ML20128Q696
| ML20128Q696 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Calvert Cliffs |
| Issue date: | 10/06/1983 |
| From: | John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127A737 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-794 NUDOCS 8506040276 | |
| Download: ML20128Q696 (14) | |
Text
4-g W
pb fc //J/73 UNITED STA'TES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ffp f/? f6.c.cd' DOCKET NO. 50-317 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. OPR-53, issued to Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (the licensee), for operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No I located in Calvert County, Maryland.
The amendment would:
(1) provide changes to the Appendix A Technical Specifications (TS) to allow Cycle 7 operation, (2) revise the TS Limiting Conditions for Operation and Surveillance Requirements for the Auxiliary Feedwater System, (3) delete the Limiting Condi. tion for Operation and Sur-veillance Requirements for certain post-accident monitoring instruments, (4) change the TS for the indicating ranges of the remote shutdown monitoring instrumentation (5) change the surveillance requirements for Subchannels A-3 and 8-3 of the automatic actuation logic for the Containment Spray Actua-tion System, and (6) provide Limiting Conditions for Operation and Surveillance Requirements for the Containment Vent Isolation Valves (MOV-6900 and MOV-6901).
The above proposed changes to the TS are in accordance with the licensee's application dated August 22, 1983, as supplemented September 1,1983, Sep-tember 16, 1983, and two supplements dated September 20, 1983.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Co-Mssion's regulations.
The Comis for, has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Urder the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 8506040276 841108 PDR FOIA ADATD84-794 PDR
. ~. _ _
4 5
. accordance with the proposed-amendment would not~(1) involve a significant fis:rese 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.
The Connission has provided guidance concerning the appifcation of standards for conclusions regarding "no significant hazards considerations" by providing examples (48 FR 14870).
In this regard, the TS changes resulting from the reload analysis for Cycle 7 operation conform to example (iii) in 48 FR 14870 which states that no significant hazards considerations are expected to exist if operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment involves:
For a nuclear power reactor, a change resulting from a nuclear reactor core reloading, if no fuel assemblies significantly different from those found previously acceptable to the NRC for a previous core at the facility in question are involved.
This assumes that no signi-ficant changes are made to the ;cceptance criteria for the technical specifications, that the analytical methods used to demons.trate confonnance with the technical specifications and regulations are not significantly changed, and that NRC has previously found such methods acceptable.
Accordingly, on this basis, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the TS changes associated with Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 Cycle 7 operation involve no sig-nificant hazards considerations. The remaining proposed changes to the TS do not conform to any of the examples provided in 48 FR 14870; the basis for the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination is presented herein.
Changes in the TS, associated with the Auxiliary Feedwater System, are required to reflect modifications to this system. These system modifications include the addition of an fndependent auxiliary feedwater train with a motor-powered pump. A cross-connect is also provided between the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Auxiliary Feedwater Systems.
In addition, the pre-set injection valves will be replaced with flow modulating valves.
. In order to assure operability of the modified system, a period of post-startup testing will be required. During this period, the automatic start and flow modulating features of the auxiliary feedwater system may be in-operable. Accordingly, the licensee has requested a special test exception to be inserted in the TS to address startup testing of the auxiliary feedwater system.
With the automatic start and flow modulating features inoperable, the auxiliary feedwater system would consist of two, manually-started, steam driven, auxiliary feedwater pumps capable of supplying water to each of two steam generators.
This configuration is identical to the auxiliary feedwater system in the as-licensed plant configuration which required operator action f
to initiate and adjust auxiliary feedwater flow. The licensee has performed shfety analyses to evaluate the time required for operator response in situa-4 tions requiring auxiliary feedwater flow.
The safety analyses performed to evaluate the effects of auxiliary feed-water flow deviations show that no' flow for~10 minutes after the most severe undercooling transient, or runout flow for 10 minutes after the most severe overcooling transient,* is acceptable.
Consequently, adequate time would be available to manually initiate and centrol auxiliary feedwater flow in the event that either of these transients were to occur during the proposed 30 day period. A period of 10 minutes is considered adequate for operator response.
In order to assure that operators are aware of the status of the auxiliary feedwater system and the possibility that operator control may be required, the licensee will brief the operators on at least a weekly basis concerning the condition of the auxiliary feedwater system.
Since operator response can adequately substitute for the automatic start and flow mcdulating
4 e
4 features of the modified auxiliary feedwater system, accidents which result in auxiliary feedwater flow will not be more severe during'the 30 days following Cycle 7 startup, during which the test exception will be applicable.
