ML20101B445
| ML20101B445 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 05/29/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101B443 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9206040069 | |
| Download: ML20101B445 (14) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _ - - - - _ _ _ - _
matog
['
UNITED STATES i
.i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
WASHINoTON, DA 20%5
/
s....
SAFETY EVALUATIO!LBY THE OFF1(E OF NUCLEAR REACT 2BEBLATION SUPPORTING AMENDHENT NO.10 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-85 PUBLIC if.RVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SEABROOK STATION UNIT NO._1 DOCKET NO. 50-443 1.0 JNTRODUCTLQ!{
By letter dated November 13,-1990, as supplemented by letters dated January 15, 1991, January 22, 1991. April 9, 1991, June 12, 1991, September-16, 1991, December 13, 1991, January 22, 1992, Jtnuary 30, 1992, and February 14,1992, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) submitted a request for an amendment to the Facility Operating License for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1.
In addition, two letters dated May 13, 1992 were received from Northeast Utilities providing information-requested by NRC.
The proposed amendment involves a change in the Seabrook Station managing agent from New Hampshire Yankee (NHY) Division of PSNH to North Atla. tic Energy Service Company (NAESCO), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Northeast Utilities (NU).
The PSNH portion of ownership of Seabrook (35.6%) will be transferred to another wholly-owned subsidiary (NAEC) of NU and a separate license arsndment has been proposed to accomplish the owners, hip transfer. ~
.The April 9, 1991, June 12, 1991, September 16, 1991, December 13, 1991, January 22, 1992, January 30, 1992, and February 14, 1992, letters and the May 13, 1992, letters from NU provided clarifying information that did not change the proposed rction or the -initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 DISCUSSION Seabrook is a nuclear powered electric generating facility which has been constructed and is being operated on behalf of the licensees, a group of investor-owned and municipal utilities, pursuant to an Agreement for Joint Ownership, Construction and Operation of New Hampshire Nuclear Units,-dated May 1, 1973, as amended (the " Joint Ownership Agreement") and certain permits and licenses heretofore issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
In accordance with the Joint Ownership-Agreement, PSNH, an' electric utility organized and operating under the laws of New Hhmpshire, has acted as lead participant and Managing Agent for all the licensees, with responsibility for management,' operation and-maintenance-of Seabrook, which position h u.been
. recognized in-the Operating License as noted above.
Since 1984, PSNH has exercised this authority through its New Hampshire Yankee Division (NHY).
f$[0$00$
b P
. On January 28, 1988, PSNH filed a voluntary petition with the United States Bankruptcy Court, District of New Hampshire (the " Bankruptcy Court") for protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. After prolonged proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court, on December 28, 1989, approved the Third Amended Plan of Reorganization (the " Amended Plan"). On April 20, 1990, the Bankruptcy Court confirmed thh Amended Plan and ordered its implementation.
The Amended Plan involves a two step process by which NU subsidiaries ultimately acquire PSNH's business, after receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals (including NRC approval):
the generation and distribution business of PSNH going to one subsidiary of NU; PSNH's ownership interest in the Seabrook facility going to NAEC, another subsidiary of NU; and the Seabrook operational responsibility, currently exercised by NHY, being transferred to NAESCO, a third subsid'.i, f HU ASNH stated that, as a reis At Gf M:
ionged bankruptcy proceedings which treceded confirmation c' M.c In : 6d ' ut, and the on-going regulatory proceedings necessary to t y t. at the Au nded Plan, there has been some uncertainty on the part of Seatecok personnel as to their future role.
Therefore, NU has stated that in the interest of maintaining the stability of the operating atmosphere at Se m cok and removing any oistractions which may be created by the pending regulatory proceedings, the licensees agreed that a prompt transfer of operational control of Seabrook to NAESCO, with minimal impact on current operations, would be in the best interest of the Seabrook project. They have represented that not only would such transfer provide the benefits described above, but it would also constitute a tangible step toward the esolution of the financial and business uncertainties t;.roughout New Hampshire which have been created by the bankruptcy filing or PSNH.
