ML20079Q846
| ML20079Q846 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 01/10/1984 |
| From: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079Q850 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8402010386 | |
| Download: ML20079Q846 (8) | |
Text
.
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-2'63 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED N0 SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION D$ TERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-22, issued to Northern States Power Company (the licensee),.for operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant located in Wright County, Minnesota.
The amendment would revise the Technical Specifications to increase the time delay setpoints of the, Reactor Protection System (RPS) power monitoring system from 100 milliseconds to four seconds.
The amendment would allow an undervoltage, over voltage, or under frequency condition to exist for up to four seconds. The change does not affect RPS response time.
To support the amendment request, the licensee has submitted a letter from General Electric Company that states the conclusions reached from a study extending the elec-trical protection assembly time delays up to four seconds.
The licensee has determined that no adverse effects occur to the RPS as a result of this delay, and that the additional time would increase the sta-bility of the alternate RPS power source and would prevent premature trips from occurring during routine switching operations.
Other changes requested in the February 15, 1983 application will be noticed separately.
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.
8402010386 840110 DR ADOCK 0500026
7590-01
. 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 operttion of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant insease 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 tafety.
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of the standards for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists by providing certain examoles (48 FR 1487G). The example most similar to the amendment proposed by the licensee is one of the examples of amendment involving a significant hazards consideration:
"...(111) A significant relax-ation in limiting conditions for operation not accompanied by compensatory changes, conditions or actions that maintain a commensurate level of safety.
In its application for amendment, the licensee states that although the time delay is being increased from 100 milliseconds to 4 seconds, which could be considered a significant relaxation of a Limiting Condition for Operation, (LCO), the change is accompanied by conditions that maintain a commensurate level of safety. The increase from 100 milliseconds to 4 seconds in the time delay has been determined by the licensee to have no adverse effects on the safety function of the RPS. Rather, safety will be enhanced because the change will increase the stability of the alternate source supplying the RPS bus and will help alleviate unnecessary plant trips that result from normal switching operation.
7590-01 The change proposed by the licensee is similar to the example cited above in that,t,he change in the time delay can be considered a relaxation in a limiting condition for operation. However, the proposed change differs
+
significantly from the example in that the change is accompanied by conditions that result in an enhancement in safety.
Thus, the proposed change does not
+
involve the factors cited in the example which would result in a determination by the staff that a significant hazards consideration exists.
Therefore, for the reasons discussed above, the staff has made a proposed i
determination that the application for amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
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.
The Commission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing.
4 Comments should t,e addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear' Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attn: Docketing and i
Service Branch.
By February 17, 1984, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating L
license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding i
(
l and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written petition for leave to intervene.
Request for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance-with the Commission's " Rules i
of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
If a i
request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the 1
1 t
7590-01 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 52.714, 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 cetitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature' and exte'nt of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order wh,ich 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 I
filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party I
may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described l
above.
Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conferenct:
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, and the bases for each contention set forth 1
-,m
--.y-
7590-01
. with reasonable specificity.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration.
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.
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 determina-tion will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no i
significant hazards consideration', the Commission may issue the amendment and make it effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.
Any rearing held would take place after issuance of the amenament.
If the final determination is that the amendment involves a significant nazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expir-ation 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
7590-01 no.tignificant hazards consideration. The final determination will c*onsider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., by the above date. Where petitions are filed during tne last ten (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 (800) 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700).
The Western Union operator should be given 'Datagram Identification Number 3737 and the following message addressed to Domenic B. Vassallo:
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 Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, and to Gerald Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge,1800 M Street, N.
W., Washington, D.C.
20036, 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 Atomic
7590-01
. Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on the petition and/or request, that the petitioner has made a substantial showing of good cause for the
-granting of a late petition and/or request. That de:ermination will be based 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 which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Environmental Conservation Library, Minneapolis Public Library, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Dated at Bethesda, Marylana, this 10th day of January,1984.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Domenic B. Vassallo, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Licensing l
1