1

12-13

...m 3.6.2. Acton c.6 3.6A Acton c.d 1

~ 13 -

16.2. Actone e f

.1 18 16 f

462g2 4.6.2 0.2.

2 16 m.-

~

- 3.7.8.2 c 3 '/.8.2.c

'2 16 i 1782.d 3.7.416 1

16

~

l 3 7.8 2.e..

1

' 16 -

3.7.8 2. Acton a 3 7.8.2. Acton a 2

17 Tebie 3 7 6. HY26 Table 17-6, FHS, 1

16-10 Table 3.74. Hyle 1

' 14-19 L Table 3 7 6.HY.

l Table 3.7-6. HY10,11, Tabee 3.7-6. FH.

.2 1e~

Tobis 3.74. FH10.11 -

2 it' 381.1 34.1.1 113 20-22 '

lz 3811. Apphoebaty 3.811. Apphoetuiny-2

'23

'l l:

3 811. Acton a4 Ea.1.1, Acton e.f 2A4.6

-2340 H

4.811.1 4.8.111 _

2 31

~

4 alt 2.

4.8111 1.2.3.4.6

. 32-3s.

1 4 er1 1._

4.e.1.1.3

_- 3 36 40-4.8.114.; -

J$

40c

~

Tebis 4 s 1-Tabte 4A 1 3

36-37 '

3 s.12 a

-~

3012.s 2

41-42 3 e 1.2.b.

18.1.2.b.c 1.2.3 41-43 3 812. ApptcaDaty.

3 412. App 4cebaty 2

43

.s I

a 4

7 l

39332 Federal Register / Vcl. 85, No.187 / Wednesday, September 26. 1930 / Nstices i

j j

TABLE L CATaoomi2ATion or CHAmeES TO THE Tech SPECS-Contmoed

1 i

Propeesd T$ Peo, N9H utenses T3 No.'

e 3ei1 Aeeaa 3.s1s.Acnon i

I l

4.8.1.2 4 8.1J.

a as

]

3E.2.1+d 3 s.21. Apoecatslety

_ 3.SA1.awb 3J 45-48 I

12 C.So I

j 3 e 2.1. Acean t6 3A2.1. Appemently E

s0 i

3 s11, Aegon a 3A2.1. Accan e.b 1

61 66 3e2.1.Acton b j

1 81 #

Tate 3.5-1 -_

i 1

$1 06 4 4 2.1M.

l Tabao 4 6 4 At.1.6$

Tabte 46-4 1.3A4A 66 4 l

3s2.2__

IA GD47 3.ess 3 e 2 2. Apoeceeen 1J

• t ar i

s. sit ?;;

3 8 21 Accort..

3 s.31.ao SAJA Assen a

et ~

l 3 841. Aw>icornwy Stithe 12 8844 4

113A 8MS 3 811. Acadru 44-s.s11, Appnastomy a

to

)

SAS.i. Actore 34 Tebte341 IA4

1. 48 i

i Tebao 3.6-2._--

1 S.7D t-I i

3 8 3.2.a<:

1 8D M i

3.832.4 3 s.32. Aaamrety 1A2 75-75

{

7 3 s12. Actort -._

3 8.3A Appicatulity 383.2.Assen a

75-7s R

75 76 Notes-i Amendmente 137 and 132. leaued AdeJet at,1s00.

8 Types at enenese: i cps Emancementa 2-admirueveeve S_More reesteeve:a Mesassoone s. Deesson of eseected re 8 FPL proposeo hce me encenseem saamets seted Jufy 2. teso, Alebenmose 1. 600 Spiessee Masapes Ostemunason, ssemeren.

Catego y 1-EPS Enhancement Changes (the two associatrd with the Unit and either - create the possibWty of a n 1

j EPS enhancement char.ges am one of the EDCe associated with the opposite of accident from any accident previonely resulting from the plant reconfiguration - -Unit) to meet the etngle failure criterion and - = ev changes to valuce and requiresnents to mittgste en socident. Also, the fuel no basic chanses in operstica er new modes ior reasons of design. Dese changes do mqsti,ewet be the new Unit 4 EDC feet.

of operatfor These changeshave not resulted not result in either relaxed or more systems are added to the 140.

1. Operation of the facility in accordance la new types of plant operating requiremente i

restrictive requirements; rather, the wtth the peoposed amendment would met given that the requimments for the rew EDGE technical requirements remain tavolve a significant inemew in the and the eseociated level of detaille unchanged. Examples of these t commeneurste with the sequisessants fee the changes are described below, ypes of probability or consequences of an accident existing T8. -

psevleuely evalueted. -

3. Operetten of the facility in accordance -

Example F--Addition of Two Diesel As postulated. LOOP and LBLOCA require with the proposed amendment would not Generotors and Afodification of Evisting - h start and operation of Enginured Safety ; - Involve a significant mduction in a Featuru (ESFl equipment. no enhanced

. safety. The addition of two new EDGE Electrico/ Distribut/on System

, eyetem with load redistribution and add 6 tion. enhenees the mergin of safety by providtag The licensee has evaluated this of swing 4 hV switchecer, owing ogDV LCs..

added onette AC capacity and increased change beginning on page 20ofits and eso y bicce provides a greater desme of ' equipment evensbinty, NSHE in the ca..u 'TS 3/4.8.1.1 (AC pown mura eveHebsty to power me.

required equipawnt. Required ESF bde are :

L'!he stuff agstis with the !!censee's Sources-Operating),!)au Conditiott for Operatlon. The licensee @has -

accommodated with the enhanced EPS conclusion that there are no significant addressed the three criteria of10 CFR configuration. and no single failure wul :.

hazards considerstions, with the f i

prevent the enhanced EPS from puforming -. following counmente.The shauges.

50.92(c) and determined that they are its requimd safety function la the event of an reduce the probabilttyand satlefied.ne licensee's evaluation

' accident on etther unit.The i ntnr% analysi* - consequences of an accident becaus follows: note that the evaluation refers as preuntadin the FSAR mmeine bounding to IFTP (Plant Turkey Point). and to

, $b ',",h*"**d EPS additional emergency power reference 1 which is a letter from K.N.

