ML20212N682

Forwards Amend Establishing Physical Security Requirements for possess-but-not-operate Status of Facility & Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amend & Proposed NSHC Determination & Opportunity for Hearing,For Info

ML20212N682
Person / Time
Site:	Humboldt Bay
Issue date:	03/05/1987
From:	Matt Young NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	Carpenter J, Lazo R, Morris P Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#187-2767 OLA, NUDOCS 8703130115
Download: ML20212N682 (9)

Text

.

2767 QIEIQ

! 'o I,j UNITED STATES ,

[- 83  ;

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 DOCKETED g

Q **v ***

/ ~

'87 MAR 11 P12:13 March 5,1987 0FftCE OF SECEW7 00CKElthG A sEav:u BRAriCH Dr. Robert M. Lazo, Chairman Dr. James II. Carpenter Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Peter A. Morris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit No. 3)

Docket No. 50-133 -auf

Dear Administrative Judges:

! Enclosed for your information is a copy of a recently issued amendment which establishes physical security requirements for the posses-but-not-operate sta-tus of the Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit 3. Also enclosed is the notice of consideration of issuance of the amendments, the proposed no significant haz-ards consideration determination, and opportunity for hearing was published in the Federal Register on June 4, 1980 (51 Fed. Reg. 20371).

Copies of the amendment were transmitted to the parties of this proceeding at l the time of its issuance.

l Sincere 5

(iW 11 i A. Young Counsel for NRC Staff

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/o enclosures: Service list 8703130115 DR 870305 ADOCK 05000133 PDR KSA

7 4

.6

. jJ+f r ...\ 3 g

. . UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

ag wasumorow.o.c. noses g .g- -

February 11.-1987 Docket No. 50-133 Mr. J. D. Shiffer, Vice President Nuclear Power Generation

.c/o Nuclear Power Generation, Licensing Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451

' San Francisco, California 94106

SUBJECT:

HUMBOLDT BAY. POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 3, AMENDMENT NO. 22 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-7 The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 22 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-7 for Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3. This amendment consists of changes to the license in response to your application of May 14, 1986, as revised November 17, 1986.

This amendment establishes physical security requirements for the shutdown Humboldt Bay, Unit 3. The security plan reflects the possess-but-not-operate status of Facility Operating License No. DPR-7.

A Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to License and Proposed No

' Significant Hazards Consideration Detemination and Opportunity for Hearing related to the requested action was published in the Federal Register on June 4, 1986 at 51 FR 20371. No coments or requests for hearing were received.

l A copy of our related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. A notice of issuance pertaining to this action will appear in the Comission's next notice publication in the Federal Register.

Sincerely, t

i, }.Ed/4 C W afd P{eter B. Erickson, Project k Manager l

Standardization and Special Projects Directorate Division of PWR Licensing-B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

[

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 22 to

. DPR-7

! 2. Safety Evaluation

cc w/ enclosures

j See next page w a - - - , . - - - - , . - - , - - - - - - , , _ . . --_,,.-,-n,. . , . , .-- -.- -. ,---, ,..--.,-.-,-,,,---,-n- . - - . - , - . - - - . . . , - - ,

g Mr. J. D. Shiffer Pacific Gas and Electric Company Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant cc Philip A. Crane, Jr. , Esq. Mr. Joseph 0. Ward, Chief .

Pacific Gas and Electric Company Radiological Health Branch Law Department . State Dept. of Health Services Post Office Box 7442 714 P Street, Office Bldg. #8 San Francisco, California 94120 Sacramento, California 95814 Chairman Director Humboldt County Board of Supervisors Energy Facilities Siting Division County Courthouse Energy Resources Conservation &

825 Fifth Street Development Commission

-Eureka, California 95501 1516 9th Street Sacramento California 95814 Linda J. Brown, Esquire Donohew, Jones, Brown & Clifford Gretch'en Dumas, Esq.

100 Van Ness Avenue,19 Floor Public Utilities Commission San Francisco, California 94102 of the State of California 5066 State Building U.S. Environmental Protection Agency San Francisco, California 94102 Region IX Office ATTN: Regional Radiation Representative Public Affairs Officer 215 Freemont Street Region V San Francisco, California 94105 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane Regional Administrator Walnut Creek, California 94596 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region V -

1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Office of Intergovernmental Walnut Creek, California 94596 Management State of California Michael R. Sherwood, Esq. 1400 10th Street, Room 108 i' Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Inc. Sacramento, California 95814 2044 Fillmore Street San Francisco, California 94115 Bruce Norton, Esq.

