ML20064K503
| ML20064K503 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1994 |
| From: | Stone J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20064K507 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9403230139 | |
| Download: ML20064K503 (8) | |
Text
1 l
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-354 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATIft{. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission).is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-57 issued to Public Service Electric and Gas Company (the licensee) for operation of the Hope Creek Generating Station located in Salem County, New Jersey.
The proposed amendment would add a new section, 3/4.10.8, " Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing," and the Bases. The new section would allow Hope Creek to remain in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 with reactor coolant temperatures up to 212 F to facilitate inservice leak and hydrostatic testing.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment 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 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. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee 9403230139 94031o PDR ADOCK 05000354 P
pon
)
- has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
1.
Will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes are requested to allow inservice leak and hydrostatic testing with the reactor in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 and the average reactor coolant temperature up to 212*F.
The change to allow inservice leak and hydrostatic testing in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 will not increase the probability or the consequences of an accident.
The probability of a leak in the reactor coolant pressure boundary during inservice leak and hydrostatic testing is not increased by considering the reactor in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4.
The hydrostatic or inservice leak test is performed water solid or near water solid, all rods in, and temperatures s 212*F. The stored energy in the reactor core will be very low and the potential for failed fuel and a subsequent increase in coolant activity above Technical Specification limits are minimal.
In addition, secondary containment will be operable and capable of handling airborne radioactivity from leaks that could occur during the performance of hydrostatic or inservice leak testing.
Requiring secondary containment to be operable will conservatively ensure that potential airborne radiation from leaks will be filtered through the Filtration, Recirculation and Ventilation System (FRVS), thereby limiting radiation releases to the environment.
Therefore, the changes will not significantly increase the consequences of an accident.
In the event of a large primary system leak, the reactor vessel would rapidly depressurize, allowing the low pressure ECCS subsystems to operate. The capability of the subsystems that are required for OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 would be adequate to keep the core flooded under this condition.
Small system leaks would be detected by leakage inspections before significant inventory loss occurred. This is an integral part of the hydrostatic testing program. Therefore, this change will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2.
Will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Allowing the reactor to be considered in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 during inservice leak or hydrostatic testing, with reactor coolant temperature up to 212*F, essentially provides an exception to OPERATIONAL CONDITION 3 requirements, including operability of primary containment and the full complement of redundant Emergency Core Cooling Systems.
The hydrostatic or inservice leak test is performed water solid, or near water solid, all rods in, and
i temperatures s 212*F.
The stored energy in the reactor core will be very low and the potential for failed fuel and a subsequent increase in coolant activity above Technical Specification limits are minimal.
In addition, secondary containment will be operable and capable of handling airborne radioactivity or leaks that could occur.
The inservice leak or hydrostatic test conditions remain unchanged.
The potential for a system leak remains unchanged since the reactor coolant system is designed for temperatures exceeding 500*F with i
similar pressures. There are no alterations of any plant systems that cope with the spectrum of accidents.
The only difference is that a different subset of systems would be utilized for accident mitigation from those of OPERATIONAL CONDITION 3.
Therefore,.this will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3.
Will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed changes allow inservice leak and hydrostatic testing to be performed with reactor coolant temperature up to 212*F and the reactor in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4.
Since the reactor vessel head will be in place, secondary containment integrity will be maintained and all systems required in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 will be operable in accordance with the Technical Specifications, the proposed changes will not have any significant impact on any design bases accident or
+
safety limit. The hydrostatic or inservice leak testing is performed water solid, or near water solid, all rods in, and temperatures 1 1
212*F. The stored energy in the core is very low and the potential
~
for failed fuel and a subsequent increase in coolant activity would be minimal.
The RPV would rapidly depressurize in the event of a large primary system leak and the low pressure injection systems normally operable in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 would be adequate to keep the core flooded. This would ensure-that the fuel would not exceed the 2200*F peak clad temperature limit.
Moreover. requiring secondary containment, including isolation capability, to be operable will assure that potential airborne radiation can be filtered.through the FRVS. This will assure that doses remain well within the limits of 10CFR100 guidelines. Small system leaks would be detected by inspection Nfore significant inventory loss has occurred.
Therefore, this special test exception will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, 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 sequest involves no significant hazards consideration.
4-The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination.
Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
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 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 and provide for opportunity for a hearing aftc* issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments 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 Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice.
Written comments may also be delivered to Room P-223, Phillips Building, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L St eet, NW., Washington, DC 20555.
The filing of requests for hearing and peti ions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
a w
,----e 3
iy-
-r-----r-7-wpe-,-
g
- n
, By April 15, 1994
, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene.
Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's " Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555 and at the local public document room located at Pennsville Public Library,190 S. Broadway, Pennsville, New Jersey 08070.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the 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 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) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made 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 explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the 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 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.
Contentions 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.
-n.
O
_7_
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.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.
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.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before 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 Charles L. Miller:
petitioner's'name and telephone number, date petition was mailed, plant name,
, i 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.
4 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to M. J. Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston and Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005-3502, 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 bat,ed upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CfR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 4, 1994, 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 Pennsville Public Library,190 S. Broadway, Pennsville, New Jersey 08070.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March 1994.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
&bc James C. Stone, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
.