The Amended Plan provides that promptly after NRC approval of this arplication and issuance of the requested operating license amendment and receipt of all other necessary regulatory approvals, NAESCO will succeed the NHY division of PSNH as managing agent and become responsible for the management, operation and maintenance of Seabrook. These necessary approvals include New Hampshire Public utilities Commission (PUC) approval of the issuance of common stock by NAESCO as a New Hamp: ire corporation and utility, approval by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, of NU's acquisition of NAESCO stock, the federal Energy Regulatory Commission's approval of the merger of NU and PSNH, and HRC approval of this application by issuance of an operating license amendment.
Other regulatory approvals have been given except for that of the SEC which is awaiting NRC action on the license transfer applications.
. On July 19, 1990, t.he Joint Owners entered into an agreement which appoints, subject to NRC app oval, NAESCO to be the managing ageht and operator of Srabrook as of the " Time of Effectiveness", seu forth their basic understandings on this subject and outlines the provisions to be contained in a subsequent management contract between the Joint Owners and NAESCO, as well as possible changes in the Joint Ownership Agreement.
Until the Time of Effectiveness, PSNH octing through NHY, will continue to be responsible for the management, operation and maintenance of Seabrook.
The July 19, 1990 Agreement provides that NAESCO will become Managing Agent in accordance with Paragraph 36.2 of the Joint Ownership Agreement.
It specifically grants to NAESCO, subject to prior receipt of favorable action by the NRC on this amendment proposal, all of the responsibility for day-te-day management, operation and maintenance of Seabrook which the Joint Ownership Agreement and Operating License currently assign to PSNH in its role as agent and representative of the Joint Owners (licensees).
Thus, on and after the Time of Effectiveness, HAESCO, as agent for the Licensees, will be responsible for:
managing, operating and maintaining deabrook; selecting, employing,trainingandmaintainingsufficient
- personne, to staff Seabrock in accordance with NRC license and regulatory requirements, and providing or causing to be provided any support services for such operations; 31anning for nuclear fuel utilization at Seabrook and procuring on e
)ehalf of the Joint Owners the requisite r.uclear fuel, including arranging for all stages of uranium processing, fuel design and fabrication and eventual storage, transportation, disposition and/or reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel and the disposition of or use of reprocessed material; purchasing and maintaining on behalf of the Joint Owners, a
apprcpriate levels of inventories of materials, supplies and spare parts required for the operation and maintenance of Seabrook; after consult tion with the Seabrook Executive Committee to the extent required by the July 19, 1990 Agreement, selecting and retaining consultants and contractors to assist in the performance 5
of NAESCO's responsibilities;
'The Mime of Effectiveness" is defined in the July 19, 1990 Agreement as 11:59 P.M. on the last day of the calendar month in which the NRC amendment to the Operating License designating NAESCO as the entity qualified to operate wabrook becomes effective, and all other necessary federal, state and local regulatory, judicial and other approvals have become effective with respect to such designation.
~
- -=...
4 reporting to the Seabrook Executive Committee and Joint Owners on Seabrook operations and finances (including insurance); and taking all other actions necessary in order to keep the Operating License and other necessary regulatory permits in full force and effect.
The licensees contemplate that this transition will be initially acconiplished by transferring to NAESCO as of the Time of Effectiveness the existing staff of NHY and all existing authority to administer contracts with respect to Seabrook.
This will achieve continuity in the management of Seabrook by allowing NAESCO to initially assume the role of operator of Seabrook with the same staff and contractor support resources that the NRC has previously evaluatid and approved in connection with the technical qualifications of PSNH, including the engineering and technical resources supplied under contract by Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC).
NU has represented that this will assure Seabrook of the continuing availability of technical expertise for its operation.
NAESCO, in the exercise of its management
' responsibility and discretion, will thereafter have the flexibility of determining how those existing resources can best be integrated with the other resources available to NAESCO, including those from the NU system, in order to carry out its responsibilities with respect to the Operating License.
3.0 EVALVATIQlf The staff, in making its evaluation, has applied the criteria and review areas required by 10 CFR 50.80 " Transfer of Licenses" as arnropriate.
The transfer of operation of the facility from the NHY division of PSNH to NAESCO simplified the review in that the NHY personnel currently acting in all areas as nuclear operations personnel will transfer to NAESCO.