Harris to U.S. NRC dated June 4.1990 EDC bl eyew,,me prmtde requimmenu

,,am a~y and capacity are provided y

3,,,,,,,,

to prevent an accident and to provide -

and designated te90-196. Some other :

wtdch am commensurate with the

. power to accident.mftigating systems.

mquimments for h existing EDc bl

. No new or different kind of accident will acronyms frequently used throughout

- systems.

the licensee's evaluations include: MCC f Since the EDGE am not initiassee of ^

- be created because the abanges add ;

(motor control center). LC (load center).

accidents. there la ao increase hn en more redundancy and especity.

l LOOP (loss of offsite power). EDG probabuity of an accidat.

Accidente resulting from a loss of power (emergency diesel generator), LBLOCA nem to eleo no inenese in the '

have been previously considered la the (large break loss of coolant accident),

$$N,',','g'd'g",[

des and analysed.Salaty wG enhanced by he avaBebt ty of

- and AOT(allowed outage time).

g,,,,

' me EPS Enhancement project at PTp adde provida en improvd ruporwe added electrical power sources.

existing FSAR umiting Dnige Baals Accidont '

two Claes 1EEDCs and modifies the existing - (DBA) by providing enhanced equipment Example 2-Add /t/on of Battery Bank. -

1 distribution system (for design details and e safety analysis of these modifications see avellability on the accidait unit with ~

Two Battery Chargere and Associated E uj#menf' I

Reference 11. As a result of hee increased EDG losding margia.

I

2. Operauon of the facility in accordance.

Time licensee has eyelveted this -

- modifications each Unit regulies three EDCs with the proposed eneendment would not.

change begirming on page 47 of fts 6

- - ^-

2 m.-

26, 1990 / Notices 39333 l

Federal Registir / Vol. 55..No.187 / Wednesd:y, September hhzards considerations, with the SHE in the context of TS 3/4.8.2.1 (DC whichMCC must be supplying power to a following comments.The addition of F

battery charger for it to be considered ources--Operstina). Limiting Condition OPERABtE The addition of this requirement one more battery bank and two battery 3r Operation.The licensee has enurn that no sinste fans of an MCC chargers provides increased reliability of D.C. power supplies at the plant.

ddrissed the three critene of to CFR and determined that they are ha bste b

'it ou n LE Because D.C. power supplies ptovide 0.92(c)d. The lICensee's description of dlisfie charger.

power for equipment to prevent and l

5e changes, and portions of the Following the EPS Enhancement Protect mitigate accidents, there le no incresse

censee's lengthy evaluation follow; completion, each unit will require 3 EDG4 to, in the probability or consequences of an be OPERABLE to supply emergency power note that the evaluation refers to the (both ofits and one of the other unit's EDCs) accident

rather, the probability of an ITS which are the Revised Technical

• '

• The addition of this requirement accident is expected to be reduced.The.

\\mendments 137 arid 132 for Units 3

,",",",','n, sjn c naequences Of an accident willnot be 1pecifications issued by NRC as ha inct desed and, depending ou the -

ul in re and 4. respectively, on August 28.1990 than one battery bank without an AC accident scenario, the consequences emergency power source * * *$s change are could be reduced because of the added -

The proposed change revises the De equipment involved in t ipecification to reflect the ettstence notinitiators of FSAR evaluated accioents -

D.C. power capability. No new or different kind of ar cident is created icllowing the completion of the EPS and the proposed requirements will ensurs because the changes add more safety =

Enhancement Project. of a spare 125. volt tiettery Bank (D-52) and eight (s) dedicated that no smgle fauures, u assumed in the -

l2 per bettery) full capacity bettery chargers TSAR analyses, will prevent the plant from equipment of a type that a! ready exists leurrently there are four (4) dedicated and mitigating the consequences of en accident as at the plant.The added reliability of D.C. power supp les wtgg egance sa(,ty evaluated in the FSAR, thus there is no -

y two (2) swing battery chargers).The significant increase in the probabihty of the

margins, proposed change specifies which bettery occurrence of an accident or significant The staff further concludes that, charpr(s) can be supplytne power to a incmase in the consequences of previously-throughout 'he amendment request.

3 required battery bank for the bettery bank to be considered OPERABLE. In addition the analyzed accidents.

1 Operstion of the feellity in cccordance wh,re EPS enhancement changes are l

proposed change adds the specific MCC with the proposed amendment would not

. Droposed, there are no significant l-which powers a specified battery charger (3r create the possibihty of a new or different hazards considerations' credit to be taken for a battery charger being ' kind of accident from any accident previously OPERABLE.The proposed change also evaluated.The added requirements are in Cattego y b -Administrative Changes rrquires, via a new footnote, that each of the accordance with the des details cnd safety batt:ry chargen used to satisfy this LCO be analysts as presented in forence 1. and' The proposed administrative changes to the TS include editorial changes.

powered by a different MCC it also. (sic) soeure that no single failure concurrent witia LOOP can result in the loss of m reformatting, and changes for identifies the EDG{s) usociated with each MCC mquired to be OPERABLE to supply one D.C. electrical system. As discussed in --

consistency.

amergency power (swing MCCs 3D anc 4D thle safety evatustion a Failure Modes and Examples of administrative changes require two EDCs 3A and 3B or 4A and 4B' Effects Analysis has bun performed and no are evalualsd by the licensee beginning I

footnote.

l respectively) with a clarifyinhentifying that new accidents are createiThe proposetf on page 21 ofits NSHEin the context of identified by a "#" symbol. t change introduced no basic changes in.

TS 3/4.8.1.1 (A.C. Sources-Operating)i inoperability of the EDG(s) specified in the

. LCO does not constitute inoperability of the operation or new modes of operation.

Limiting Condition for Operation. The.

.g. Operation of the facility in accordance associated battery chargers or battery banks, with the propoud amendment would not licensee has addressed the three criteria

1. Operation of the facihty in accordance involve a significant reduction in a margin of of 10 CFR 50.92(c) and determined that 1'

with the proposed amendment would not safety * * '.The number of required

-they are satisfielThe licensee's involve a significant increase in the OPERABLE D.C. electrical systems remains "

evaluation follows"-

. probability or consequences of an accident the same between the proposed requirements.

The LCO has been reformatted (items b

previously evaluated for the fo' lawing and the RTS.

i and c) to cnhance consistency with the S'fB reasons:

.The FTP D.C. system requires 3 of 4 D.C.

. by carabining all requireinents to assure EDG

~

The number of D.C. electrical sources besses (and associated chargers) to be OPERABi!ITY in one LCO (new 3.8.1.1b). A :

nquired to be OPERABLE following this operable to perform its accident functions.

cmendment remains the ume as in the RTS.