The licensee has proposed additional changes to the Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCOs) for the Auxiliary Feedwater System. These proposed. changes to_the LCOs are equivalent to existing LCOs in that, should an auxiliary feedwater pump be inoperable (among a total complement of two steam driven pumps, and one motor driven pump) the proposed LCO would require that two auxiliary feedwater pumps would be operable within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. The existing LCO is based upon two steam driven auxilia.ry feedwater pumps and, in the event that one pump is inoperable, both pumps must be operable within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
i A se~cond proposed LCO would allow two of the-three auxiliary feedwater pumps to be inoperable for up to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> provided that the auxiliary feedwater cross-connect, and the Unit 2 motor driven auxiliary feedwater pump, are verified to be operable. This proposed LCO is at least equivalent to the
- existing LCO in that a total of two auxiliary feedwater pumps are required to be operable; in this case one Unit Sand one Unit 2 auxiliary feedwater pump would be required.
A change to the LCO is also proposed to address the changing of opera-tional modes (e.g. from startup to power operation) with an inoperable aux-fliary feedwater pump.
Since no additional safety concerns are associated with changing operational modes with an inoperable auxiliary feedwater pump, no prohibition on such mode changes is appropriate.
The Surveillance Requirements have been proposed for modification to reflect changes to the auxiliary feedwater system.
Prior to modification, auxiliary feedwater flow was controlled via preset flow control valves.
4
.......-..-----+,-,-?
a
- These valves were the subject of surveillance to assure that their position would permit a preset flow value. The TS required-reverification of auxiliary feedwater flow control valve alignment should the auxiliary feedwater flow control valves be repositioned.
Since these preset flow control valves have been replaced by air-operated modulating valves, this surveillance is no longer applicable.
In place of this requirement, BG&E has proposed to perform a flow verification test each 18 months which would assure that each auxiliary feedwater pump delivers flow upon automatic initiation.
In addition, BG&E has proposed a test of the dynamic head for the motor driven auxiliary feed-water pump. This proposed test would be conducted every 31 days to assure J
a dynamic head of at least 3100 ft on recirculation flow. This test fre-quency is consistent with dynamic head test currently required for the steam driven auxiliary feedwater pumps.
The above proposed changes to tee Limiting Conditions.for Operation and Surveillance Requirements for the Auxiliary Feedwater, System do not allow a decrease in the operability or effectiveness of surveillance of the auxiliary feedwater system.
Based upon the above, the proposed changes to the TS for the Auxiliary Feedwater System maintain or improve the readiness of this system to respond to emergency conditions and, therefore, the staff proposes to determine that the proposed changes do not involve significant hazards considerations.
BG&E has requested that certain post-accident monitoring instrumentation be deleted from the TS. Although these instruments vould not be physically removed from their installed locations, they would no longer be the subject of TS requirements. These instruments include:
\\
\\.
s
.....,_-...,m.
. _ -. - - _., ^
)
. (1) Power Range-Nuclear Flux Monitor - This instrument was judged to be un-necessary for post-trip reactor monitoring. The function of. post-accident flux monitoring is adequately performed by the Wide Range Logarithmic Neutron Flux Monitor, which includes the power range flux indication and is addressed in the TS.
(2) Reactor Coolant Total Flow - Reactor coolant system-total flow is con-sidered a non-essential channel Of instrumentation in the post-trip condition because of the availability of reactor coolant system (RCS) temperature indication, RCS subcooled margin and Reactor Coolant pumps status.
In the absence of adequate core ficw, RCS temperature and sub-cooled margin are indirect indicators of core flow conditions and provide adequate display to ensure appropriate actions are initiated by operations personnel.to recover from any abnormal conditions existing in the post-3 trip condition.
Neither the Total Reactor Coolant Flow nor the Power Range Nuclear Flux Monitor is referenced in the emergency operating procedures. We therefore conclude that the proposed deletion of operability and surveillance require-ments for the power range nuclear flux monitor and reactor coolant total flow, post accident, instrumentation would not decrease the ability of the licensee to detect and correct abnormal post-accident conditions. Accordingly, the staff proposes to determine that the proposed deletion of the TS requirements for the subject post-accident monitoring instrumentation does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The remote shutdown instrumentation allows the reactor operator to monitor key safety parameters from outside the control room.
No automatic safety m
. features are actuated from the remote shutdown instrumentation.