&Lugeme,1t and Technical Qualifications Evaluation of the management and technical qualifications was conducted in accordance with the criteria set forth in NUREG-0800, " Standard Review Plan" (SRP) Section 13.1.1, " Management and Technical Support Organization," and Section 13.1.2-13.1.3, "Operat ing Organization."
In a letter dated April 9,1991, the licensee stated that a change in the Seabrook Station managing agent will not result in changes to the station's technical support organization. The change in station managing agent will establish relationships with NU and Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC) via the NU subsidiary NAESCO allowing Seabrook to draw upon the experience and l
expertiso of those organizations. The 1"ensee has stated that all NHY employees ~111 become NAESCO employees an9 that in the long-term (1992-1996) the number of employees is expected to remain close to current levels.
Additionally, the licensee has committed that NAESCO will have complete and ultimate responsibility for day-to-day operation of the Seabrook Station.
Therefore, based on current plant structure, the staff concludes that the
c proposed managing agent, NAESCO, has an acce) table organization and adequate resources to provide technical support for tie operation of Seabrook Station under both normal and off-normal conditions.
In a letter from PSNH dated April 9, 1991, fi Interre'lationships," describes the basic cor)gure 1-A, ' Corporate orate relationships between Seabrook and parties providing support for tie operation of the station.
The licensee states that service agreements will govern the services provided to NAESCO by NU, NU subsidiaries, YAEC, and PSNH.
These agreements will be at NAESCO's request and discretion and will be directed and controlled by NAESCO.
Thereforo, the staff concludes that the proposed managing agent. NAESCO, has an acceptable methodology for providing integrated support for the operation of Seabrook Station, in the letter dated April 9, 1991. PSNH has described the lines of authority, comunication, and control that will exist between North Atlantic Energy Services Compan_v, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, and the operational units of-Northeast Utilities related to management, operation, and technical support for the operation of Seabrook Station. The terms of the Managing Agent Operating Agreement for Seabrook described in the April 1991 letter provide NAESCO with complete responsibility for management and operation of Seabrook Station.
Upon NRC approval of the transfer to NAESCO of the authority.to operate Seabrook, this subsidiary of NU would be in charge of the day-to-day operations at Seabrook subject to the oversight provided by the Seabrook Joint Owners (J0) through committees established by these_ agreements among the co-owners of Seabrook.
The Operator responsibility for day-to-day manag(NAESCO) is to have complete and ultimate ement of Seabrook and the obligation to assure compliance with Nr.C requirements. The Operator is to select, employ and train the Seabrook staff, plan for and procure nuclear fuel for use at Seabrook, purchase Seabrook's materials and supplies and take other actions to -
operate Seabrook. NAESCO is also to initiate requests for service agreements for operational and technical support with other interested parties and to direct and control the activities governed by those agreements... However, the selection of the Seabrook senior site official, the incentive compensation =
program and significant governmental and public affairs policies are subject to the approval, by a majority vote on an ownership share basis, of all the Seabrook owners.
An Executive Comittee of the JO has ' general oversight responsibility for the policymaking, planning, financial, legal, material litigation and significant operational decisions related to SeabrooK which do ntt involve the day-to-day operations of the plant." The Executive Comittee also has budgetary functions. The Executive Comcittee has 5 members, only one of whom can be employed by NU-companies. This Executive Committee selects an Oversight Comittee of no more than five persons which "shall be comprised of-individuals with substantial experience in the operation and oversight of
' comercial nuclear power f acilities." This Oversight Comittee reports to the group of JO members who are not affiliated with the Operator (NAESCO), i.e.
all Seabrook owners except NAEC and Connecticut Power and Light.
NAESCO is to meet with the Executive Comittee of the JO at least quarterly and report on operations at Seabrook including the plant's operations, shutdowns, capital expenditure, regulatory violations, enforcement actions, and significant industry concerns.
In addition, NAESCO is to distribute in a timely manner SALP and INP0 reports, more serious NRC violation reports, etc.,
to the JD Executive Comittee.
On April 3,1992, the Comission was briefed in closed session by the Office of Investigations (01) on the status of their investigations into allegations of intimidation and harassment at NU, and by the NRC Special Review Group (SRG) about the findings of their review of documentation regarding the reporting of employee conceen at NV and Hillstone. After hearing these briefings and reviewing the SRG report, the staff determined it would consider these findings in its review of the license amendment application to transfer managing authority to NAESCO.