RTS (existing system) requin chargere 38. 4 A ' new associated footnote was added to this '

only existence of a new full capacity 125-volt and 4S to be OPERABLE (at all times) and 2 LCO to ensure that if one or more of the four s D C. Battery Bank (D-52) has been added, o( 3 charpre 3A. 3S and 4B to be OPERABLE EDC's le out.cf.eervice that comphances with The new. spare" bat:ery bank OPERABILITY for the plant to not be in an ACTION Technical Specifications 3.5.2 and 3.8.2.11e willbe assured by the new battery bank

. statement (Note: Table 3.8.1 matrix of the -

reviewed.This administrative change eleo undergoing the same surveillances as the

RTS shows these conditions) *. * *.

includes the consolidation of the EDC '

exleting bettery banks "

• The addition of (0)perator action is still required to slign thej support requirements by add.ing the MCCa thle battery bank allows one battery bank in. swing charger 38 to alther the 4 A or 3B D.C.

. "4* '

h sa n

'e*e,

be taken o it of service without the unit (s) '

, entering 6tto an ACTION statement.'

bus so that 3 D.,C., busses are energized viaA1s of p g y

was deleted to enhance consistency with the 1

. - With she enhanced EF'.' dulgn two battery

.the chargers

.. For the new system the proposed TS STS and since thle information wee not '

chargers are being added and the two a quire a select 4 of 8 chargers to beOPERABLE.The new design of the e6 sting " swing" chargere are being

. dedicated to a particu!ar bettery.Though the EPS eliminates the * *.* condition where.,

with the proposed amendment would not ;

i ~. number of battery charpere requind to be failure of the 3A or 4B battery / bus results in, involve a significantinenase in the

'j OPERABLE decreases from five (3) to four (4). the condition of Iwo D.C. busees being probability or consequences of an accident

) each OPERABLE battery bank willbe without a bettery charger? * *..

previously evaluated.The reformatting.

. j L connected to en OPERABLE full capacity Thus, the new daign does not rely on "includng the new nosociated footnote is -

) chirger,The criteria used for the existing (olperator action and its reliability is * * * - - intended to make the TS easier to use for i LCO and for the proposed LCO for the new greater than the existing when the minimum plant operations personnelThe addition of design is identical * ",

- equipment required by the LCO is satistfied the MCC requirements with this 140 d

This amendment adds additional 1=-

reqeitements for equipment sesociated with

. The staff agrees with the licensee's

. consolidates the OPERABILITY requiremente of the EDGo,The consolidation of the EDG :

en OPERABLE battery bank.The revised opecification provides requirements as to s j conclusion that there are no significant 6

" = - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _., ' ' ' - - - - '

' ' - ~ - - - - - -, - - -,. _ _,. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,..

_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ ~ _ - - -

L T

.{

33p4 Federal Raideter / Vol. 65. No.187 / Wednesday. September I'6.1980 / Nsticas -

1 aE l OPERABILITY requirements into one item transformers. This proposed time limit is. probability of a previously eyeleated '

improves the TS orsamantie.

consistant with the STS. -

• • cid" * '

The transformer toting is }TiAlt design date tFut is not required by the reactor operators in the licensee's no signiScant

2. Opwenen of the fecuny in seemg - 3 or other personnel by whom the TS are need.

hazards evaluation. Attachment 1 of the with the proposed amendment woulda II

"'"nds"I "

t. N create the possibuity of a new or difhn N.5 and' 26. the licenses svafusted mom.

There are only Iwo startup transformers at Lind of econdent from any ly.

PTP and the removal of the nameplete toting -

evolusted.The proposed intreh will not effect idenuficetion of the stattop reatnctive changes including startuP no basic changesin opwouen or new n'

. tre neformas, transfertner operability vermaation of operation. :

1 he above changes have not resulted in -

frequency in accordance with the three

3. Operosion of the footlity in accorde any new plant operating reqmromante. No standarda of to CFR 80.92 and occident inidaties mnte am affecsed.name. concluded that the changes do not

. with the pmposed amendment woulden administrouve changes do not effect th*

involve a mentnoent redaction in a mag ;

probability of the ocairrence or the Involve a algnificant hasards

- sefety. N margia of sehty would be, i enhanced beasm tiw plem oywetore consequences of en accident.

consideration. The licensee's evaluation

2. Based on the above discussione it een gagjows.

take compeasencry AC110No ensur s, 4

edditional easuranse af eqdr===*

eleo be concluded that operation of the '

ne frequency for varianelios of OPERABl!JTY would be providesL Alea, L facility 19 ocenrdance wteh the proposed OPERAB1tITY of the OPERABIJ:startup stettup transioneers are not respdred le

• emendment would not create the pose 6bdity treneformere as required by MTIONe a". -

mitigeues of a design basie moeidet.14 offattopower. via the startup transf of a new oe diffemnt Lind of acciaent from "b" and existing "d" and "e". has been any accident previavely erotuated. No new incrossed from once every 34 hoere to caos -

- normour utilised dering plant sh type of eqiri 4 are added by thle chaage. - every eight houre.De elloweble time to has the capabiltty of metalaining stabin The crop change tetroduces nn basic reduce power to less than or equal to 305 la condidoes essemos a reaction trip wubC,

chang. e in oreretion or new enodes of ACTION "a" has been reduced from 30 heure. offeito power senilehne.

-* i operatid.The changes are administrouve to 34 hours3.935185e-4 days <br />0.00944 hours <br />5.621693e-5 weeks <br />1.2937e-5 months <br />. If power le not reduced to less only.

then or equal to aos within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. tha -

. The staff adds the foDowing 1

3. Daeon so b above diameekn it cea -

associated unit must be shut down within the clarification of the Bret paragraph of; (

also be con 6ded that operation of the next 54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br /> if the startup tsansfonner ;

licensea's aboue evaluation. In ACE

(

facility in accadanos with the proposed remains inoperable. This provision is. -

"a."ilpoweris not reduced to less t '

l emendment wocid not involve a signiacent.

Inonrpreted into ACTIONe "a" and the new or equal to 30E within 24 hosta, the i reduction in a ma' sin of safety.The changes "e".Tne existing 75 aHows condamd only enhance the 't 't by daistieg enn operation et a maximum of 305 reactar. '

assomated unit mest bein HOT-7.-

information, consolidating requiremente.