2002 East Osborn Dr. Perry Aminoto Phoenix, Arizona 85064 r Department of Conservation Division of Mines & Geology

. 1416 9th Street, Room-1341 Sacramento, California 95814 Scott L. Fiedler, Esq.

517 Third Street, Suite 14

Eureka, California 95501 l

I

.. ..J s o UNITED STATES

~g

! c NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555' ~'

• t,4 g 4j [ - ~

4...+

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 3 l

DOCKET NO. 50-133 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 22

, License No. DPR-7

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for. amendment by Pacific Gas and Electric Compin'y (thelicensee)datedMay 14, 1986, as revised November 17, 1986, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; j B. The facility will be maintained in conformity with the application,

! the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance: (i)thattheactivitiesauthorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comnission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

t

Lo

,3-

2. Accordingly, Facility Operating License No. DPR-7. is hereby amended by the addition of paragraph C.I. which reads as follows:

1. The licensee shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the physical security plan previously approved by the Commission and all amendments and revisions made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The plan, which contains Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, is entitled: "Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3 Physical Security Plan," with revisions submitted through November 17, 1986. The Guard Iraining and

. Qualification Plan and the Safeguards Contingency Plan are incorporated into the Physical Security Plan as Chapters 6 4

and 9, respectively.

3. This license amendment is effective when the revised physical security plan is fully implemented but in no case more than 90 days from the date of issuance of this amendment.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPMISSION

'. erbert N. Berkow, Director Standardization and Special Projects Directorate Division of PWR Licensing-B 0ffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Date 'of Issuance: February 11, 1987 I

a l

l.

l

. 2 ~ - *

[g$

- [. gA AfC 'o

~ UNITED STATES

!" ~

n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -_

,{ , ' WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 ,

,f:

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPP0kTING AMENDMENT NO. 22 TO FACILITY OPEP,ATING LICENSE NO. .DPR-7 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY HUMBOLDT BAY. POWER PLANT,-UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO.'50-133

~

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated May 14, 1986, as revised November 17, 1986 Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) proposed.to revise the existing

~

Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3, Physical Security Plan to reflect the possess-but-not-operate status of Facility Operating License No. DPR-7.

On July 2,1976, the facility was shut down for refueling and the required

' seismic modifications. In 1983, the licensee concluded that the seismic modifications and the modifications necessary to comply with requirements imposed after the accident at the TMI Unit 2 were uneconomical, and decided to decomission the facility. Facility Operating License No.

DPR-7 was amended to the possess-but-not-operate status on July 16, 1985, as_ requested by the licensee.

l 2. EVALUATION All' spent fuel has now been removed from the reactor vessel and placed in the spent fuel storage pool. There is no new fuel on site. The reactor

. cooling' system and associated tanks and pipes have been drained and l

sealed. .The suppression pool, below the reactor vessel, has been drained. Ion exchange systems were used to remove chemicals and radionuclides from the waste water prior to its discharge. The only L'- water containing radionuclides that remains on site is the water in the spent fuel pool, its associated systems and in the radwaste tanks, i

The proposed change does not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because: (1)The security plan only eliminates areas, equipment and systems that are not i

operating with the facility permanently shutdown and (2) the spent fuel, which is the primary focus of the proposed plan, has a reduced potential F for the probability or consequences of an accident because of the i

i significant radioactive decay in the more than 10 years the facility has been shutdown.

,,_--,--,-..-w,-=-w

~ '

• i a

^

The spent fuel radioactivity has now decayed such that the fuel can cool

'in air with natural convection. Postulated' accidents at Humboldt Bay, Unit 3, involving the. spent fuel are evaluated in Section 3.2 3 of the Draft Environmental Statement (NUREG-1166) issued by the NRC-in April 1986. The staff concludes in NUREG-1166 that there are no postulated accidents'at Humboldt Bay, Unit 3, that would result in offsite exposures which would require protective action by the public.

The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, because the method of. storage'of spent fuel has not changed, and with the reactor defueled, permanently shutdown and the cooling system drained,~no reactor

, accidents are possible.

j The proposed change does not involve a reduction in a margin of safety because the security measures described in the plan are commensurate with the risks associated with the storage of fuel which have decreased because of radioactive decay of the fuel in the more than 10 years the facility has been shutdown.

Therefore, based on the above considerations the NRC staff has determined,

! in accordance with 10 CFR 550.92, that this proposed amendment will not involve a significant hazards consideration.

