ML20137A343
| ML20137A343 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/1997 |
| From: | Dromerick A NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137A347 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9703200287 | |
| Download: ML20137A343 (8) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _. _. _
j 7590-01-P 3
}
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION i
i BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-318 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE TO AMENDMENT TO i
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING l
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-69 isssued to 4
Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BGE), for operation of the Calvert Cliffs 4
i Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 2, located in Calvert County, Maryland.
The proposed amendment would allow a modification to the Unit 2 Service Water System (SWS) which constitutes an unreviewed safety question as described in 10 CFR 50.59. BGE proposes to add a nitrogen system to the SWS head tanks to increase the pressure in the SWS by approximately 15 psi. This proposed modification is in response to the water hammer concerns expressed in Generic Letter (GL) 96-06. The concern of the GL was that a loss-of-offsite power would disable the SWS pumps and stop flow in the SWS for a short time.
5 If this situation should occur concurrent with a loss-of-coolant accident or main steam line break, the water in the containment air coolers (CACs) could boil as a result of the energy released to containment by the accident. The boiling would form steam voids in the CACs. The voids would collapse when SWS flow was re-established and the collapse, combined with the returning flow, would cause a water hanner, challenging the CAC(s) and/or the related SWS piping. As discussed in a letter from Mr. C. H. Cruse dated January 28, 1997, j
the CACs and associated equipment were shown to be operable under these conditions.
9703200287 970312 DR ADOCK 0500 8
i
- )
After considering several options, it was determined that the best method for resolving this concern is to increase the pressure in the SWS above the fluid 1
i saturation point, thus providing a means to prevent boiling in the CACs until the SWS pumps automatically restart.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulatiuns in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91 (a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
1.
Would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Neither the (SWS] nor any (SWS) component is an initiator to an accident. The [SWS) provides cooling to safety-related equipment following an accident.
It supports accident mitigation functions.
Therefore, this proposed modification does not significantly increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The (SWS) provides cooling water to the containment air coolers to mitigate the consequences of a loss-of-accident or main steam line break. A loss of nitrogen pressure to the [SWS) due to a single active failure has been evaluated.
Since the nitrogen pressurization system is redundant, a single active failure in the nitrogen system would not prevent the (SWS) from performing
h l
t,
its safety function. Therefore this proposed modification does not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an accident.
Therefore, this pro >osed modification does not involve a significant increase in the pro) ability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
l 2.
Would not create the possibility of a new or different type of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
I The [SWS] provides cooling water to the containment air coolers and emergency diesel generators. The purpose of the components which are affected by this proposed modification is to mitigate accidents.
F This proposed modification does not change equipment function, or significantly alter the method of operating equipment to be modified. The system will continue to operate in essentially the same manner as before the proposed modification was done.
Therefore, the proposed changes does not create the possibility of a new or different type of accident from any accident previously l
evaluated.
3.
Would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The margin of safety in this case is the degree to which a single failure of the nitrogen system can affect the [SWS), since it connects to both [SWS] head tanks. To determine if there would be an adverse effect on plant safety resulting from this proposed modification, an evaluation of malfunctions of the nitrogen pressurization system was conducted. The only credible malfunctions are those related to failure of the pressure regulator.
Even if a 1
regulator were to fail open or closed, the [SWS? can perform its safety function. The proposed modification inciudes design features which ensure that pressure is maintained in each subsystem, even if this single failure occurs. Therefore, this proposed modification maintains the ability of the (SWS) to properly respond to an accident.
Therefore, this proposed modification does not significantly reduce the j
margin of safety.
~
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied.
l Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request
]
involves no significant hazards consideration.
}
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 j
determination.
{
Normally, the Comission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would i
result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Comission j
may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice j
period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves j
no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider 4
l all public and State coments received. Should the Comission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance and j
provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Comission expects 4
that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
l Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules Review and i
Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission,
]
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page l
number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be i
delivered to Room 6D22, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Copies of j
written coments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
i i
~.- -
i 1
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By April 18, 1997, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license 1
1 any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to j
participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene.
Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition 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.
Interested i
persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the Calvert County Library, Prince Frederick, Maryland 20678.
If a request for a j
hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the j
Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an
)
appropriate order.
f 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 permitted with particular reference to the following factors:
(1) the nature 5
s
, of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made 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 filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the I
petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are I
sought to be litigated in the matter.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact or be raised or controverted.
In addition, the petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in i
proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is 4
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion.
Petitioner must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention me,t be one which, if proven, would
i I entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to be 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 determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request invo?ves no significant hazards consideration, tht: Commission may issue the amendeent and i
make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any j
hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a i
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before l
the issuance of any amendment.
i A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Docketing and Services i
Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, the
{
Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, W., Washington, DC, by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a toll-free j
telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342 I
k a
P 8
! 4
-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following message addressed to S. Singh Bajwa:
petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition was mailed, plant name, r.nd publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S.
t Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to Jay E.
l Silbert, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW.,
Washington, DC, attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be j
entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or 4
the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified in J
10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 6,1997, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the local public document room located at the Calvert County Library, Prince Frederick, Maryland 20678.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of March 1997.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COP 911SSION f
Alexander. Dromerick, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-l Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
_