. power for 30 days befose requiring shutdown.. STN M 3) m 8Pposed h I providing an additional rendadernete i Also la AC110No "b"and new "r*. the shutdown, within se hoore and C013 _

resulting in improved TB orgemaation and

. clatity, number of hours for reaching hot shutdeum SHUTDOM within the foHowing4; t has twen reduced from twelve house to sin hours. Also,in the last parearaph oil The staff agrees with the licensee.s hours.

1. above. tha 5censee has refeeredis evaluation and conclusion that there m. with h proposed an==d==at weeld not1. Operation of the facGity LOOP (less ofoffsite power) as an 1

no significant hasards considration.'

- ccident.De alaffdoes not conside

I a

The etaff further concludes that them involve a algniBesat lacrease in the :

! LOOP. by ihne4f.to be an accident.

l probability or consequences of as mes.ident are no signincent hasarde ~ -

previously evaluated. no tassesse in the

.g,,g,g* M,g g,ggan g l

conalderatione associated with surveinance of the startup tr"m Mla.

ceciale thatam Wat

1 3a L

administrative changes throughout the. ; more restrictive than the saleting.

verification of transformer operabill amendment request.

~ nquirements.nie ch walprovide added e a more restrictive requirement, and1 3,

assurance that the O startop the three criteria of to CFR 80A2 are: 3 Category A-Requirements Which are More Restrictive

. trenaformer(e)le (am) svallable to perform ise i setlefied and there are no significar,t (their) function. If needed. The redustien en :

hazards considerations.'.=-

i hamples d p ud change la -

the time for reducing power on the lose of a"L ' Example #

startup transformer wtD result la the pisat -

mluimments w m um matricth" then those curreadylicensed are

being in a low power, stable condition sooner. GenesotarOpembility

.I

&anrequirWinbexhunsTEBecaum -

. described below. These examples them requireamste are more tecnictive thea ; ( Technical A M f

include changes to freqeency of the enleting sequiremente, the psobability og a pages 3/484 of-

,g verifying operability and changes in

. an accident and its consequeness am 1.. 3 Attachmect 2 of the 2.1930 surveUlance requirements, retuced. ne reduction in the time allowed to J amendmentrequest)a requiremes :,

re 4ch hot shutdown fine twelve home to ela = to ve the Anweatory, quality,and ' ;

Example J-Verificatiert ofSicitup r h m to a direct result of the eliminetton of ' - avalla ty of EDGlubricatias oilin L DOMformerOperabil/ly

! tas deal unit abatdown requirement (sea '

atorage, as weH as verifying certata

' Technical Specification 3/4.3.1 ( see' "'

EI' discussion below on deletional. His change

-other EDG test and operability 3/4 lb1 and 6-2 of Attachment 2 the J f requiressats. Por example, the licone ]

en f h TB w ai

. July 2.1990 amendment request) shutdown le m added a requirement tocheck t j

describes prope 'ed requirements for han before. ' quired and is more sentriodwe,lubricatina oG in storage because the = 1

. operability of /W. power sources. For -

ne requiremsat to rutore as taapa==M. '

Unit 3 EDCs the addition of i !

example, the iment TS 3/4 8.1 (License ;

startup transformer wtthin 72 bours followta 3 days of operatis '

lose of an associated startup translermer s : lubricating

= Amendment 1; and1.12 issued August 28,1990) requires that,if one of two with no componentr.:y ACTIONS (l.a.1 availability of lubriesting oil in storep l

- startup transformers, an associated.

reduction of mactor power to lens &as or.

. provides assurance that an EDG can s :

circuit or a required RDG le inoperable, equaHo am ruluces me AOh andays operate foe a minimum of 7 days as "I

the remaining startup transformer (s) be I [,2 s' h I'S"l#'d*

ne p

demountrated operable within 24 boers.

y en ad

. In the liceWe no s.,,ou...

i.

De licensee proposes inesasing the.

c NRCguidelines.Thle AOTcheneereduces -

-n.

frequency of verification from 24 to 8 the likehbood of an aceident (IDOP) beins ~ s hazarde evaluation, Attachment 1of!!,

7 initiswd with the reactor at power.Therefore. July 2.1990 amendment request, pages = ;

hours for the operable startup this proposed change would rodeos the -

36 and 37. the licensee evaluated more v a-

-(>

t

,c 1i g;

s 1,

sb

(

n m.

y

w.

m.,.~n

-w

-r

~~

' ' ' " ^ ~

^ ' ^

~~

Federal R:sist:r / Vol. t,$, No.187 / Wednesday, Septemb3r 26,1990 / Noticos 39333 restrictive changes to section 4.C.1.1.2 of additional surveillaner nquirements to verify in reduced reyultements, but not a lobe oil storop inventory, verify Unit 3 sig.ificant reduction in safety. Examples the Technical Specificadons in automatic fuel transfer to the skid mounwd of relaxations a e dascribed below.

accordance with the three standerris of tank, and checking and analyzing diesel fuel 10 CFR 50.92 and concluded that the oil eerve to provide increend confidence that Example 1-Test!np 0/ Diesel changes do not involve a significant the EDGs will function as designed. The -

Genetofors hazards consideration. The itcensee's iightening of the tolerance ellowed for the The licensee has proposed a change to evaluation follows.

voltage provided by the EDG is more Technical Specifications 3.8.1.1. b and c intrictive and will provide added assurance The following new restrichons are that the equipment powmd by Ge EDGE cci (pages 3/4 6-2 and 3/4 6-3 of proposed: Smeillance 4 8.1.1.2a.3) nquirn function as designed.The addition of testmg Attachme:it 2 of the july 2,1990 -

I verification of lubricating oi! inventory in frequency nquirements associated with the amendment request) wherebyif an EDG

[

etoregs. Surveillance 4.8.1.1.2a.6 requirn number of failurn in the last 100 valid teste is intentionally made (noperable due to l

vertheation (of] eutomatic transfer of fuel t

l from tl.e doy tank to the skid. mounted tank govides incrund confidence of EDG pre planned maintenance or testing.