Access to the spent fuel is controlled through a combination of barriers, f intrusion detection systems and security guards which are discussed in detail in the licensee's Physical Security Plan (withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 573.21). Pursuant to 10 CFR 673.6, the licensee will not have to comply with the requirements of 5673.20, 73.25, 73.26, 73.27, 73.45, 73.46, 73.70 ~and 73.72 because the fuel is of low enrichment, is special nuclear material that is not readily separable from other radioactive material and has a total external radiation dose rate in excess 100 rems per hour at a distance of 3 feet from any

, accessible surface without intervening ' shielding.

We have concluded that the Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3. Physical 4

Security Plan, when implemented, will adequately protect the fuel against theft and radiological sabotage, and therefore, the proposed amendment will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety.

3.0 ENVIPONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment relates solely to safeguards matters and does not involve

, any significant construction impacts. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eliaibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR i 551.22(c)(12). Pursuant to 10 CFR 551.22(b) no environmental impact i-statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with 1

the issuance of this amendment.

1 I

4.0 CONCLUSION

2 The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed ,above, that: (1)thereisreasonable'assurancethatthe=healthandsafetyof the public will not be endangered by maintenance of the facility in the proposed manner, and (2) licensed activities will be conducted in .

compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this

~

amendment will not be inimical to'the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Dated: February 11, 1987 Principal Contributors: Charles E. Gaskin and Peter B. Erickson e

0 l

t- - - . .- ,. . . - - - - - . - . - . - .. . . . . - . - _ . _ . - .__ ____

d

• m ., a: a ::~ m 7-c > o-p.;.w o ~,

9 .w te d;q g g .f.9.y--~:~f.;;'

L . . hi l.w.%.i::uw * -

. .20371 ..

Federal Register / Vol. 51.'No'.107 / Wedne'sday, June.4.198e] Notice's

~

A.

especially those which'are part of the ^  ;

. Basisforproposednos/gnificant. > reactor coolant pressure boundary or' . . .

calculation of the proposed' values is the, .. hozords consideration determination attached - thereto, should not be placed use cf a six inch diameter pipe instead : 7 .I ne proposed change does not involve' cf a fourinch diameter pipe. .- an increase in the probabi!!ty or . . Into service with reduced structural .,

'Ihe safety function of the isolation. integrity.%e proposed amendment, . - i consequences of an accident previously v:!ve in the RCIC steam supply line is to evaluated because:(1) ne security plan responds to the staff's request.

Basis forproposedno significant' O cl:se following a postulated break of the ordy eliminates areas, equipment and

• cte:m supply Ifne thus isolating the " systems that are not operating with the %e hozords considemtion determination: i I Commission has provided II c:ntainment.The flow rate assumed  ; in facility permanently shutdown and (2) theloss of coolant accident (LOCA)- the spent fuel,which is the primary . standards in10 CFR 50.92(c) for determining that a proposed amendment *

.) "

s:fety analysis was 300 percent of rated . focus of the proposed plan,has a ., r. ,

RCIC steam flow and is not changed in lavolves no significant har.ards reduced potential for the probability or the calculation of the proposed consequences of an accident because of consideration. Accordingly thelicenses instrument setpoint and allowable . the s!gnificant radioactive decay in the - - has performed the following ' analysis:

v:!ues.Because the safety analysis for more than 9 years the facility has been This change does not involve a - k the LOCA would remain the same, the shutdown.

- significant increase in the probability or j proposed change wouldnot involve a %eproposed change does not efeate. . consequences of an accident previous -

the possibility of a new or different kind evaluated because deleting'ITS significant increase in the probability or d consequences of an accident previously of accident from any accident reviously 3.4.10.1.d requires that strucutural l evaluated.%e change would make the integrity be restored inlieu of - g cctuationinstrumentationsetpoints g 7, evaluated,becausethemethe ofstorage p,,g,,,,,,, of spent

,g ,, ,y,g,,,g,,, gg,fuelhas not1cha consistent with the as built plant.He . and with the reactor defueled and change constitutes an additional '

setpoints have been and continue to be permanehtly shut down.no reactor restriction not presently incl,uded in the , -

caministratively controlled to the . accidents are possible. -

- proposed values by plant administrative .

