ML20137G636
| ML20137G636 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1997 |
| From: | Stang J NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137G639 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9704010454 | |
| Download: ML20137G636 (8) | |
Text
C l
l 7590-01-P
~
I UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPANY DOCKET NOS. 50-237 AND 50-249 l
NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO I
1 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS j
CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING l
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering l
issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed, the licensee) for operation of l
the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, located in Grundy County, Illinois.
The proposed amendments would remove the Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor High scram and the Main Steam Line Tunnel Radiation High input to the Main Steam Line Isolation function requirement from the Technical Specifications (TS).
The proposed changes are a result of a Boiling Water Reactor Owners Group (BWROG) initiative to minimize inadvertent scrams and j
Main Steam Isolation Valve closure due to erroneous radiation monitor actuation.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission will have made findings' required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the 1
Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendments requested involve no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a l
\\
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident l
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind 9704010454 970328 PDR ADOCK 05000237 p
i 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:
4 (1)
Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because of the following:
l This amendment request proposes to remove the existing [ Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor) MSLRM scram and the MSLRM i
[ Main Steam Line] MSL Valve closure signal. The purpose of the MSLRM High scram and the MSL Valve closure signal is to mitigate the radiological effects of a fuel element failure.
These functions do not serve as initiators for any of the accidents evaluated in chapter 15 of the [ Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR.
Removal of these functions J
will not increase the probability of any of the accidents previously evaluated.
The radiological effects of a (Control Rod Drop Accident]
CRDA have been evaluated by the BWROG in their Safety Analysis Report NED0 - 31400.
The BWROG report was evaluated by the NRC and found acceptable by letter dated
.i May 15, 1991.
The NRC Safety Evaluation Report accepting l
the BWROG analysis required licensees to demonstrate that the assumptions of the BWROG analysis were bounding on their i
plants.
Comed's Dresden Station has evaluated the BWROG analysis for applicability on Dresden Units 2 and 3.
The BWROG analysis demonstrates that operation of Units 2 and 3 with the proposed amendment does not represent a significant increase in the consequences of a CRDA.
)
Therefore, operation of Dresden Units 2 and 3 under the i
proposed amendment does not represent a'significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
1 (2)
Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated bec&use:
This amendment request proposes to remove the existing MSLRM High scram and the MSL Valve closure input from the MSL Tunnel Radiation High signal.
Removal of these functions does not represent a change in operating parameters for Dresden Units 2 and 3.
Removal of these functions does not
add any additional hardware and does not represent any new failure modes. Operation of Dresden Units 2 and 3 under the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different type of accident previously evaluated.
(3)
Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety because:
The requested amendment proposes to eliminate the MSLRM High scram and the MSL Valve Closure input from the MSL Tunnel Radiation High signal.
Operation under the proposed amendment will not change any plant operation parameters, nor any protective system setpoints other than removal of these functions.
The BWROG Safety Analysis Report had demonstrated that the consequences of the CRDA without the MSLRM High scram and MSL Valve Closure signal from the MSL Tunnel Radiation monitor does not result in doses which are not well within guidelines of 10 CFR part 100 limits.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
Guidance has been provided in " Final Procedures and Standards on No Significant Hazards Considerations," Final Rule, 51 FR 7744, for the application of standards to license change requests for determination of the existence of significant hazards considerations. This document provides examples of amendments which are and are not considered likely to involve significant hazards considerations.
This proposed amendment does not involve any irreversible changes, a significant relaxation of the criteria used to establish safety limits, a significant relaxation of the bases for the limiting safety system settings or a significant relaxation of the bases for the limiting conditions for operations.
Therefore, based on the guidance provided in the Federal Register and the criteria.
established in 10 CFR 50.92(c),'the proposed change does not constitute a significant hazards consideration.
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.
~Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendments requested involve no significant hazards consideration.
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 j
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendments 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 result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendments before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
The final determination will considc::
all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Commission expects 1
that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6022, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
7
~.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By March 28
, 1997, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene.
Requests for a i
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 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 Morris Area Public Library District, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450.
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 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 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 of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made party to the proceeding; l
(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 petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are sought to be litigated in the matter.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted.
In addition, the petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.
The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is 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 must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a
, r
~
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 i
to any limitations in the order granting l' eave 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 amendments requested involve no significant hazards. consideration, the Comission may issue the amendments and make them imediately effective, 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 requested involve a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place befcre the issuance of any amendments.
i A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be f
l filed with the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Docketing and Services 4
i j-Branch, or may be delivered to the Comission's Public Document Room, the
)
4-Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Comission by a toll-free telephore call to Western Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) i j
342-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification
3..
1 Number N1023 and the following message addressed to Robert A. Capra:
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 j
of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S.
l Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to Michael I.
Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, One First National Plaza, Chicago, i
Illinois 60603, attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
]
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for j
f amendments dated March 5,1997, which is available for public inspection at
-l 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 Morris Area Public Library District, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28 day of March 1997.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
A J bn F. Stang, ior Project Manager Project Directorate III-2 Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
4