DI

n y due o ot i nt st of special testing of the remaining EDCs is l

tun Unit 3. Surveillance 4A112 c through i t

are added in their entirety to add tallures in the last 100 vehd tests insteed of not required in Mtachment 1 of the -

amendment request, pages 26 and 27, the

- nquiremente conceming the EDG fuel oli.

just the last 20.The required tests to ensure licensee evaluated the proposed 4

l

Thtee requirements include et least once per that a Safety injection signal overrides the EDG int mode circuitry; the automatic load changes against the three standards of f cccur$le [d wer fro fu istorege segunce Ome operates per design; and the

- to CFR S0.92 and concluded there are no i

! cnd day tanks (Units 3 & el and the skid.

significant hazards considerations. The -

E0 l ule ve o an mounted fuel tanks (Unit 3). Also, et least

,,jy g

g g.

licensee e evaluation is reptsduced i once per 31 deys obtaining a ocmple from the ' operek pmperly. This providu grume D*IoW.

fuel oil storese tank and vertfying thst the confidence that the EDG4 will operate, as dulgned, to power required '

In ACTIONS "b" and "c" en exception to afl ter wh n check in accor ance th accident loads. Finally, h new Unit 4 EDC the requirement to demonstrate the l 1

• the opphcehle industry standard. In addition, fuel oil system pressure test verifies the OPERABilJTY of the remaining required

{ requinments are included to test uew fuel oil integrity of this required e stein and reduces EDCs is added for the case when the EDG

. in cecordance with the appbcable industry the probability of EDG, al ure due to fuel became inoperable because of preplanned

.I f

standarde for items such as appearance. flesh starvati n durma a design accident.Thus,

' preventative maintenance or testing.

point. viscosity, and API Gravity. These there will be noincreses in accident

1. Operation of the facility in accordance requirements replace the current requirement. **

• with the proposed amendment would not P[r n of h fulli'I'a accordance - involve a significant increase in the to at leest once per 92 days verify a sample of '

2.

fuel cil le within acceptable halte for with the propoemd amendment would not probability or consequences of an accident viscosity, water and sediment (4.811Jb in Previously evaluated. Consistent with the -

I the RTS). In Surveillance 411.1.2a.41,2d.11a' fn of acci nt y accident oly STS and current NRC guider.ce, testing of the 2d 4). and as, the voltese tolerance of 1624 pmp ch d$ - todundant (i.e., remaining required EDCs)

.) volte is reduced to *420 volte. Table to-1,

'*1jc'd EDCs are to be performed after any failure or no be a

e, Pe,g, j " DIESEL GENERATOR TEST SCHEDULE." le yop o

any problem which renders the EDG I

modified to add tuting frequency 3

on of b fulhty in ucordance inoperable.The purpose of this testing le to re utrements escociated with the number of with the propond amendment would not demonstrate that the redundant EDGE have f ri ures in the last 100 valid teste. This involve e significant reductionin a margin of not been degraded by a similar problem.

j included deleting the word " valid" in the safety.The proposed cha f cing h

. When en EDG to intentionally taken out of would enhance.

footnotes for Table 411. Also,the word -

N margin of ufety bfailure due to

' service, the above concem does not exlet.

re

" prior" before "NRC"in the first footnote of possibility of an EDG Therefore,it la acceptable to provide an ll Tebb 4.&1 le deleted.These Table 4.k1 contaminated fuel or fuel starvauon, ensuring - exemption to thle testing when an EDG is changes enhance conformance to the STS. In an adequate supply oflube oil for en

' taken out of service for preplanned Surveillance Requirement 4A11237 extended EDG run. ensuring proper operetion preventive maintenance or testing. Reducing (4 811.2d.5 in the RTS), the test duration is of the EDG control circuite. ensuring a the number of unnecessary EDC teste le in 1

extended from B hours to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of EDG voltage well within the design tolerance of '

accordance with Generic Letter 64-15 and cperation (this extension provides enhanced

.the required electrical equipment, providing :

current NRC guidance. Since the EDGE are t

constetency with the B'11). Surveillance increased confidence of EDG reliability by Rtquirement 411.1.2310 verifies that a requiring increened EDG testing due to the. - not initiators of FSAR analyzed accidente Safety injection signal overrides an EDG total number of failur;s in the test 100 valid and this change serves to enhance EDG operating in the test mode. Surveillance teste, and by lengthening the EDG run test reliability, there le no increase in the Requireinent 411.1.2312 veriftee from 8 to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> which provides added.

probability or consequences of a previously 3 OPERABII.lTY of the automatic load assurance the EDG will function as designed. ; analysed accident.

r

2. Operation of the facility in accordance eequence timer. Surveillance Requirement The staff agrees with the licensee.s with the proposed amendment would not 4.811.2g.13 verifies proper operation of the.

conclusion that there are no significant - ' creets the possibility of a new or different '

l EDG lockout relay. Finally, Surveillance hazards considerations associated with kind of accident from any accident previously Requirement 4A1121 specifies a pressure test of t!'e Unit 4 (only) diesel fuel oil system - these added and more restrictive evaluated. The change only affects the designed to ASME Section RI, Subsection -

requirements.The added mquirements number of timu an EDG OPERABILTFY

.ND.This surveillance requirement also improve surveillance and alert operators demonstration may be performed.The specifice a drain.down and cleaning of each i to problem 8 sooner.Therefore the three proposed change introduces no basic changes EDG fuel oil storage tank to ensure a reliable criteria of10 CFR 50.92 are met.

in operetion or new modes of operation.1

3. Operation of the facihty in accordance j

source of high quality fuel Furthermore, throughout the amendment with the propowd amendment would not i.

1. Operation of the facility in accordance request where additional or more involve a significant reduction in a margin of with the proposed amendment would not restrictive requirements are imposed.

' safety.This change serves to enhance EDC involve e significant increase in the -

the staff concludes there are no ~

reliability by reducing the number of -

' probability or consequences of an accident significant hasards considerations.

. unnecusary EDG tute which minimizes EDG preytously evaluated.The additional l

4 surveillance will have no impact on the

< wear.

probability of an accident since EDCe are not Cat'8Y --Ch8 that Rela" The staff agrees with the licensee's 4

Accidente (DBAs). Extending the duration of evaluation and concludes that the three

-l initiators of FSAR analysed Design Basis Requiremes

' EDG operetion during tuting. and adding the. ~ Relaxations are changes which result : criteria of 10 CFR 50.92 are s 1

L!

I b

-. ~ - _ _ - -..

39336

- Fedaral Rrgister / Vct. 55. No.187 / Wednesday. SIptember 28, i9eo / Notices that there are no sim2ficant hazards l

l cecs!derstions.

specific gravitv to be within the TS i

limi's is not sufficient to in6cate en the unit wtbut its associated startup Example 2-Bottery filot Ce!/

inoterable battery.

t ansformer,if required. hnplementation M 'lll08C*

The staff conchrdes that the three

' of the EPS enhancement project will add The licensee has proposed relaxing cr'reria of 10 CIlt 50.92 have been met.

