ML20082B807
| ML20082B807 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1995 |
| From: | William Reckley NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082B809 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9504060043 | |
| Download: ML20082B807 (10) | |
Text
_
I t
1 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COP 911SSION COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-374 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS M
. e4 ;
CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING g
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering
, m: i issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-18, issued to 4i Comonwealth Edison Company (the licensee), for operation of the LaSalle Oh 1
County Station, Unit 2, located in LaSalle County, Illinois.
"?M The proposed amendment would revise the safety / relief valve (SRV) safety t
s.
function lift setting allowable tolerance band from (-3% to +1%) to (-3% to tn,
+3%) and include as-left SRV lift setting tolerances of (-1% to +1%).
g.j Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will 3
aqq have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as. amended (the,
, ;:j
, s3 Act) and the Commission's regulations.
8 Section 50.91(a)(6) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
_/
! ?)
specifies that the Comission may, where exigent circumstances exist, allow
~),
a less than the 30 days for public coment. Exigent circumstances have been found to exist for this proposed amendment. On March 18, 1995, with LaSalle N
a Unit 2 in a shutdown condition for the current refueling outage, the licensee learned that two of the six SRVs tested had lift settings that were not within I
w the current tolerance band allowed by the technical specifications. This N.)
resulted in three additional SRVs being tested and two additional SRVs found up
- '^""" M3
-g
y l
a l
)
- to lift at pressures slightly outside the existing tolerance band. - The I
remaining nine SRVs are required to be tested based on the current technical specifications. This testing would involve a significant financial cost, the -
collection of approximately 11 person-rem of radiation exposure by plant workers, and a delay in the restart of Unit 2.
The history of the safety-relief valve testing at LaSalle is such that the licensee did not anticipate
~
the immediate need for an increased tolerance band. However, as part of a C'
longer range plan to reduce the number of SRVs and increase the allowable lift setting tolerances, the licensee had performed much of the analyses required
]
to justify the proposed amendment request. On March 27, 1995, tha licensee decided to expedite the SRV lift setting technical specification change for 4
LaSalle Unit 2.
The licensee completed the review and submitted the request q
on March 31, 1995. To avoid the radiation exposures and restart delays
'9 associated with testing the remaining nine SRVs, the proposed amendment would g
need to be issued before April 22, 1995, and therefore the request does not
.lf afford the normal 30-day comment period.
y Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under
}
exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment J
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the M
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),
.. ~ _ _ -
2 g;
the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
~
consideration. The staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis against the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c). The NRC staff's review is presented below.
1.
The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the Q3..
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
,g The probability of an accident previously evaluated will not increase as vy' a result of this change, because the only changes are the tolerances for the 4
SRV opening setpoints and the speed of the reactor core isolation cooling g
system (RCIC) turbine and pump. Changing the maximum allowable opening i
g setpoint for the SRVs does not cause any accident previously evaluated to occur, or degrade valve or system performance in any way so as to cause an accident to occur with an increased frequency.
In addition, the increased t<
speed of the RCIC turbine and pump are within the design limits of the system.-
f RCIC operability and failure probabilities are not impacted by this change.
g The consequences of an ASME overpressurization event are not 4
99 significantly increased and do not exceed the previously accepted licensing 91 criteria for this event.
GE has calculated the revised peak vessel pressure for LaSalle Station to be 1341 psig, which is well below the 1375 psig
,4' criterion of the ASME Code for upset conditions, referenced in Section 5.2.2, M
Overpressurization Protection, of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), and NUREG-0519 (Safety Evaluation Report related to the operation of LaSalle County Station, Units I and 2, March 1981), and Section 15.2-4, Closure of Main Steam Isolation Valves (BWR) of NUREG-0800 (Standard Review i
Plan).
, di i'
GE has also performed an analysis of the limiting anticipated transient without scram (ATWS) event, which is the main steam isolation valve (MSIV)
closure event. This analysis calculated the peak vessel pressure-to be 1457 psig, which is well below the 1500 psig criterion of the ASME Code for emergency conditions.
Per NUREG-0519, listed above, Section 5.4.1, and Technical Specification 4.7.3.b, the RCIC pump is required to develop flow greater than or equal to 600 gpm in the test flow path with a system head corresponding to reactor i
vessel operating pressure when steam is supplied to the turbine at 1000 +20, -80 psig.
Increasing the turbine and pump speed ensures these criteria will still be met and the consequences of an accident will not increase.
Therefore, there is not a significant increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2.
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The only physical changes are to increase the allowable tolerances for SRV opening setpoints and to increase the RCIC pump and turbine speeds. These changes do not result in any changed component interactions. The SRVs and RCIC will still provide the functions for which they were designed. Since all of the systems evaluated will continue to function as intended, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3.
The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
While the calculated peak vessel pressures for the ASME overpressurization event and the MSIV closure ATWS event are larger than that previously
. 3 calculated without the proposed setpoint tolerance increases, the new peak pressures remain far below the respective licensing acceptance limits associated with these events. These licensing acceptance limits have been previously evaluated as providing a sufficient margin of safety. For other accidents and transients, the increased setpoint tolerances have a negligible, if any, effect on the results, so the margin of safety is preserved.
Based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR
,y 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that a
^
the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
i 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.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until
[1 the expiration of the 15-day notice period. However, should circumstances
,d change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely way j
would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the 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 Comission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
s 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, L__.
Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTEP. notice. Written coments may also be delivered to Room 6D22, Two White Flint North,11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 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
~*
Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By May 8, 1995
, 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.
4 Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed p
in accordance with the Comission's " Rules of Practice for Domestic 34 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, 4
DC, and at the local public document room located at the Public Library of Illinois Valley Comunity College, Rural Route No.1, Oglesby, Illinois 61348.
4 a
If a request for a hearing or petition 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 Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
__.)
a 3 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 4
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 a 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 I
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
,f conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must a
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 i
)
l 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 1
under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a j
i 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 9 l opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including
.'4 the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
m i
If the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day hearing w
period, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no 4
significant hazards consideration.
If a hearing is requested, the final determination 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 immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a i
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
- A 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, 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-g 6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following message addressed to Robert A. Capra, Director, Project Directorate III-2: petitioner's name and telephone number, date o
petition was mailed, plant name, and publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, og DC 20555, and to Michael I. Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, One First 3
National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60690, attorney for the licensee.
q Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended
- g petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer f;
or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or 3
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).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 31, 1995, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, t
NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room, located at the
- l.
l; i.
'1 Public Library of Illinois Valley Comunity College, Rural, Rogte No.1, Oglesby, Illinois 61348.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this ' 4th day of April 1995.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION William D. Reckley, Proje nager
)
Project Directorate III-2
-l Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV 1
i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
'l
,y of.
- lx '
y 3
.