As a result of its review, the SRG concluded 'that an atmosphere that encouraged the reporting of quality deficiencies or safety concerns (at NU's Millstone facility) was lacking in many respects," and that there were "significant weaknesses with respect to the process for the reporting of safety concerns." However, the SRG also concluded that this atmosphere "did not have an overall ' chilling effect' on the willingness of employees to report concerns.' The problems were perceived by the employees at Millstone to be caused by management not acknowledging their own responsibility and an overemphasis on t.ost containment.
Other findings o.~ the SRG related to internal management problems at Hillstone.
in its two years of operation, the current Seabrook organization has not t
l experienced more than isolated instances involving allegations of harassment and intimidation, employee reporting problems or adverse impacts attributable to cost-containment measures; overall, the licensee has demonstrated good performance from a safety standpoint.
Further, notwithstanding the proposed l
changes in ownership and management, the existing site operating staff and management will be maintained. The proposed changes do, however, entail a substantial change in corporate management.
For this reason, adequate oversight of facility performance during the transition period will be important.
The substantial oversight of NAESCO's operation of the Seabrook facility by owners not affiliated with NU provides important assurance that the transition of operation of the Seabrook facility from New Hampshire Yankee Division of PSNH to the NAESCO subsidiary of NU will not have an adverse etfect on safety of operation of Seabrook.
To monitor this transition, NRC has added certain license conditions applicable for a period of three years calling for NRC to be informed of particular issues.
Specifically, NRC will require that it be informed of:
any change in the senior site official; reports to the Joint
0 9.
Owners from the Oversight Comittee, the licensee, or contractors or consultants, including those that relate to employee discrimination or indications of conditions potentially adverse to safety (such reports will provide NRC with an early opportunity to assure that plant operations do not in fact become adversely affected); any substantive programatic or procedural change to the employee concerns program; any allegation of employei harassment, intimidation or discrimination; any change in the incentive compensation programs which could have potentially adverse effects on safety; and any changes to the annual operating and maintenance budget and to the capital expenditure budget.
The staff will further require that any oversight reports will be followed by a report from the Operator (NAESCO) to NRC assessing the oversight report and indicating planned corrective action.
The Operator s report will be reviewed and assessed by the Joint Owners which will also report to NRC its correc dve actions and disposition of the Operator's report.
Further, to assure tiat NRC is aware of significant changes in the oversight functions, NRC will require that for a limited time NRC be informed of changes to certain sections of the agreements among the owners relating to the oversight function of the Executive Comittee and the Oversight Comittee.
These sections are:
Sections 3.c, 7.a. 7.e 8, 10, 11 and 16.b as described in Appendix 1 of the Settlemunt Agreement dated as of July 19, 1990 between Northeast Utilities Service Company and New England Power Company.
In evaluating the request to transfer the operations management and partial ownership of Seabrook to NU, the staff also considered the recent operational performance of NU's Hillstone Station.
The staff has been concerned with 'he decline in performance at the Hillstone station over the past several years.
NRC concerns in the areas of procedure adherence, attention to detail, and the resolution of employee concerns were highlighted in the SALP report issued in March 1991 and again in the SALP report issued in May, 1992.
During a May 11, 1992 open Comission meeting on the prnposed transfer, the NRC requested that NU management provide written comitments that adequate resources to ensure nuclear safety would be provided for the Seabrook Millstone and Haddam Neck Stations, including those resources necessar,y to fully implement planned improvements being developed in the NU Performance Enhancement Program (PEP).
On May 13, 1992, NU provided two letters containing comitments regarding the allocation of resources to the nuclear stations. The staff reviewed the NU letters and believes that they are responsive to NRC's request, and indicate that the resources to be applied to improving the safety performance at NU's Connecticut plants will not be reduced until the NRC staff is apprised on a timely basis, of those projected changes and the reasons for those changes.
The staff will use these budget plans in monitoring performance at the current NU facilities, including the development and implementation of the PEP.
Budget information for Seabrook will be used as a baseline in reviewing any changes to the annual budgets which are to be provided to the staff in accordance with the new license conditions, i
f The staff will continue monitoring operating practices, resource utilization, management and personnel staffing activities at Seabrook Station after NAESCO 1
assumes the responsibilities of managing agent.