- two safety-grade EDGs to the plant with the survedisnce interval for the station ead there are no significant hazards capability for cross connect between censiderations.

umts, replacing the need to beve two,

battery pilot cell specific gravity cranking EDGs operable as backup to e'trveillance of Attachmen(TS 4.8.2.1.a. page 3/4 614 Example 3-D/eselGenerator Testing the safety EDGs w startup transformer.

t 2 of the July 2, tego la enother example, described on The EPS design eliminates this -

amendment request) from once per 24 pages 32-35 of Attachment 1 of the July - requirement with better design based on hours to once per 7 days.The proposed 2 smendment request thelicensee has safety grade EDGa.

nurvedisnce intervalis consistent with provided a lenthf In Attachment 1 of the July g.1990 the STS In Attachment 1 of the

- evolustion of cer'y and detailed sin EPS enhecement amendment request, pasos 27 through 30 emendment request, pages 56 and 3G, the : changes and administrative changos

- and on page 40, the licenses presented a licensee evaluated this proposed change related to testing of the EDCs. 4%

lengthy and detaued evaluatlos of thia -

against the three standards of 10 CFR these changes, the test los for the change agalast the thras standards of to

..J 60.C2 and concluded there are no Unit 3 EDGs has been rela from CTR 50.92 ated delsrudnad there is no significant hazards considerations. Re 230kw to perme a testload band of sig nificant hazasde sensideration g

licensee's evaluation is reproduced 2300-2800kw, A riew higher test load associated with &ls change. De staffs

hegow, 8

band is specified for the two new EDG.e evaluation is provided below, a

The reqcited surveillance (4.8.2.1a)

" ' I"

• I in the current design. Turkey Point

?

is aquacy for verifying the pilot cou specific proc ts waW

.has Iwo safety-grade EDGs, with any reduced from once per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to ence per 7 fast test atarts. The technical basis for g,,g,,y,jgg,n eafety eranidag h,!

gravity for etc.h 125 volt hattery bank te with grado 1 loading lastas ogcold, two out of five no

, gg,, g, g, 4

days. The revised surveillance frequency these relaxations was described in more..

b M,M kw im -

conforms to the requirements of the STS.

1. Opereuon of the facAhty In accordance detail in the staff's Generic Letter l#4-15, safety grade EDGE with the non cefety with the proposed emeedment would not -

Bascially,it was to reduce stress and cmdW $wde anilaW as bad i

involve a significant increau in the wear on the engine that accompanies.

%e two additional EDGs wi probabihty or consequences of an accident cold, fast test starts, and which couki

. have a complete set of d thus

,?

• lower the reliability of the ED f8 place the cranklag diasals with higher previously evatusted. Since PI'P received its "V"gf"'

th he 11**"*".Gs. %e _

operauns bconse in the early 1s70's, indestry N'H

' capabili and sacre seliable equipenent. -

j experience on nuclear sele [t related 125 vott g,g,,

The diesels willbe malatained bat 6ery benka, u conclude in IEEE 48cL has. these changes, but would characterise -

and available as a backup poseer determined that a rapid drop in pilot con the changes as relaxations rather then g

g,,,,g

}i specific gravity during a 7 day perted io EPS enhancements or administrative ~ _,g g g, g,,,g, t-hishly unlikely. For this ruson. the NRC has changes.

every18 monthsis spec 4ed a 7 day surveinanra frequency for on pt lt

& wee er,ge 3/4 125 volt battery bank pilot call specific Throughout the proposed TS, where 7-11 d ee licensed H is -

relaxations have been toposed by the nolonger necessary br &e hregalm g,

gravity in the STS. The 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> surveillanos requirement is inconelatent with prwent NRC ' licensee, the staff concfudes that tlw a demonstratlon of operabilhy of the :

{.(

guidelinea, reposed changes involve no significant crading diesels whena safsty EDG (3

Since LEEE 450 has datermined that a 7-day ?

considmHone.

and/or startup transfosuseris surveillance frequency La acceptable for pilot 8

' Category 5-. Deledens '

. Inoperable.

'# M Nan N #'Ov N s, t

. h ddedon of &is reqaltenantis I

h I

he licensee has identitled15 L

~

v

- Increase in the probabinty or conesquence.

requirements that are to be deleted.c.

, additional safety EDGs which are :

t =i more than compensated for by the two

' of an accident previously evaluatedL I

2. Opration of the facihty in accordsace Generally. these deletions are a natura}

with the proposed amer heent would not -

result of the design changes associated - ' required to be operable as described

,I d

~

the proposed TSE 4

create the possibthly of a new or dlSevent -

with the Emeraency Power System..

,i%e change does not knotwei 6-kind of accident from any accadent previousluppede,in a few cassa the deletions are 1 ' a el evaluated. No new types of equipment are Y - made to complete the conversion to STS,,;or consequenc inYob.

"ia 'N.N

' oPereting experience t an were the ;ficantly more ;

e previously evaluated bocesse deletion L which are based on ei cc e

L of the requirement to demonstrata -

new moda of opereuen.

3. Operation of the incility in accordaan original plant eustoni TS, Examples of.

. operability of manirtne 1

deletions are described below. -

tis more than cosapenas. diesel resors invo

• Weso Yt$in hog ' Example J-Opeb///tyReguhement tedfor the a

sefety. Beeed on ties above discussion,lEEE /N M888 88"'" ^

t addi a ty 450 and NRC ddawe indicates that a 7. day ;

surveitlance frequency.versus a 24. hour The licensed Technical Specifications 4 - AC1'lON b of propos 3

s c

(IS 3/4.8.t pages a/4 6-1 through 3/4 6-pages 3/4 6-1 and 6 3 of Attachment 3 ?

. survelUance frqeuncy does not signitisantly

-i'

. reduce the margin of niety.

7 of Amendments 137 and 132 leased ne staff agrees with the licensee's August as,1990) require that, with cas f of the July 2.1990 amenchnent request.

evaluation and conclusions.The staff startup transformer inoperable or one '

%e proposed change does not create <

also notes that in footnote 1 of Tablestartup transforraer and one EDG 4 the possibility of a new or different kind 4 6-2 of the proposed TS (page 3/4 6-18 ~ inoperable, two cranidas diesel >.

