ML20210E263
| ML20210E263 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1986 |
| From: | Wagner M NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#186-552 OLA-2, NUDOCS 8603270294 | |
| Download: ML20210E263 (7) | |
Text
-
q s
March 25, 1986 g
\\V 0.
( /'.'L 9
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2./
'O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f!/
Cj /. ' " n o 2
u y
BEFORF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARIhk C
/
Q l' In the Matter of
)
j
?.'ETROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY,
)
Docket No. 50-280 CrLA 'l ET AL.
)
(Steam Generator Plugging
)
Criteria)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station,
)
Unit No.1)
)
NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO TMIA'S MOTION TO BROADEN llEARING SCOPE INTRODUCTION There are two separate amendment requests pending before the NRC in which Licensee GPU Nuclear Corporation seeks revision of the thresh-old criteria (plugging criteria or repair limit) I for determining when plugging nr some other repair of degraded steam generator tubes is re-quired at TMI-1.
The first amendment request is contained in Licensee's November 6,1985 Technical Speciffeation Change Request (TSCR)
No.148, in which Licensee requested approval to revise the repair limit depth for linited are defects based on maintaining the licensed margin of safety using an alternate analysis approach and considering improved de -
feet characterization capability.
The proposed criteria in TSCR No.148 are based on the total cross section of unimpaired tube remaining in the 1/
The present TMI-1 Technical Specifications require that defects ex-
~
tending greater than 40% of the tube wall thickness shall be *c-paired.
Defects penetrating less than 40% of the tube wall thickness need not be repaired regardless of their length.
8603270294 860325 PDR ADOCM 05000289 g0%
G PDR
?
'4 i
1 l
)
j i 4 tube free span, rather than a consideration of throughwall depth alone.
The criteria specify a repair limit up to 70% throughwall depth for small defect lengths, decreasing to a 40% throughwall depth for longer defects.
The second, separate amendment request was submitted by Licensee on i
2.
February 4, 1986 as Technical Specification Change Request No.153.
By j
that reouest, Licensee seeks approval of separate revised plugging crite-1 ria which would require plugging of any tube with an imperfection or crack depth over 50% throughwall and greater than.55 inches in length.
TMIA, which has haen provisionally granted intervention status with I
respret to the TSCR No.148 request, has filed a motion to " broaden the j
hearing scope" in that proceeding to include litigation of TSCR No.153.
j
TMI A'c ?'otion to I? roaden licaring Scope," (TMIA Motion), March 10, 1980. 2_/
Ac discussed below, the Staff provisionally supports the TMIA i
{
Motion insofer as it would permit discussion of the contentions for both
[
proceadings at the f' arch 27 prehearing conference, and, if the Board i
should decide that TMIA has submitted at least one litigable contention in each proceeding, the Staff favors consolidating the proceedings for I
pretrial and hcering purposes.
The Staff's support for consolidation is dependent on such consolidation not effecting significant delay in the f
resolution of any hearing on TSCR No. 148, since TSCR No.148 cannot l
j be issued prior to the completion of such a hearing.
l i
-2/
TMIA simultaneously filed a formal demand for an adjudicatory hear-l
-ing with respect to TSCP. No.153. TM!A's Formal Demand for Adju-l dicatory Hearing on Amendment to TMI-I Operating Licenso to Change Tube plugging Criteria, March 10, 1986.
4 l
i I
3
! 1 6
4 1
II.
DISCUSSION 4
In response to TSCR No. 148, on January. 6, 1986, the NRC pub-j lished in the Federal Register a notice of consideration of the issuance of i
.an amendment to the TMI-1 license and offered an opportunity for prior j
hearing on the amendment. 51 Fed.
R_eg. 459.
On December 23, 1985, e
i before publication of that Federal Register notice TMIA filed an inter-
[
vention petition.
By Memorandum and Order of February 12, 1986, the 4
Bocrd provicionally granted TMI A's petition for leave to intervene and i
)
provisionally ordered a hearing.
The Board further scheduled a special prehearing conference for March 27, 1986 to rule upon any contentions I
j submitted in connection with TSCR No.148.
i l
On February 4,1986, Licensee submitted TSCR No.153, a separate, 1
l and different, amendment request, which seeks an interim revision to the existing steam generator tube plugging criteria.
In response to this j
second request, on February 28, 1986, the NRC published in the Federal l
Register a notice entitled " Consideration of issuance of Amendment to
}
Facility Operating License and Proposed No Significant Hazards i
j Consideration Determination and Opportunity for Hearing."
51 Fed. g.
7157.
On March 10, 1986, TMIA filed a intervention petition in response I
l to that notice, along with the instant motion to broaden the scope of the j
j j
hearing on TSCR No.148.
On March 14, 1986 a licensing board was
)
appointed to rule on intervention petitions and to preside over any hearing on No.153.
That licensing board is composed of the same three l
1 1
}
1 i
.. -,,-- - ~.- - _
._,.-.--.,,--,,,,~~,.,-..,---,-.._-n..,-,,_.,-n-,.-n.-,.
.- -,,-., n n, - -
s
! 1 i i
board members who are presiding over this proceeding on TSCR No. 148. b The Staff notes that there are some important technical differences in the two outstanding amendment requests. O Notwithstanding these differences, TMIA has submitted identical contentions with regard to TSCRs No.148 and 153 and some of the same technical considerations and supporting analyses apply to both amendment requests.