Acceptance of this change in managing agent is based on the proposed managing agent, NAESCO, being technically qualified to operate the plant and having the necessary managerial and technical resources to provide assistance to the plant staff during normal and off-normal conditions, and in the event of an emergency.
Based on its review of information given in the request to amend the operating license for Seabrook Station Unit No. I and the response to the request for additional information, the staff has determined that:
(1)
The corporate and plant organizational structure and functions for operation and technical support of Seabrook Station are acceptable.
(2)
The organizational structure described in the amendment request provides for the integrated management of activities that support the operations of Seabrook Station.
(3)
The management controls, lines of authority, and channels of communication between the organizational units involved in the management, operation, and technical support for Seabrook Station are acceptable.
These findings support the staff's determination that the proposed managing agent NAESCO, will have the necessary managerial and technical resources to provide assistance to Seabrook Station staff during normal and off-normal l
conditions, including an emergency, as specified in Standard Review Plan (SRP)
Section 13.1.1 of NUREG-0800. Moreover, since all NHY employees will become NAESCO employees, the staff concludes that the operating organization is acceptable as specified in SRP Section 13.1.2-13.1.3.
Financial Considerations In its November 13, 1990, amendment proposal,' the licensee stated that this amendment proposal does not-in any way alter the status gun with respect to the licensees' ability-to obtain the funds necessary to cover all costs for i
the operation, construction, maintenance, repair, decontamination and decommissioning of Seabrook.
Each license
- remains-liable for such costs under-the Joint Ownership Agreement. NAESCO, as managing agent, will perform certain functions on behalf of the licensees.
Ihese costs will continue to be borne by the1 Joint Owners and NAESCO will be compensated by them for all expenses incurred.
y
~ ~,, -,, -...
c.m_._-,,-.m
,_..,,,-..~#,-.
m.
--,---.--,-,-,i._m....,b.m..-~m.,
....e.
s 9
Antitru11 Since NAESCO will not accuire any ownership interest in Seabrook or the energy provided by Seabrook, anc will have no role in the marketing of such energy, this proposed amendment raises no issue with respect to antitrust considerations.
Restricted Data The application for amendment does not contain any Restricted Data or other defense information, and PSNH has stated that it is not expected that any such information will become involved in the licensed activities.
However, PSNH has committed, and NAESCO agrees, that, should such information become involved, it will safeguard any such information and limit access to it until the Office of Personnal Management can investigate, report to the NRC, and NRC approve or disapprove access of individuals to Restricted Data.
The staff finds this to be acceptable and in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.37.
Offsite Power In its application for amendment, PSNH has stated there will be no change in the arrangements to provide offsite power to the plant as a result of the change in operational control requested by the application. 'The staff finds this to be acceptable.
Other Areas in other technical areas, such as emergency planning, training, quality assurance, security (including the exclusion areas and othern, the licensee has stated that NAESCO management will manage, oper)a,te and maintain Seabrook in accordance with the conditions and requirements established by the NRC with respect to Seabrook and with the same regard for public and personnel safety as heretofore exemplified by NHY.
PSNH has also made a commitment that, except for administrative changes to reflect the role of NAESCO, the commitments in the Seabrook Quality Assurance Program, the Seabrook Emergency Plan, Security Plan, and Training Program will be unaffected, and that this license amendment will not change any of the licensee's regulatory commitments to the NRC. The staff finds this to be acceptable.
License Conditions (a)
Administrative Changes Throughout the license, license conditions and other statements are proposed to be modified to reflect NAESCO as a new licensee and the operator / managing agent for all licensees.
These administrative changes, necessary to effect the transfer of operating authority, are acceptable.
N
I O
E
. (b)
Marketing of Energy A new licensa condition (2.1) relating to the marketing of energy will be included in the license.
This condition results from the NRC staff's request, dated December 26, 1990, for a commitment from the licensee that NAESCO would not participate in the marketing or brokering of energy.
Such a commitment was provided on January 15, 1991, in a supplement to the application.
The new license condition states:
NAESCO is prohibited from marketing or brokering power or energy from the plant.
