ML20073A292
| ML20073A292 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1994 |
| From: | Vissing G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20073A294 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9409200197 | |
| Download: ML20073A292 (9) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:4 1 4 L 4 .++ar4aa Aa <.6i-t-6 44 5, es H d 4 7590.i UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY DOCKET NO.-50-423 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS I CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING i The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-49, issued .to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNEC0/the licensee), for operation of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3, located in New London County, Connecticut. The proposed amendment would revise the Technical Specifications (TS) to-modify surveillance requirements by increasing the acceptance criterion.for -l the closure of the main steam isolation valves (MSIVs) from 5 seconds to 10 seconds. The proposed change would permit Millstone Unit 3 to resume plant operation. To resume-plant operations Hillstone Unit 3-must' meet the ' operability requirements of the Technical. Specifications for the MSIVs. On . September 8,1994, during monthly testing of the "C" MSIV, it was determined that the MSIV was inoperable because its closure time was determined to be greater than 5 seconds.. Subsequent efforts to meet the required closure time ~ t have been unsuccessful. i i I l 9409200197 940913 DR ADOCK O 3 o
3
- l 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.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be' granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must; determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the ' Commission's. regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the' l 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 l kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a-significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the: licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no. 1 significant hazards consideration (SHC), which.is presented below: ...The proposed change does not. involve an SHC because the change would not: '1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of' an accident previouslyl analyzed. NNECO's proposal to modify Surveillance Requirement 4.7.1.5.1 of the. l ' Millstone Unit No. 3. Technical Specifications-does not' involve-a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an - accident previously analyzed. The increase in the MSIV stroke time from 5' seconds to 10 seconds has no adverse impact on the FSAR [ Final' Safety Analysis Report) analyses for the feedwater line break and the main steam line break. The applicable acceptance criteria (e.g., DNBR [ departure from_- q nucleate boiling ratio] and-pressure) for both 3-loop and 4-loop l operation continue to be met with an increase in the MSIV closure time from 5 to 10 seconds. No other accident analyses discussed:in Chapter 15 of.the FSAR are affected by the proposed increase in'the .MSIV closure time. i 1 1
A4, .w. N -e F d,WEh
- W.,,-
4 -A -A 5 4
- pp..Am+J+-w=W-,-W A
ega b .s ; .j 3-j Additionally, evaluations have determined that the proposal does not. affect the environmental qualification program for either the main steam valve building or the containment, does not impact the design-basis accident radiological consequence calculations, does not negatively impact fluid transient evaluations, has a negligible impact on the long term cooling capacity of the steam generators,. and does not change pipe rupture mechanistic effects. 1 2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from- ) any previously analyzed. The proposed change does not introduce any new failure modes. It-l simply modifies an acceptance criterion for a surveillance requirement. As such, increasing the MSIV~ stroke time from.5 seconds to 10 seconds affects only the FSAR analyses for the feedwater line break and the main steam line break. No other accident analyses discussed in Chapter 15 of the FSAR are affected by the proposed increase in the MSIV closure time. The applicable i acceptance criteria (e.g., DNBR and pressure) for both 3-loop and 4-loop operation continue to be met with an increase in the MSIV closure time from 5 to 10 seconds. Additionally, evaluations have determined that the proposal does not affect the environmental qualification program for either.the main 1 steam valve building or the containment, does not impact the design basis accident radiological consequence calculations, does not negatively impact fluid transient eval ~uations, has a negligible impact on the long term cooling capacity of the steam generators, and does not change pipe rupture mechanistic effects. j I Thus, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of. accident from any previously ~ analyzed. 3. Involve a significant reduction in the margin of ' safety. The. increase in the MSIV stroke time from 5. seconds to 10 seconds has no adverse impact on the FSAR analyses for the feedwater line l break and the main steam line break. The applicable acceptance-criteria (e.g., DNBR and pressure) for both 3-loop and 4-loop. operation continue to be met with an increase in the MSIV closure time from 5 to 10 seconds. No other accident analyses discussed in Chapter 15 of the FSAR are affected by the. proposed increase.in the - MSIV closure time. Additionally, the proposed change does not 1 impact the consequences of an accident previously analyzed. j Based on the above, there is no significant reduction in the margin? of safety. ~ i a i ~f ~
y _4_ 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 t amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 15 days after the date of { publication of this notice.will be considered in making any final determination. 7 Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 15-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 l Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 15-day notice period, provided that its final determination -is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL ~ REGISTER a a notice of 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 L Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications L Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,- Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page number'of. j this FEDERAL' REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room-6D22, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville Maryland, from n
~ 4 ,l 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 Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions'for leave to -i intervene is discussed below. j By October 19, 1994 , the licensee may file a request for a I Il 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 I file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to' intervene. .l Requests for a hearing and a petition 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, NW., Washington, i DC 20555 and at the local public document room located at. the Learning Resource Center, Three Rivers Comunity-Technical College, Thames Valley Campus, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich Connecticut 06360. If a_ request for a hearing or petitir for leave.to intervene is filed by the above date, the - Comission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing ' Board, designated by the Comission 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 Bo'ard will issue a notice of hearing or an_ l appropriate order. a ~ l +
o 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 l proceeding. The petition should specifically-explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the-following o factors: (1) the nature of the petitioner's right-under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's q 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 . i 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; o 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 l 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 c q 1
~. + the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. l The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources andz ' documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion.. Petitioner l must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists l 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 l 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. 1 i Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject 3 to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have.the j opportunity to participate 1 fully in the. conduct of the hearing, including j the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses. 'If the amendment is issued before the expiration _of the 30-day hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no. j significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is requested, the final ~ ] determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. l 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, notwithnanding the. request for a-. i 1 heari_ng. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of.the' i ] amendment. l I i -{ i --_ _ _ _, _ _ _ _______i__i__i__
4 w a + -.,u a ._.6 4.a a w - .(# l 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 la filed with the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Comission'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 a period, it is request.ed that the petitioner promptly so inform the l Comission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800).248. 5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Wostern Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following message addressed to John F. Stolz: petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition was mailed, plant name, and publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. A copy of the petition should also' be sent to' the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Gerald Garfield, Esquire, Day, Berry & Howard, City Place, a Hartford, Connecticut 06103-3499, 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 Comission, the presiding officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or j request should be granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d). j i l
_g. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated September 9,1994, which is available for public. inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and-at the local public document i room, located at the Learning Resource Center, Three Rivers Community-Technical College, Thames Valley Campus, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich,. i Connecticut 06360. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of September.1994. FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i y Guy S. Vissing, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-4 Division of Reactor Projects -I/II ' Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation o 1 f t r y s I i i ? t ..w e 4 s -+e e e a}}