Changes to Reactor Coolant Cold Leg Temperature, Steam Generator Pressure and Level and Wide Range Neutron Flux instrumentation as described in the applicable LCO, have been proposed.
With regard to Reactor Coolant Cold Leg Temperature (RCS)T, NUREG-0737, c
Item II.F.2 requires the installation of instrumentation for detection of inadequate core cooling. Accordingly, subcooled margin monitors have been installed utilizing, among other inputs, existing temperature measurement channel inputs. The initial installation of the subcooled margin monitors utilized (RCS)T narrow range temperature inputs.
The detection range of the c
subcooled margin monitors was limited by the measurement range provided by the cold leg temperature measurement channels, required by the LCO to be from 0-600*F.
The design of the subcooled margin monitors precludes pro-viding any representative engineering-dat5 at temperature measurement ranges less than 212*F (boiling point of water) or greater than 705*F. (critical pointofwater).
The guidance contained in Reg. Guide 1.97 suggested modiff-cations to provide temperature measurement ranges of 150*F to 750*F.
Since temperature measurement ranges below the boiling point or above the critical point of water provided no useful input to the subcooled margin monitors and produce the undesirable effect of greater inaccuracy over the extended measurement ranges, a limited T measurement range between the two points c
that would provide useful input to the subcooled margin monitors, 212*F to 705'F, was selected.
Steam generator level measurement has been modified to provide an extended ranse of level indication.
It had previbusly indicated level from -116 to
+63.5 inches.
The modification increases the range to -401 to +63.5 inches
~
1 as required by the proposed LCO. The steam' generator level measurement channel provides indication at the remote shutdown panel (2C43)~isd does not provide any control functions at the panel. The additional level range
- provides the operator with more representative information of actual steam generator inventory. Finally, the range of the " Wide Range Neutron Flux" instrumentation has been increased, as indicated in the proposed LCO, from
.1 counts per second (cps) - 150% power to.1 cps - 200% power.
As indicated previously the remote shutdown instrumentation is provided for monitoring purposes and does not provide inputs for automatically actuated equipment; therefore, the changes as reflected in the proposed LCO-do not change.the course or severity of any analyzed accidents. Moreover, since the proposed changes to the instrumentation ranges provide equivalent or improved information, the usefulness of this instrumentation to provide
. post-accident information has not been degraded. On this basis, the staff proposes to determine that these proposed changes to the LCO for remote shutdown instrumentation do not involve significant hazards considerations.
The licensee has proposed a change in the Surveillance Requirements for subchannels A-3 and B-3 of the Containment Spray Actuation System (CSAS).
l The purpose of CSAS subchannels'A-3 and B-3 is'to isolate the service water supply to the spent fuel pool coolers on indication of high containment pressure; the licensee has proposed a plant modification which would move these functions to other CSAS actuation channels.
CSAS subchannels A-3 and B-3 as reconstituted would perform 'the following functions on indication c
of.high containment pressure:
trip the main feedwater, condensate booster, and heater drain pumps and close the main steam and feedwater isolation valves. These automatic actions would isolate the main feedwater system I
t t -
-g.
~
in the event of a steamline break thus preventing overpressuriz ti a on of the containment.
The same automatic features would alco be add Generator Isolation function.
The present surveillance requirement for subchannels A-3 and B quiring monthly testing, is no longer appropriate for the reconstitut
, re-subchannels A-3 and B-3.
Such testing, during reactor operation, would result in a reactor trip due to closure of the main steam isolation valves since the MSIVs cannot be bypassed during testing.
The licensee has proposed that CSAS subchannels A-3 and B-3 be tested every 18 months d uring plant shutdown, which is appropriate considering the design of the ass equipment and the need to prevent unnecessary reactor scrams e
Since the addition of automatic tripping of the pumps in the feedwater trains in a less severe plant response to a main steamline break results
, the NRC staff proposes to conclude that the associEted changes to the TS involv ficant hazards considerations.
e no signi-The licensee has proposed changes to the TS to address LCO s and Surveil-lance Requirements for Containment Vent Isolation Valves These valves are presently designated as Hydrogen Purge Outlet Yalves (MOV-6900 These valves are presently non-automatic, motor operated n
-6901).
, valves that are required by the TS to be maintained in the closed position durin g reactor operation (Modes 1, 2, 3 and 4).