In addition, all licensees other than NAESCO are responsible and accountable for the actions of their agent to the extent said agent's actions effect the marketing or brokering of power and energy from Seabrook Station, Unit 1.
(c)
Transfer of Managing Authority The new license conditions 2.C.t4)(a), (b), (c) and (d) are stated below.
(a) for a period of three years from the date of issuance of the NRC license amendment approving the transfer of management authority to NAESCO, the licensee shall inform the Director, NRR, at least 60 days in advance, of any change in the senior site official for the Seabrook facility, or in the principal duties of such official, unless such change is due to unforeseen circumstances, in such circumstances, the licensen shall inform the Director, NRR, of such change as soon as it can reasonably do so.
(b) for a period of three years from the date of issuance of the NRC license amendment approving the transfer of management authority to NAESCO, the Joint Owners shall provide to the Director, NRR, promptly any report of the Oversight Committee or any report of the Operator or of any contractor or consultant which has been provided to the Joint Owners relating to:
plant design, equipment or personnel performance or plant operations that could have potentially adverse effects on facility safety; any substantive programmatic or procedural changes to the employee concerns program; any allegation of employee harassment, intimidation or discrimination; changes to any compensation incentive program which could have potentially adverse effects on facility safety; and any changes to the annual operations and maintenance and capital expenditure budgets.
These reporting requirements are in addition to other requirements of NRC regulations.
(c)
The oversight reports in 2.C.(4)(b) shall be followed promptly by a report to the Di*ector, NRR by the Operator, reflecting the Operator's assessment of such report and proposed corrective action, if any.
Submission of the Operator's assessment and
?
proposed corrective action shall not delay submission of the report called for by license condition 2.C.(4)(b). A review and assessment of the Operator's report by the Joint Owners shall be provided to the Director, NRR, together with any corrective actions and disposition of the Operator's report.
(d)
For a period of three years from the date of issuance of the NRC license amendment approving the transfer of management authority to uAESCO, the licensee shall inform the Director, NRR, of any chs,qes to certain sections of the Joint Ownership Agreement and the Hanaging Agent Operating Agreement.
These sections are:
Sections 3.c, 7.a, 7.e, 8, 10, 11 and 16.b, as described in Appendix 1 of the Settlement agreement Dated as of July 19, 1990 Betweer' Northeast Utilities Service Company and New England Power Company.
4.0 FINAL NO SIGNIFICANT HA7ARDS CONSIDERATION The licensee's request for this amendment to the operating license for the Seabrook Station, including a proposed determination by the staff of no significant hazards consideration, was noticed in the Federal Reaisler on March 6, 1991 (56 FR 9384).
The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92(c) include three standards used by the NRC staff to arrive at a determination that a request for amendment involves no significant hazards considerations.
These regulations state that the Commission may make such a final determi-nation if operation of a facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or conse-quences 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.
In its submittal, the licensee has evaluated the proposed ch;nge in accordance with the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) and has determined that op; ration of the Seabrook Station in accordance with the proposed amendment would not:
a 1.
Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
The technical qualifications of NHY, the NU system companies and Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC) have already been approved by the NRC.
There will be no changes that would adversely affect the NRC's corclusions on the technical qualifications of the Seabrook management, operating or maintenance organizations as documented in the Seabrook Safety Evaluation Report as supplemented.
o
- Further, as a result of the proposed license amendment, there will be no physical changes to the Seabrook facility and all Limiting Conditions for Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings, and Safety Limits specified in the Technical Specifications will remain unchanged. Additionally, with the exception of revising the license to reflect the role of NAESCO, the commitments in the Seabrook Quality Assurance Program, and the Seabrook Emergency Plan, Security Plan, and Training Program will be unaffected.
Moreover, the license amendment will not result in any changes to NHY's regulatory commitments to the NRC.
2.
Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The Seabrook design and design bases will remain the same.
The current plant safety analyses will therefore remain complete and accurate in addressing the licensing basis events and in analyzing plant response and consequences.
The Limiting Conditions for Operation, Limiting Safety System Settings and Safety Limits for Seabrook are not affected by the proposed license amendmcnt.
With the exception of changes to reflect the role of NAESCO, plant procedures will be unaffected.