'of eccident because the cranking diesels L

of Attachment 2 of the July 2.1990 :

generetors be demonstrated operable., :will still be maintained and available amendraent request). the failure of a This requirernant is intended to provide and because nochangein petsmalain asident inliiatosa has sacerred. *I1ae '

Category A parameter, such as pilot cell.an additional non. safety grada source of ' addition of two power to assist in the safe shutdown of Lto make the plant selbe and provide

~

.E t

k s.o q

Federal Register / Vd. 55, No.187 / Wednesday, September 28,1900 / N2tices 39337 added protection.The proposed change involve e Msnmeant reduction in a margia cf Room P-123, Phillips Building. 7920 does not involve a significant reducuon niety.no deleted surveluence mquimments Norfolk Avenue,Bethesda. Mary'.cnd.

14.s.2.te and e) en preventive metnianane, from 7:30 a.is. to 4:15 p.m. Copies of in a margin of safety because the added items only.Fauem to pwim 8umemance written comunents received may bc I

safety EDGs provide additional safety n.o on m* O margin. In addition, the cranking diesels

[*do,,

'at.

.s a. 'ww examined at the NRC Public Document e

Room, the Celman Building,2120 L will still be available.

priormed more frequendy then Surveulamoe Street, NW., Weahington, DC.The g

Derefore,the staff concludes that talte(weeWy versue monely), verses there tre no significant hasards redundant pilot cou regniremente De filings of requests for bearing and considerations associated with deleting Surveillance 4.s.t.1e deletion does not petiuons forleave to intervene is eipnificently affect the margin of safetF

- discussed below.

the TS requirement to demonstrate bece mquim *"

By October 28,1990, the licensee may operability of the cranking diesels when g

d if file a request for a hearing with respect a safety EDG and/or startup transformer equipment is OPERAm2 er not.ManBy, to issuance of the amendments to the -

g is inoperebk.

deletion of the requirement to vertly that as equensing chasse le started la Notes 1 and I subject facili opereting licenses and Exomple 2--Surveillance of D.C Power of Table aM has no affect on the margia of any person se interest may be g,urces safety, because the OPERABRJrY affected by this proceeding and who i

Thelicensee proposes to delete mquimmente of the betterte am deteredned wishes k pardcipate as a party in b r

certain DC power survelHances as by the bettery parameter limite of Table 4.s.

moeding amt file a wnuen peddon

}

described on peges as and 80 of

'y,*ge*'"g forleave tolatervene. Request for a hearing and poudons forleave to of the July 2,1990

,,,i,m.

intervene shall be filed in accordance amendment request.De hcensee's The staff notes that comprehensive d b ('

• 'n's Rules of description of the proposed changes and surveillance requirements of D.C power Prudos fwDamasuc Uomhg

' f no signifloant hasards evaluation sources are provided in the proposed TS Procedbesin to CPR 2.

follows.-

on pages 3/4 6-14 through his of Interestad persons d consult a Surveillances ente and a have been Attechment 2 of tha July 2,1990 current copy of to CPR 2.714 which le deleted. Survet!!ancu entc roquired amndment requestin pardeuter available at the Comunission's Public rotating the puoi cell and chechns water requirements for issportant batter'y Document Room, the Celman Bouding, i

level every 31 days This servem.

l requirement is a mainionence activity only parameters are shown in Table 4.8-2 on 2121, Stat. NW, Washingtm, DC age 3/4 6-16. De staff agrees with the 2666 and eMe local Puke Document j

and does not verify bettery OPERABRITY, i

Surveulance 4. site mquired performance of ficensse's evaluation and conclusions Room located at the Environmental and a bettery charger visualinspection quarterly, and concludes that the three criteria of Urban Affaire Ubrary, Florida.

This nmdlana mquimeent la e pwnne" 10 CFR 50.92 have been met and there -

International University, Miami, Florida h,bfQe$d,5eu h "YhasardsE ** O *~

5" Y $ $ $ $ $ ",a*n*'

, maintenanas estivity and does met Note.

Atomic Safety and uomeing Board,

1. Operation of the faculty in scoordance The staff also concludes that,.

designated by the Comadesion or by the i

with the proposed amendment would not throughout the amendment request, and Chairman of the Atomic Safe 7e o s

involve a signifneemt lacrease la the where deletions are proposed, there are Ucensing Board Panel, will ru probabuity or consequenen of an meddent no s!gnificant hazards considerations.

request and/or petition and the g

i previously evaluated. Survetuances 4.811c involved.

Secretary or the designated Atomic I-and e am maimanance activities caly. NRC For all the reasons given above.

Safety and Doensing Board will issue a guidance indicates that the above deleted including those given(above)b the notice of hearing or en appropriate

• ", E"9

[g",",q*[

licensee, the staff agrees with e licensee's determinshon, and therefore

order, letest Su do not contain these surveillance proposes to determine that the

.. As required by to CFR 2.714, a mquirements. lestead. Surwhnee 4.t.2.is amendments do not involve a significant : petition for leave to intervene shall set contains a requirement to venfy puot ceu forth with particularity the interest of 4

[i

~

electrolyte level wukiy. Also, the hazard consideration, requirement in Table 4.s-2. Notes i and 2, to De Commiselonis seeking public the petitioner in the proceeding. and start an equalising charge when a bettery's comments on this proposed how that interest may be affected by the ceH don not comply wMh the estepry A and determination. Any commentt received - results of the proceeding.The petition y l, B limits of the table,is not tachided in SM.

within 30 days after the date of should specifically explain the reasons a ains charge wW be appued, as publication of this notice willbe why intervention should be permitted t

[;

consideredin making any final with particular reference to the:

following factors:(1)The nature of the Desofore, band on the above discussion'

'. determination,The Commission will not ' petitioner's right under the Act the probabuity or consequences of e.

normally make a final determination.

('

preytowely evaluated eccident is not unless it receives a request for a made party to the proceeding. (2) the signifloaney inereend.

nature and extent of the petitioner's.

2. Opereuon of the faculty in accordance hearing.

with the proposed amendment would not Written comments may be submitted property. Enancial, or other interest in caste the poutbility of a new or a different

. by mall to the Regulatory Publications the proceeding: and (3) the posalble 5

kind of accident from any accident previously ' ~ Branch, Division of Freedom of effect of an order which may be t

I

N'd[' "'" '7P" 'I '9"iP"'"i 8" information and Publications Services, enteredin t e proceeding on the

" dansm bP "d Office of Administration. U.S. Nuclear -

petitioner's interest. The petition should

. b c oper Regulatory Cammission, Washington.