A nodificatito to these valves would add
{
an automatic isolation signal to close these valves on a Safety Inject Actuation Signal (SIAS).
on The licensee has proposed that the redesignated Containment Vent Isolation Valves be required to close automatic ll a y in less s
- than 20 seconds as verified by periodic testing. Under reactor operating conditions Modes 1, 2, 3 and 4 the proposed LC0 would require the valves to be maintained in the closed position and doubly isolated.
In this case, double isolation includes removal of mothe power (supply breaker open) and the use of a key-locked switch. Mar.thly surveillance would assure that the valves remain closed and doubly 1;olated.
In addition, during core altera-tions or movement of irradiated fuel within containment, the ifcensee has proposed TS to require that these valves remain closed.
The proposed TS are consistent with other existing Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 TS for containment purge valves.
In addition, both existing and proposed TS for valves MOV-6900 and MOV-6901 require these valves to be c1csed during reac-tor operation and during refueling operations; thus, the proposed TS would be at least as restrictive as existing TS. Accordingly, the NRC staff proposes todeterminethattheTSchangesassociatedwiththemodifiedMOV-69b0and MOV-6901, the Containment Vent Isolation Valves, invo4ve no significant hazards considerations.-
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination.
Any coments 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.
Coments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch.
^
. By N0y 141983
, 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 peti-tion for leave to intervene.
Request for a hearing and petitions 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.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Connission 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 appro-priate order.
As required by 10 CFR 92.714, 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 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 petitioner's interest. The petition should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proce'eding 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 fifteen
.n,-
(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 fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the peti-tion 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 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 significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment e
and make it 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 involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Comission will not issue the amendment until the expir-ation of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change l
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 Comission 4
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 cements received.
Should the Comission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Comission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infFequently.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave 'to intervene-must be filed with the Secretary of. the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, l
Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:
Docketing and. Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last ten (10) days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner i
promptly so inform the Comission 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 James R. Miller:
petitioner's name and telephone number; L
l l
. 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, Washing-ton, D.C.
20555, and to James A. Biddison, Jr., General Counsel, G and E Building, Charles Center, Baltimore, Maryland 21203, 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 abscnt a determination by the Comission, the presiding officer or the Atomic 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 determination will be based upon a balancing of the factors specified irr 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the app 1tcation for amendment dated August 22, 1983 as supplemented S&ptember 1, 16 and two dated September 20, 1983 which are available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.,
and at the local public document room located at the Calvert County Library, Prince Frederick, Maryland.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 6th day of October,1983.
FOR THE NUCLEAR R GULATORY COMMISSION James R. Miller, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing L
?.*'~.**
g
{
]
1 s
g39C 7J90-01 g 6 #i//N U_ ITED STATES WCLEAR REGULATORY COPG4ISSION N
OMANAFUBLICPOWERDI_ STRICT DOCKET NO. 50-285
. NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMEN 0 MENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARD $
CONSIDERATION DETERMINAT!CN AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING '
i
,?.
t The U. S. Nucldar Regulatory Cothrission (the Cosuniis!sion) is.considering
~
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-40, issued to Omaha Public Power 01s'trict (the licensee), for operation of the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. I located in Washington County, Xebrida.
A reactor coolant systss!s (RCS) pressure-temperature limits mus't be revised periodically to take into account irradiation of the reactor pressure vessel. Various curves are used to analyze the RCS's' pressure-tempera'ture limits. The amendment would make more restrictive the curves that are used to make decisions about itaating up and cooling down the reactor' coo.lant system.
These curves, specified in the licensee's. technical specifications, must be changed periodically because of irradtation to the reactor pressure vessel, which is an integral part of the reactor coolant system. Th(i pressure-temper-ature limits contained in the curves are needed to ensurecthat.the reactor pressure vessel maintains adequate ductilit/* while pressurized,'in accordance with the licensee's application for antadment dated Maren 7,1983, as supple-
.mented by letter dated April 28, 1983.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Ccannission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
W
_ p a ccro W
_ _ - _. _ _ ~.., _.. _ _ -
i g
-y 7590-01 2-The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Comisson'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; 4
or (2) create the possiblity or a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a signiffcant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed changes constitute an additional lim'itation, not presently included in the technical specifications, which ensures that current marg' ins of safety are maintained with respect to the periodic revision of the RCS's pressure-temperature limits. The proposed amendment is an example of an amend-ment that is considered not likely to involve significgnt hazards considerations such that the change constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently in the technical specifications (sg Example 11 in the not_ likely category in 48 FR 14870, April 6,1983).