As such, the plant conditions for which the design basis accident analyses have been performed will remain valid. Therefore, the proposed licensa amendment cannot create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident than previously evaluated.
3.
Involve a reduction in a margin of safety.
Plant safety margins are established thorough Limiting Conditions for Operation, limiting Safety System Settings and Safety Limits specified in the Technical Specifications.
Since there will be no change to the physical design or operation of the plant, there will be no change to any of these margins.
Thus, the proposed license amendment will not involve a reduction in a margin of safety.
On April 1,1991, Seabrook Anti-Pollution League (SAPL) filed an intervention petition which contests the ownership transfer from PSNH to the North Atlantic 3
Energy Company (NAEC). That petition was dismissed because SAPL had not shown standing to intervene concerning the transfer of ownership since it did not show the alleged harm would abate if it were granted relief in regard to the ownership transfer amendment.
See Public Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Unit 1), CL1-91-14, 34 NRC 261, 267-68 (1991).
The SAPL petition raised the issue of possible NU intimidation and harassment of several employees at the Millstone Nuclear Power Plant for reporting possible
13 violations of regulations to the NRC.
The petition indicated that this management attitude could lead to an increase in the hazard of the operation of Seabrook, and that NU should not be permitted to become the licensed operator of Seabrook Station. An additional concern, that NU had insufficient finances to take over the Seabrcok operation safely, were presented by SAPL in a public meeting with the Comission on May 11, 1992.
Those statements have been treated as coments on the staff's )roposed no significant hazards determination for the license amendment 1erein.
The staff addressed the concerns of the petitioner in several reports to the Comission (SECY-92-099 dated April 20,1992, SECY-92-1:i6 dated April 29, 1992, and SECY-92-156A dated May 15,1992). The staff met with the Comission and with NU in a public meeting on May 11, 1992.
As a result of the staff's and the Comission's deliberations, the staff imposed special license conditions upon the Seabrook licensees.
The special license conditions were a condition of approval of this license amendment. Those licenso conditions require the licensees to inform the staff of particular issues.
Specifically, NRC will require that it be informed of:
any change in the senior site official; teports to the Joint Owners from the Oversight Comittee, the licensee, or contractors or consultants, including those that relate to employee discrimination or indications of conditions potentially adverse to safety (such reports will provide NRC with an early opportunity to assure that plant operations do not in fact become adversely affected any substantive programatic or procedural changes to the employee concern)s; program; any allegation of employee harassm intimidation or discrimination; any change in the incentive compensation programs which could have potentially adverse effects on safety; and any changes to the annual operating and maintenance budget and to the capital expenditure budget. The staff will further require that any oversight reports will be followed by a report frcm the Operator (NAESCO) to NRC assessing the oversight report and indicating alanned corrective action.
The Operator's report will be reviewed and assessed )y the Joint Owners which will also report to NRC its I
correcti're actions and disposition of the Operator's resort.
Further, to assure R
that NRC is aware of significant changes in the oversigit functions, NRC will require that for a limited time NRC be informed of changes to certain sections of the agreements among the owners relating to the oversight function of the Executive Comnittee and the Oversight Comittee.
In two letters dated May 13, 1992, NU comitted, at NRC request, to keep the NRC apprised on a timely basis of any significant changes in the 01M and capital budgets and projections for calendar years 1992-1995, including an explanation for such changes.
In addition, budget information was presented for prior years. NU assured the NRC that adequate financial resources would be provided for nuclear operations at Seabrook as well as at the Millstone and Haddam Neck facilities.
Furthermore, financial comitments were made to support a significant Performance Enhancement Program at the Millstone facility.
The NRC finds these comitments acceptable.
I
I For these reasons, and those given (above) by the licensee, the staff agrees with the licensee's determination, and therefore has made a final determination that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
5.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Hampshire and Massachusetts State officials were notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State officials had no comments.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
Pursuant to CFR 51.21, 51.32, and 51.35, an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact was published in the Federal Reaister on October 28, 1991 (56 FR 55512).
In this finding, the Commission determined that issuance of this amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
7.0
[LNCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the aroposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with tie Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be in'imical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
Richard Pelton Mary Ann Biamonte Gordon E. Edison Date:
May 29, 1992
...... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -.. -..