' also identify the specific aspect (s)of the new modes of operation.They only delete DC 20585, and should cite the subject matter of the proceeding as to extraneous surveulance regainments that publication data and page number of which petitioner wishes to intervena.

are not contained in the STS.

- s. Operetion of the facuity in accordance this Federal Register notice. Written -

Any person who has filed a petition for.

y' leave to intervene or who has been with the proposed amendment would not comments may also be delivered to ~

p I

u

,,,.._,,__,,gg,,,,

G 5-

~....~.,-

..m

..,,o

l' i,.

39338 Fed ^'ral Register / Vol,55 No.187 / Wednesday, September 26, 1990 / Nstlose.

3 I

admitted as a party may amend the Normally, the Commission will not the Gelman Building,2120 L Street NW.,

issue the amendments until the Washington, DC 20555 and at the Local

.?

betition without requesting leave of the l

ard up to fifteen (15) days prior to the expiration of the 30. day notice period.

Public Document Room located at first prehearing conference scheduled in However, should circumstances change Environmental and Urban Affairs the proceeding. but such an amended during the notice period such that failure Library, Florida Intemational petition must satisfy the specificity to act in a timely way would result, for University, Miami, Florida 33199.

requirements described above, example,in derating or shutdown of the Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to facility, the Commission may issue the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day the first prehearing conference license amendments before the of September teso.

?

scheduled is the proceeding, a petitioner expiration of the 30. day nouce period.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commlaston.

I shall file a supplement to the petition to provided that its final determination is Gordos s. Edison, Sr.,

intervene which must include a list of that the amendments involve no -

s pg,,%,,,,, p,j,,, pj,,,,,,,, p.,,

the contentions which are sought to be significant hazarde consideration.The gj,j,j,,,f a,,,,,, p,,j,,,,_yff, offj,,,f 7

litigated in the matter. Each contention final determination will consider all NuclearAeoctorRegulation.

must consist of a specific statement of public and State comments received.

l theissue oflaw or fact to be raised or Should the Commission take this actiog (FR Doc. so-2270s Filed 9-26-04 448 am) l controverted. in addition, the petitioner it will publish a notice of issuance and aa necaseress.com shall provide a brief explanation of the provide for opportunity for a hearing e:

bases of the contention and a concise after issuance. The fiammission expects statement of the alleged facts or expert that the need to take this action wiu

^3 opinion which support the contention occur very infrequendy.

ID'*k't ME and on which the petitioner intends to A request for a hearing or a petition rely in proving the contention at the for leave to intervene must be filed with ' -Washington Public Power Supply hearing.The petitioner must also the Secretary of the Commissl6n, U.S.

System; Withdrawal of Amendment to -

1' provide references to those specific Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Facility Operating Lloonee sources and documents of which the Washington, DC 20585, Attention:

petitioner is aware and on which b Docketing and Services Branch, or may The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory petitioner intends to rely to establish be delivered to the Commission's Public -

those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner Document Room, the Gelman Building, Commission (the Commission)has must provide sufficient information to -

2120 L Stnet, NW., Washington, DC, by granted a request by the Washington -

show that a genuine dispute exists with the above date.Whom petitions are Public Power Supply System (WPPSS)

,=

the applicant on a materialissue oflaw filed during the last ten (10)d that thedays of the (b licensee) to withdrew its April 18, i4 or fact. Contentions shall be limited to notice period,it is requeste 1990 application for an amendment to i.

matters within the scope of the peutioner promptly soinform the Facility Operating Elcense No. NPF-21,

{

amendment under consideration.h Commission by a toll. free telephone call issued to the licensee for operation of -

contention must be one which,if proven, to Westem Union at 1-(800) 325-8000 (in,the WPPSS Nuclear Project No.1, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A 342-8700).The Western located in Benton County, Washington.

Missouri 1-(800) hould be given petitioner who fails to file such a Union operator s

- Notice of Consideration ofIssuance of supplement which satisfies these Datagram Identifloation Number 3737 this amendment was published in the:

requirements with respect to at least one and the following message addressed to ' ' Federal Register on May 30,1990 (55 FR contention will not be permitted to Herbert N. Berkow: (petitioner's name -

21982), '

participate as a party -

and telephone number),(date petition

%e purpose of b licensee's I.

Those permitted to intervene become was mailed),(plant name), and

{

parties to the proceeding subject to any (publication date and page number of amendment aquest was to mvise e limitations in the order granting leave to this Federal Registernotice). A co' of _ Technical Specifications (TS) to remove l

intervene, and have the opportunity to the petition should also be sent to t e.

the nquirements of 3.0.4 from the I

participate fully in the conduct of tne Office of the General Counsel, U.S.

specifications related to accident hearing including the opportunity to Nuclear Regulatory Commission, monitoring instrumentab,on.

present evidence and cross. examine Washington, DC 20555, and to Harold F.

Subsequently, the licensee informed -

Reis. Esquire, Newman and Holtzer, the staff that the amendment is no -

witnesses.

If a hearing is requested, the P.C 1815 L Street, NW., Washington, >

longer requested.Therefore, the Commission willmake a final DC 20036, attorney for the licennes, amendment application is considered to determination on the issue of no Nontimely fill: qts o(petitions for leave. be withdrawn by the licensee.

significant hazards consideration, %e.

to intervene, amended petitions,.

For further details with respect to this final determination will serve to decide supplemental petitions and/or requests -

action, see (1)The ' application for when b hearing is held.

for hearing willnot be entertelned amendment dated Aprills,1990, and (2).

If the final determination is that the absent a determination by the

• request for amendment involves no -

Commission, the presiding officer or the the staff's letter da.ted September 5' 1990m significant hazards consideration, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that

. Wee documents'are av' llable for a

Commission mayleeue the amendments the petition and/or request should be.

and make it effective, notwithstanding

. granted based upon a balancing of the public inspection at the, Commission's the request for a hearing. Any hearing factors specified in to CPR Public Document Room, the Gelman held would take place after issuance of 2.714(A)(1)(i)-(v) and 3.714(d).'

Building,2120 L Street, NW., ;

the amendments.

For further details'with respect to this. Washington, DC and at the Richland '

l

- If a final determination is that the action, see the application for Public Library,955 Northgate Street,.

amendments involve a significant '

amendments dated July 2,1990, as Richland, Washington 99382.

-hasards consideration, any hearing held supplemented September e,1990, which --

j would take place before the issuance of - is available for public inspection at the -

Deted at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day i

any amendment.

Commission's Public Document Room,:

of September,teso.-

1

.