The Comission is seeking public coments on this proposed determination.
Any coments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final detemination. The Comission will not normally make a final determination unless.it receives a request for a hearing.
Coments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Comission, U.S..
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attn:
Docketing and Service Branch.
-,-w--.
+. - - - - -, -,, - - - -,.,, -,,
y w-2
-m-+
7590-01 By June U, 1923, 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 petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Conmission's " Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" 1.n 10 CFR Part 2.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Consission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Connission or by the Chaiman of the Atomic Safety and Lfcensing 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 pemitted 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; i
I (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other l
interest in the procceding; 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 l'
proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person who has
. L.
.)
J 7590-01 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 fifteen (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 fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference seneduled 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 with reasonable specificity. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope o'f 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 pemitted to participate as a party.
Those pemitted 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 Consnission 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.
i i
4 7590-01.If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Comission may issue the amendment and make it effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.
Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
If the final detemination is that the amendment involin a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Comi'ssion 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 Comission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves d
no significant hazards consideration. The final determination -will consider all public and State coments received. Should the Comission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Comission 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 Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, s
.s 7590-01 Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or may be delivere'd to the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N,W.
Washington, D.C., by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the 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 Robert A. Clark:
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 LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and MacRae,1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20036, attorneys 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 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 determination will be based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d).
l' e
,,e---
--.- 4 e n y
.m
,p
- ~, -
- r__,
.,r--,--
7
7590-01 For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the W. Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68102.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this Eth day of May,1983.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY C019tISSION I
(IL._j_ EE CA-- a Robert A. Clark', Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing l
l i
l l
l e
,,n-
-,---,n.-,-
- i-c
(
7590-01 7g q fh b UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY, ET AL.
'I 00CXET NO. 50-336 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY ~ 0PERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. OPR-65, issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, the Connecticut Light and Power Company, and Western Massachusetts Electric Company (the licensee), for operation of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1, located in new London County, Connecticut.
.The amendment would permit repairing degraded steam generator tubes by in-stalling metal sleeves in such tubes rather than removing them from service by plugging them, in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated June 3, 1983.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations.
The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility-in accordance with th'e 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.
~
i
-83f1fTYSO i$i---
2
t,
This amendment would change the technical specifications to allow repair of defective steam generator tubes by either plugging or sleeving.
In the present case, the licensee intends to repair selected defective generator tubes by installing a sleeve (bimetallic Inconel 625/690) between the tube sheet and
~
the first tube support to provide an elevated resistance to the pitting corrosion attack experienced on the secondary side of the steam generator tube bundle.
Sleeving materials and installation techniques to be applied are similar to those previously evaldated and accepted by the staff at Point Beach,. San Onofre and Indian Point plants.
Reviews conducted by the licensee pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 in the areas of mechanical and structural integrity, material and corrosion considerations,.
and reactor performance have not been found to constitute an unreviewed safety question.
Further, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The staff agrees with the preliminary results provided in the licensee's application.
The Commission has ~ provided guidance concerning the application of these stand-ards by providing certain examples, published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on' April 6, 1983 (48 FR 14870).
None of the examples, relating to whether significant
' hazards considerations are likely or unlikely., appear to be directly applicable to this amendment.
The Commission, however, proposes to determine that the l
application does not involve a significant hazards consideration because the proposed method of repairing the degraded tubes will restore their original l
capabilities and provide a level of safety in operation commensurate with that anticipated of the facility had it not experienced the need to repair steam generators.
A t-,-(
c
,m-.-
-.c.
7 m.e-3 The Commission is seeking public coments on this proposed detemination.
Any coments received within 30 days after the date o-f publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
The Comission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing.
Coments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C.
20555 Attn: Oceketing and Service Branch.
By AUG 2 91983 the 1.icensee 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 mst file a wMtten petition for leave to intervene.
Request for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Cosumission's " Rules of Practica for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Conssission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Comission or by tha Chainnan of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule "on tho' request and/or petition and the Secretan 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 i
sat 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 pGtition-should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be psmitted 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;
,y
,py.,.-,.,,,,,,-,,,em
.,., -, -, n
.-,.e--.,e-.
.,,,._,,.,,,,n-,_
. 6 (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 fifteen (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 fifteen (15) day.s 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 i
to be litigated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth
~
with reasonable specificity.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within l
the scope nf 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 pensitted 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 Conunission will make a final deterinination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.
