ML20249C025
| ML20249C025 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 06/23/1998 |
| From: | Rinaldi F NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20249C026 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9806250193 | |
| Download: ML20249C025 (7) | |
Text
._
____.-__.=.;.m__..
~
7590-01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMlSSION DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION DOCKET NOS. 50-369 AND 50-370 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCES OF AMENDMENTS TO FliCILITY OPERATING l.lCENSES. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS C CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17 issued to Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee) for operation of the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
The proposed amendments would revise Figure 5.1-1 of the Technical Specifications (TS) to show the location of the new meteorological tower. The proposed TS change does not change the related TS Section 5.1.1.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, 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 t
}
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 amendments would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) crsate 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 9906250193 990623 PDR ADOCK 05000369
'P PDR s
b
. _ _. _ _ n,
= _._,7
. required by 10 CFR 50.g1(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
1.
Does the change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
No. The proposed change involves the location of the meteorological tower. The meteorological tower is mainly used for post-accident radiological release assessment and does not impact the initiation or mitigation of previously analyzed accidents. No change in routine or accident radioactive release diffusion estimate methods is made.
The new location is approximately twice as far as the old location from the reactor buildings. Within a radius of 60 meters of the new location, there is no significant structure that the tower can reach if it falls down. A fall of the tower due to natural or man-made causes will not adversely affect Category I structures such as the reactor buildings, auxiliary building, spent fuel pool buildings, diesel generator buildings, and control room. These structures have been analyzed for effect from tomado missiles comparable to or more severe than those possibly generated from a failed tower. The results of these analyses showed that no safety limit was exceeded due to tomado missiles.
The new location and tower do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2.
Does the change create tN possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
No. The proposed change involves the location of the meteorological tower. The new tower, like the old one, is separated from other systems in the plant. No physical changes to other systems or changes in methods goveming normal plant operation are made as a result of this proposed change. Failure of the new tower due to either man-made or natural causes should not create any new effects than those described above.
The new location and tower do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3.
Does this change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
i No. The proposed change involves the location of the meteorological tower. The proposed change does not involve any physical change to other systems in the plant and has no impact on any safety analysis assumptions. Therefore, this change does not involve a 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 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 9
--- w:. -.
. 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 after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 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 dorating 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 consider 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 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 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 6D$g, 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.
.The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By. July 29, 1998, 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
+
, 7_;
4 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 hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in acwrdance with the Commission's " Rules of Practice fcr Domestic Uconsing 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 J. Murrey Atkins Ubrary, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,9201 University City Boulevard, Chartotte, North Carolina. 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 Ucensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Ucensing 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 l
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 j
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 e
-, -- ~ r =-
v::' - -
-- 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 materialissue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendments 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 conter.non will not be permitted 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 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.
u m.
i-
~
4
_ if the final deterrninstion is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendments ard make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendments.
l if the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the l
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Ruhmakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Pub!ic 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 Ccmmission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to Mr. Albert I
Carr, Duke Energy Corporation,422 South Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina, attomey 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's balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(l)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, cae the application for amendments dated March 3,1998, as supplemented by letters dated April 24 and May 7,1998, which are available for public inspection 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 J. Murrey 4
' ", ' ~
_ ;.~,.* " " ' ' ' a_ _,,
7 Atkins Library, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,920118r.iversity City Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd dayof June 1998.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0 A s u /L RW F~
Frank Rinaldi, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects.1/11 ONice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4
9