ML20151U977
| ML20151U977 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/1998 |
| From: | Hopkins J NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151U974 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9809140011 | |
| Download: ML20151U977 (7) | |
Text
.____. _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ _ . . . _ . . . . - _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ .___
7590-01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY l DOCKET NO. 50-461 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-62 issued to Illinois Power Company (IP, or the licensee) for operation of the Clinton Power Station (CPS), located in DeWitt County, Illinois.
The proposed amendment concems the " ready-to-load" requirement for the D, vision 3 diesel generator (DG). The Division 3 DG reoHres operator action to reset the mechaWeal governor to meet the " ready-to-load" requirement.
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 regulations in 10 CFR l 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 9809140011 980908 PDR ADOCK 05000461 P pm
j
\
2 i 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) The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change revises the acceptance enteria for meeting the " ready-to-load" requirement denoted by TS Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.8.1.17 for the Division 3 Diesel Generator (DG). The proposed change also adds a discussion of this acceptance criterion to the USAR [ updated safety analysis report) to clarify the intent of the requirement. The proposed change allows manual operator action to reset the !
governor upon receipt of an ECCS [ emergency core cooling system) signal.
Analyzed events are considered to be initiated by the failure of plant structures, systems, or components. The DGs are not considered as initiators of any analyzed event. The proposed change does not have a detrimentalimpact on the condition or performance of any plant structure, system, or component that initiates an analyzed event. The proposed change will not alter the operation of or otherwise increase the failure probability of any plant equipment that initiates an analyzed event. As such, .
the probability of occurrence for a previously analyzed accident is not significantly increased.
The consequences of a previously analyzed event are dependent on the initial conditions assumed for the analysis, the availability and successful functioning of the equipment assumed to operate in response to the analyzed event, and the setpoints at which these actions are initiated. The Division 3 DG continues to override the test mode and return the DG to a standby operation. The manual operator action to reset the govemor following the receipt of an ECCS signal, continues tc ensure that the equipment being powered by the DG will perform its intended function. The proposed change continues to ensure that the Division 3 DG will gdequately support its design basis performance and mitigative function during en accident. Since the manual operator action performed during the test mode ensures that the govemor is reset upon receipt of an ECCS signal, no analyses assumptions are violated and there are no adverse effects on the factors that contribute to offsite or onsite dose as the result of an accident. The proposed l change does not affect setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative actions. The proposed change ensures that plant structures, systems, or components are maintained consistent with the safety analysis and licensing bases. Based on this evaluation, there is no significant increase in the consequences of a previously analyzed event.
Therefore, this change will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
(2) The proposed change would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
~
~
i 3
1 The proposed change revises the acceptance criteria for meeting the " ready-to-load" requirement denoted by TS SR 3.8.1.17 for the Division 3 DG. The proposed
] change also adds a discussion of this acceptance criterion to the USAR to clarify the 4
i intent of the requirement. The proposed change does not change the operating characteristics or the safety function of the DG. The DG performs a mitigative
- function. No new or different equipment is being installed and no installed i equipment, which might initiate an analyzed event, is being operated in a different .
{ manner. The proposed change does not impact core reactivity or the manipulation 4
of fuel bundles. There is no alteration to the parameters within which the plant is normally operated or in the setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative actions. As
- a result no new failure modes are being introduced. There are no changes in the
[ methods goveming normal plant operation, nor are the methods utilized to respond to plant transients altered.
i
,- Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
l (3) The proposed change wil! not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The margin of safety is established through the design of the plant structures, systems, and components, the parameters within which the plant is operated, and the establishment of the setpoints for the actuation of equipment relied upon to respond to an event. The proposed change revises the acceptance criteria for meeting the " ready-to-load" requirement denoted by TS SR 3.8.1.17 for the Division 3 DG. The proposed change also adds a discussion of this acceptance criterion to the USAR to clarify the intent of the requirement. The proposed change allows manual operator action to reset the governor upon receipt of an ECCS signal. This ensures that appropriate frequency limits are obtained and that the Division 3 DG can perform its intended function. Thus, the proposed change does not significantly impact the condition or performance of structures, systems, and components relied upon for accident mitigation. Additionally, the proposed change does not significantly impact any safety analysis assumptions or results.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a 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.g2(c) are satisfied. 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 comments received within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
5 1
4 q Normally, the Commission 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 4-l to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the
- Commission 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 comments received.
4 j
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 that
- the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch,
- Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory i- Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page e
number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room l
1 6D59, 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 Ge! man Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
f The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By Q:tober 9,1998, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance i
- of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be i
j- 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 hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's Rules of i
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 4
v, - - , . . , -
i .
i i* 5 Document Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the Vespasian Wamer Public Library,310 N. Quincy Street, Clinton, IL 61727. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety andi.icensing 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. l 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; (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 e
1
- l l . 6 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 documentu 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 supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to 1
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 involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of 1
the amendment.
If the final da%rmination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
I
I 0 1 7 \
\
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: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's I
~
Public Document Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above date. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to Leah Manning i
i Stetzner, Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary,500 South 27th Street, l Decatur, IL 62525, attomey for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearin0 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 1- CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
l For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated 4
August 24,1998, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document l
l Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public !
document room located at the Vespasian Warner Public Library,310 N. Quincy Street, Clinton, IL 61727. I Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of Septembar 1998.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l r
/
4 )
on B. Hopkins, Senior roject Manager 1 Project Directorate ill-3 !
Division of Reactor Projects -lil/IV l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l