The final detennina-tion will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
. N
^
O
~
~
~
s 7590-01 ;
If th'e final detensination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it 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 involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Consission 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 dorating or shutdown of the facility, the Cosmission 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 detennination will consider all public and State comuments received.
Should.the Conmission 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 ven infrequently.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Coussission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, i
l
,,.--..-...-,-....,.-:::--,.-.--._._-=.--
i 7590-01 Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Conslission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C., by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last ten (10) days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Conssission 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 Robert A. Clark:
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 Conslission, Washington, D.C.
20555, and to William H.. Cuddy, Esq., Day',' Berry and Howard, One Constitution Plaza, Hartford Connecticut, 06103 attoihey for.the l'icensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions,
~
supplemental pr..tions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a detensination by the Conslission, the presiding officer or the Atomic 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 determination will be based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d).
1
u.J'
-.t i
7590-01
' For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment wnich is available for public inspection at the Cosumission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Waterford Public Library, Rape Ferry Road, Route 156, Waterford, Connecticut.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 22nd day of July,1983.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY C01911SSION 0
i$
Ya.-
R rt A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing 8
g
3 7f ). F l
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ~
3 g;pf/73 9
LL b
NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY ET AL DOCKET NOS. 50-245 & 50-336 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMEN 0MENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Provisional Operating License No. OPR-21 and Facility Operating License No. OPR-65, issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, the Connecticut Light & Power Company, and Western Massachusettes Electric Company (the licensees), for operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station Units 1 and 2 located in New London County, Connecticut.
The amendments would delete superfluous Appendix B environmental technical specifications relative to meteorological monitoring, terrestrial monitoring, and transmission ~li'ne right-of-way management, in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated February 16, 1983.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will
-trave made findings required by.the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
Deletion of the environmental technical specifications relative to meteorological monitoring would have no effect since the emergency pre-paredness requirements of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 and the requirements of the Unit 2 operating license Appendix A technical specification 3/4.3.3.4 ensure that sufficient meteorological data are available for estimating potential doses to the public as a result of radiological releases from either unit at the Millstone Station. The annual surveys required by the environmental technical y 3d-(f-02 Om by u
(
7590-01 specifications have indicated no significant adverse effects on flora and fauna from station operation since Units 1 and 2 began operation in 1970 and 1975, respectively; the staff considers these results a sufficient demonstration that continuation of the surveys is not warranted. The environmental technical specification which requires an annual report concerning the use of herbicides to control vegetation on transmission line rights-of-way is also superfluous since the use of such chemicals must comply with control measures established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection rather than the NRC.
The proposed changes in the environmental technical specifications will have no effect on tha safe operation of, Millstone Station Units 1 and 2.
Therefore, the Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facili}y 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 previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The Comi.ssion 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.
Coments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Ccmmission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attn:
Docketing and Service Branch.
T o.
?
7590-01
,\\ -
By JUL 1
- 1983
, the licensee or a petitioner may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject operating licenses 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 petition for leave to intervene.
Requests for a hearing and petitions 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.
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 ':he 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 12.714, 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 or 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 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 w
i n.
a n
7590-01 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 fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheculed in the proceeding, but sucn an amended. peti ~ tion must satisfy the specificity requirements cescrioed above.
Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference seneculee in the proceecing, a petitioner shall file a sucplement to tne 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 with. reasonable specificity.
Contentions shall be limited to matters witnin t e scc:e of tne amendments under consideration.
A cetitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to par;icipate.as a party.
~ hose permitted to intervene become parties to tne :receecing, su: ject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, anc nave 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 wnen the hearing is held.
l
-..__-,,,--...--___.m._,
4 7590-01
-5 If the final-determination is that the amenoment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Comission may issue the amendments and make it effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.
Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amenaments.
If the final determination is that the amenaments involve a significant ha:ards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendments.
Norinally, the Comission will not issue the amenoment 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 amendments before the expiration c'f the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is tha't the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
The final ce:ermination will consider 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, e
O m
z-7590-01 Washington, D.C. 20565, 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 the 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 oe given Datagram Identification Number 3737 and the' folicwing message addressed to Robert A. Clark:
petitioner's name and telephone numoer; date petition was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page numoer 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 William H. Cuddy, Esquire, Day, Serry & Howard, One Constitutier Fia:a, Hartford, Connecticut 06103, attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amencec petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the Atomic i
1 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 p'etition and/or request.