The proposed change does not involve ,This' change does not create the. y procedures.Because the plant a reductionin a margin of safety . . possibill of a new or different kind of 1

l equipment and operating procedes '. . because the security m6asures accident m any accident previously  ;

I remain the same,the proposed change described in the plan are cocunensurst, evaluated because restoring structural

.p i

w:uld not create the possibility of a ne.w with the risks associated with the - Integrity is more conservative than evaluating structuralintegrity from an or different kind of accident from any :l'

• cccident previously evaluated. Bec, ause . . storage of fuef which have accident analysis standpoint.By decreasedbe .e th* ' a val restoring structuralintegrity, assurance ff ecneervat$ve.tha t$epre[e tly, jJ ,; ' in . . . , the

..* more than

' la provided 9 years that a newtheor different facilitykind has.s.

specified values,the proposed cha.nge,jbe.e.n shutdown.ghdMMod M {

of accidentivillnotoccur. .

, ,. considerations the NRC staff has  %!s change does'notinvolve a 'I ed et[on se .

• .  ? determinedin accordance with to CFRsignificant reduction in a margin of " ,

rdinal

' Part 50.92 that this proposed amendment safety because restoring structural de ermine that e propos en ! ment -

w n Hnv Ive a sigscant hazards : ' Integrity inlieu of evaluating structural, does not involve a signific, ant hazar.ds , e asideration. , . .

integrity assures that margins of safety ' ' '

s ,

LocoIPublicDocument Room

• • "'iderat!0".

location: Eureka.Humboldt Coanty are notreduced.

LocalPublicDocumentRoom ,

• In the April 6,1983 FederalR ster focation:Hfnds Junior College. Ubrary,421I Street (County Court (48 FR 14870), the NRC publishe a list McLendon Ubrary,Raymond. House) Eureka. California 95501. of examples of amendments that are not

- _ ,Attorneyforlicensee:Phillip A."

Mississippi 39154. ,

. Crane, Jr., Pacific Gas and Electric likely to involve a significant hazards Attorneyforlicensee: Nicholas S. . ^

id f[co', Ca! f a 94 h erati n. Example!!of th tlia

" t co stitutes k, 11 and Re o s 12001 Street N.W Washington.D.C.20036fl NRCPioject Dinctor: Herbert N. b s'tates:"A cha)se

." an additionallimitation, restriction, or CPmfect Directon Walter R. 7 Berkow. , y .i ,

control not presently included in the

' W'., a . Portland General Electric'Coinpany, e't technical specifications, e.g., a more

' ,,,A,

. al., Docket No,50-344 Trojan Nuclear- ~' stringent surveillance requirement" Pacific Gas and Elecrlc Company. - Plant, Columbia County, Oregon Docket No.50-133 Humboldt Bay 2 Since the above exampleis judged to

-- Power Plant, Unit No.3, Eureka,g [ Date

,h. ofs.,,. amendment , r .v v.

request: Airild. . . . applyto the .proposed .

ch

, , proposed cb is deemed not to "q

Califela ,,),g . j n , g , ,,,.W 34 .1986.* Eription

~

Des of amendment request {.1 cant hazard -

- . . DateofamendmentrequestiMay14b* f W A , ,ne proposed ideration. amendment  ;,. . . i . ; . delet'e

wpuld .. .g .

• Inv 1966. . w M .: .O ti*

' ' Descr/ptio'n'of amendment. Paragraph requot& TrojanParagra'ph 3.4.10.1.d. Technical 3.4.10.1.d Specincation no significanthazards consideration * .

(TPS), J . cons +The

- The licensee proposes an amendment to of TSS % 4.10,"RCS Structural .,,.

determination and agrees with the -

, Ucense No.DPR-7 to approve a revised - Integrity," currently a!Iows thelicensee's

~

!!censeeanalysis.The staff has, ~,..

security plan for Humboldt Bay Power - to perform an evaluation of reduced .., thereforeimade a proposed .* r * "

Plant, Unit No.3 (the facility).%e% structural !ntegrity as an alternative' to" determination that the licensee's request

, proposed security plan is reduced in M restoring structural integrity. By fetter 1, . , does notinvolve algnificant hazards .

scope totover only the storage of spent dated February 10,1986 the staff - considerations.

fuel.%e facility is permanently shut . } requested the ticensee review Parrgraph Loco /Public Document Room down and authority to operate has been 3.4.10.1.d and propose revised Tecanical location:Multnomah County Ubrary, deleted by an amendment to allow . Specifications besed on the staff's 801 S.W. toth Avenue. Portland. Oregon.

posseas-but not operate status issued .

on concern that safety related components, l July 18,1965c .

_ _ _ _ _ _ . ._. . . _ _