Accordingly, it i
1 l
1 3)
Since the scope of a licensing board's jurisdiction is limited by the scopo of the notice of hearing, prior to the appointment of a licens-i ing board to preside over any hearing on TSCR No.153, this licens-
)
ing board's jurisdiction was limited to consideration of TSCR No. 14 6.
Now that a board has also been appointed for TSCR j
No. 153, the licensing boards for those two proceedings (in this case, the same three board members) may consolidate for hearing or other purposes the two proceedings, upon a finding "that such i
acticn will be conducive to the proper dispatch of its business and j
to the ends of justice...."
10 C. F. R. S 2. 716.
4/
TSCR 149 would allow continued operation with a defect of up to 70%
~
throughwall penetration and 0.4 inches in length.
The repair criteria proposed in TSCR No.148 contain a linear scale allowing a lenger length defect of less throughwall penetration until the defect i
is 0.8 inches long at a penetration of 40% throughwall.
Above a J
. penetration of approximately 60% throughwall, safety margins as described in Regulatory Guide 1.121 cannot be demonstrated using 1
methodologies previously applied by the Staff for steam generator j
tube integrity.
Rather the Licensee attempts to justify the safety j
nergins using methodologies not previously utilized by the Staff for j
stean generator tube applications.
I In contrast, TSCR 153 would allow operation with a defeet of up to i
50t throughwall penetration with a maximum length of 0.55 inches.
For defects greater than 0.55 inches in length, the defect must be i
lors than 40% throughwall.
Therefore, unlike TSCR 148, TSCR 153 is not a sliding scale depending on defect size.
The amendment re-quest for TSCR 153 also has sufficient supporting data to conclude that safety margins, as described in Regulatory Guide 1.121, are i
satisfied by mothedologies previously utilized by the Staff for steam generator tube integrity applications.
Moreover, this request is for i
an interirn period as it is to be effective only until the next refuel-ing outage (scheduled to start in December 1986), while TSCR 148 j
seeks a permanent change.
}
)
,- - nn, - - ~ ~ ~
.-r..,-
-,-~n
w,-,,-,m--,n,--
,,,,,,,-,,,n,-m,n,w n,-,---n.,,,--
, ~ -, - ~
-c-
\\
. t would be appropriate to consider the admissibility of both sets of contentions at the scheduled March 27, 1986 prehearing conference.
If the Board should decide that TMIA has submitted at least one litigable contention in each proceeding, the Staff believes that combining i
the two proceedings for the nurposes of litigation is warranted for rea-sons of judicial economy, since there is an identity of issues proffered by Tf1IA and similarity in some of the considerations involved in the cmendment requests themselves.
Staff support for consolidation of the two proceedings is based upon the Staff's expectation that such consolidation would not significantly delay the completion of hearings and ultimate licensing action on TSCR Mo.148.
In contrast to TSCR No.153, which does not require a hearing prior to issuance of the amendment if the Staff makes a final determination that TSCR No.153 does not involve significant hazards considerations, 5_/
TSCP No. 148 requires that any l
henring precede the issuance of that amendment.
If it appears at any point that consolidation of the two proceedings would likely cause a 1
i l
S/
In contrast to T.S. Change Request No.148, the Staff has proposed that the TSCR 153 request of up to a 50% tube thickness defect limit i
meets the criteria for a no significant hazards determination.
Since a hearing has been requested, the Commission will make a final de-termination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.
10 C.F.R. I 50.91(a)(2)-(4).
If the final determination is that the 4
l amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the j
Commission may issue the amendment and make it effective, notwith-standing TMIA's request for a hearing.
10 C.F.R. I 50.91(a)(4).
Any hearing with regard to TSCR No.153 would likely take place after the issuance of the amendment.
i
_ ~ -
. =.
- t significant delay in the resolution of any hearing on TSCR No.148, the proceedings could be severed. 6,/
III.
CONCLUSION
]
For the reasons set forth above, consolidation of the two proceedings could effect substantial economies of litigation, since there is identity of Issues posed by TMIA and some similarities between the amendments. The Staff provisionally supports consolidation, provided such consolidation i
does not significantly delay ultimate licensing action on TSCR No.148, i
Respectfully submitted, I
Mary Wagner I
taff j
Couns or NRC
)
Dated at I3ethesda, Maryland this 25th day of March,1986 s
)
i
)
6/
Licensee has stated that it is hopeful of having a determination on TSCR No.148 in time for its next scheduled refueling outage, which is currently scheduled for December 1986.
Licensee's Answer To i
TMIA's Motion To Broaden IIcaring Scope, March 20, 1986, at 7-8.
I
r b
.,+-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE TIIE ATOf11C SAFETY AllD LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY,
)
Docket No. 50-289 OLA-2 ET AL.
)
(Steam Generator Plugging (Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Criteria)
Station, Unit No.1)
)
CERTIFICATR OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO TMIA'S MOTION TO BROADEN HEARING SCOPF" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by. deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, or, as indicated by an asterisk, by hand delivery, or, as indicated by a double asterisk, by express mail, this 25th doy of March,1986:
"Sheldon J. V'olfe, Chairman
- Bruce W. Churchill, Esq.
Administrative Judge Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel 1800 M Stract. NW U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20036 Washington, DC 20555
- Dr. Oscar II. Paris Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Administrative Judge Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555
- Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Administrative Judge Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licencing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 "Joanne Doroshow Docketing & Service Section TMIA Alert Office of the Secretary 315 Peffer Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission liarrisburg, PA 17102 Washington, DC 20555
" Louise Bradford 1011 Green Street flarrisburg, PA 17102 Mary E. t 'agner Counsel f r NRC aff L._