That determination will be based i
upon a calancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.7'*(a)(1)(il-(v) and f
?. 714(d).
s
4 -
7590-01,
For further details with respect to this action, see the aps lication for amendment which is available for public inspection at the Consission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Waterford Public Library, Race Ferry Road, Route 1%, Waterford, Connecticut.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 3rd day of June,1983.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION tt[
^
Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing e
rA/n
?
Q 2 FR 3 s 20 c) 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY 00CKET NOS. 50-282 AND 50-306-NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF' ISSUANCE OF AMEN 0 MENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS.
CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. OPR-24 and OPR-60, issued to Northern States Power Company (tne licensee), for operation of the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Unit Nos. I and 2 located in Goodhue County, Minnesota.
The amendments would change the limit of the core local heat flux ratio NF, from 2.21 to 2.32, allowing a localized linear heat generation rate g
increase from 14.31 to 15.02 kw/ft which includes a 1.02 factor for power uncertainty.
In addition the definition of Ff would be changed from a -
[
neutron flux comparison to heat flux comparison derived from measured neutron flux and fuel enrichment.
The amendments would not consider the increase in peak fuel pellet exposure from 51 to 55 GWD/MTU.
This matter will be the subject of a separate notice.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Comission's regulations.
ma mns y.
1 c
7590-01 6,
The Commission has made -a proposed detemination that.the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. IJnder the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposad amendments would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability o* consequences of an accident previously' evaluated; or (2) creaa the possib.lity of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
A new analysis. performed by the fuel vendor (Ex. con Nuclear Comoany ReDort No. XN-NF 83-38) for the licenste,shows that the change in the limit of the local heat flux ratio (F ) from 2.21 to 2.32 wi!1 not result in an increase in the consecuences of a previously analyzed accident.
Under accident con-ditions, the new analysis shows that more margin axists to the 22000F peak clad temoerature limit than was previously anal, zed., The results of the new 0
analysis at an F
' f 2.32 gives 2142 F as the peak clad temperature while a o
temoerature of 2192cF at an F of 2.21 is given by the previous analysis.
The change in definition of the local heat flux ratio (F ) does not change the value of the ratio nor.the way in which the ratio is acclied in calculating l
core succriticality levels, core power distribution or the potential reactivity insertion caused by the hypothetical control red ejection.
The procosed change
'in definition of Fh does however make the definition more consistent with that given in the current model standard technical specification.
I l
t i
w m-
7590-01 Based on the above, the staff proposes to determine that the above changes do not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accidem previously evaluated; (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a signi-ficant reduction in the margin of safety. On this basis the staff proposes i
to dei: ermine that the amendment request does not involve a significant i
hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this propos,ed datamination.
Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice
'will be considered in making any final detemination.
The Commission will not
, nomally make, a final detamination unless it receives a request for a' hearing. -
Comments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attn:
Docketing and Service Branch.
By SEp 2 1983
, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license i
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 petttien for leave to intervene.
Request for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene j
shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's " Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
If a request for a hearing or petition i
for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic j
l 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 1
petition and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
m m
~
7590-01 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 pemitted 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 I
may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest..The petition.
i should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as.to which Detitioner wishes to intervene.
Any person who has i
filed a' petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party t-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 i
above.
Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference l
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 with reasonable specificity.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within l
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 pemitted to participate as a party.
l
.. _. _. _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _, _ _ _ _. _ _ _..... _ _ _ _ - _ _, _, _ -,. ~ _ _ _ _.. _ -. _. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _. _.. _ _... _ _. - - - - _ _ _..
7590-01
, Those pemitted 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.
4 If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final detemination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.
The final.detemina-tion will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final detemination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendments and make them e ffective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.
Any
. hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendments.
If the final determination is 'that the amendments involve a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take plac.e b,efore the issuance of any amendment.
Nomally, the Commission will not issue the ame<1dments 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 amendments before the expiration of the 30-day n'otice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
The final detemination will consider
' 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,
7590-01 -
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 the last ten (10) days of tne notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so infom 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 Robert A. Clark:
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 G. Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, & Trowbridge, 18'0 M. Street, N.W., Washington, D. C.
20036.
0 Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a detemination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the Atomic i
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 determination will be based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.71'!d).
1
7590-01 t
7-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, Maryland this 28th day of July,1983.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
!+b c6 Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing o
4 6
0
.m
-- - -.