ML20206Q749
| ML20206Q749 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 06/17/1986 |
| From: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206Q754 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8607030317 | |
| Download: ML20206Q749 (8) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
'O 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ARKANSAS POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-368 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARD CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Comission) is considering issuance of amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-6 issued to Arkansas Power and Light Company (the licensee), for operation of Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2,. located in Pope County, Arkansas.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (T.S.) 3/4.10, "Special Test Exceptions - Shutdown Margin," in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated June 9,1986.
T. S. 3.10.1 allows the shut-down margin to be reduced to less than the normal operating shutdown margin requirements during the performance of low power physics tests, provided that certain conditions are met. As one of these conditions, Surveillance Requirement 4.10.1.2 requires that all control element assemblies (CEA's) not fully inserted in the core be demonstrated to be capable of full insertion when tripped from at least the 50% withdrawn position w'ithin 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to reducing shutdown margin to less than the normal operating requirements.
The proposed change will allow this surveillance to be performed within seven days prior to the tests instead of within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to the tests.
This will enable low power physics testing to be completed without an additional trip to verify CEA insertability.
p&7030317 86062sADOCK 05000368 PDR
.. Low power physics tests are performed to verify core physics predictions.
One of the test sequences measures CEA worths and may involve the reduction of shutdown margin as permitted by T.S. 3.10.1. Prior to initial criticality for perfonnance of the low power physics tests, rod drop testing is perfonned to demonstrate CEA insertability. The reactor is brought critical and stabilized at the test plateau (approximately 10~2% power). The perferred sequence for low power physics testing has CEA worth measurements made last.
Since approximately five days would have elapsed from when the hot rod drop test were performed, the reactor would have to be tripped again to demonstrate CEA insertion capabi.lity and satisfy the current 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> criteria.
The proposed change would' eliminate the necessity for an additional trip during low power physics testing by requiring CEA insertability to be verified within seven days prior to reducing shutdown margin instead of within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
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 Connission's regulations ir.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 i
sa fety.
1
i l A discussion of these standards as they relate to this amendment follows:
Criterion 1 The previously analyzed accidents which potentially could be affected by the proposed change are those which involve overcooling of the reactor coolant system (RCS). Because of the negative moderation temperature coefficient, cooldown results in a reactivity increase. Because of this, a post trip return to power may be experienced during events involving overcooling of the RCS if insufficient negative reactivity is inserted via the CEA's. Since shut down margin must be reduced during measurement of CEA worths, Surveillance Require-ment 4.10.1.2 provides added assurance that the maximum amount of negative reactivity is available for insertion should a reactor trip occur. The proposed change may reduce the degree of assurance provided by this surveillance by extending the surveillance time period. However, the impact of the proposed change on the probability of the previously analyzed accidents are insignificant based cn the fact that the geometry of the components involved (fuel assembly, CEA, extension shaft, control element drive mechanism, upper guide structure) will not change over tP.1 7 day time period. Additionally, extending the t
i surveillance time period to 7 days will not cause a significant increase in the probability of a stuck CEA due to an electrical malfunction since the CEAs insert as a result of gravitational force after a removal of power.
Therefore, the proposed change does not significantly increase the probability of previously evaluated accidents.
In addition, the proposed change has no effect on the consequences of overcooling events since it does not affect the l
amount by which shutdown margin may be reduced.
.. Criterion 2 There is no possibility of a new or different kind of accident occurring since the existing FSAR accident analysis already assumes a hypothetical stuck CEA and the proposed change does not result in any change to the facility.
Criterion 3 The affected Specification 3/4.10.1 provides that a minimum amount of CEA worth is imediately available for reactivity control when tests are performed for CEA worth measurement, and will, therefore, preserve the existing margin of safety.
Therefore, since the application for amendment appears to satisfy the criteria specified in 10 CFR 50.92, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the requested change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The Comission 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 Comission will not normally make a final deterraination unless it receives a request for a hearing.
Comments should be addressed to the Rules and Procedures Branch, Division of Rules and Records, Office of Administration, U.S. Nu' clear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555.
By July 21, 1986, 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. 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 Commission or an 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 92.714, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and hcw 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 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 l
without requesting leave of the Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the first perhearing 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 perhearing 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, 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 pennitted 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 parti.cipate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to presen't evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make 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 effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
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 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 A
,. hazards consideration. The final determination 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, 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.,
l 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 Commissior, 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 George W. Knighton:
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.
2055E. and to Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq., Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Purcell and Reynolds, 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20036.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petiticns, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the presiding
1 l 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 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 Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas 72801.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 17th day of June 1986.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
M/
George W
l
,.,. -