ML20203A027

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amend to Operating License,Proposed NSHC Determination & Opportunity for Hearing.Amend Requests Changes to TS Degraded Voltage Relay Setpoints

ML20203A027
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	01/22/1999
From:	Hopkins J NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20203A003	List: ML20202J854 ML20203A027 ML20203A050
References
NUDOCS 9902090270
Download: ML20203A027 (8)

Text

_ _ . _ _ - . . _ _ _ - _

7590-OL P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

lLLINOIS POWER COMPANY DOCKET _NO_50-461 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATIQN. 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 lilinois Power Company (IP, or the licensee) for operation of the Clinton Power Station (CPS), located in DeWitt County, Illinois.

The proposed amendment requests changes to the Technical Specification degraded voltage relay setpoints.

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.

l The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 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 safety. As 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:

9902090270 990205 PDR ADOCK 05000461 P ~

PDR

. p (1) . The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The degraded voltage relays are designed to respond to degraded voltage conditions from the offsite sources, and are not initiators of such a condition themselves. However, proper establishment of the degraded voltage relay setpoints is necessary to avoid inadvertent or unnecessary disconnection of the offsite source and transfer to the standby diesel generators (DGs) when the offsite sources are still capable of supplying adequate power to the plant safety buses. At the same time,

> proper establishment of the setpoints must also ensure that a transfer will occur when required so that power can be provided to safety loads, with voltage at greater than or equal to the minimum required voltage. The revised degraded voltage setpoints were established consistent with these requirements using an NRC-approved methodology. The revised setpoints (and the revised minimum bus voltage specified in the DG surveillances) take into account the new minimum required bus voltage required for all safety loads based on a more in-depth circuit analysis. Concurrently, the expected range of offsite voltage has been factored into the setpoint calculations to ensure that the offsite source can reset the degraded voltage relays at the minimum expected offsite voltage, thus maximizing the availab!!ity of the offsite source consistent with the intent of 10 CFR 50 Appendix A General Design Criterion 17.

Raising the degraded voltage relay setpoints does not increase the probability of

. transferring the safety buses to the DGs. This is because the existing margin

' between the safety bus voltage (based on the minimum expected offsite voltage) r and the upper reset value of the degraded voltage relay will be maintained by the static VAR compensators that are installed on the CPS auxiliary power system.

Chapter 15 of the Clinton Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) discusses the effects of anticipated process disturbances to determine their consequences and the capability of the plant to control or accommodate such events. Subsection 15.2.6 discusses loss of a-c power, including loss of grid voltage. This discussion demonstrates that fuel design limits and reactor coolant pressure boundary design conditions are not exceeded. The proposed changes do not affect the discussion nor the conclusion of this evaluation.

Due to the associated change in the tap setting for the reserve auxiliary transformer (RAT), the proposed changes involve some increased potential for overvoltage for certain loads. Although the estimated magnitude of the overvoltage to those loads is not severe, procedural guidance will be established to prevent or mitigate such a condition. This will minimize the potential for equipment failure due to overvoltage.

Therefore, this aspect of the proposed changes does not involve a significant increase in the probability of failure of equipment important to safety.

Based on the above, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.

.1_

] . .

. , 1 i .

3 (2) The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 4

accident from any accident previously evaluated.

i The proposed changes involve setpoint changes for the degraded voltage relays

! and a change to the minimum bus voltage required to be achieved during DG i testing. The setpoint changes to the relays alters their performance in an intended i manner but in no other way affects their intended function. The change to the DG 4

surveillance criteria is primarily administrative since the DGs have repeatedly shown that they are able to achicve this value during testing. The DGs themselves are physically unaffected. These changes by themselves thus involve no physical  !

changes to the facility, no new failure modes of initiating conditions that could lead to a new or different accident.

Notwithstanding the above, and as noted previously, the associated change in the RAT tap setting could involve an increased potential for overvoltage to some plant loads. As noted above, however, this potential is reduced by providing procedural guidance to plant operators. The potential for equipment failure due to overvoltage is thus ininimized, and no new failure mode is thus introduced.

Based on the above, the proposed changes do not involve any significant increase in the failure of plant equipment due either to overvoltage or inadequate voltage, and do not introduce any new failure modes or conditions that could lead to a new

. or different kind of accident. On this basis, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different accident from any accident previously evaluated.

(3) None of the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The margin of safety that may be associated with the degraded voltage relays is the margin involved in ensuring adequate voltage to plant safety loads. The revised degraded voltage relay setpoints, as proposed, were established by an NRC-accepted methodology that ensures the revised setpoints will maintain this margin of safety. Consistent with this determination, the proposed revision of the lower voltage limit for the DG surveillances (SR3.8.1.2, SR 3.8.1.7, SR 3.8.1.11, SR 3.8.1.12, SR 3.8.1.15, SR 3.8.1.19, and SR 3.8.1.20) will assure that the DGs will be capable of contro!Iing voltage to a range that will be adequate for the loads on the bus. This value was determined using revised voltage calculations and is consistent with the proposed degraded voltage setpoints. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

__,~___

~

- _ T_ , . - . ,.

4 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.

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 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 rction 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 205S5-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 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 Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.

The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.

By March 1 , 1999, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license anti any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a wrinen request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene.

A - ,A- c+mw-e ,4m am %Fa

-. -. - - , - - - - - _ - - . - . - - - - _ _ - _ ~ .

5 Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shsfl be filed in accordance with the I

Commission's " Rules of 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 Document Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, ,

i 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 and Licensing Board, designated I

by the Ccamission 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 l

Board willissue 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 j 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 petitioners property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; .nd (3) the possible effect of any order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioners 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 A _

6 1

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 wn;ch 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 r, hall be limited to matters within the l

scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, I 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 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 the amendment.

y _ _ ,

- 7 If tho final determir@..n b 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 t petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, A@ Mon: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's 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 Stetzner, Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, 500 South 27th Street, Decatur, IL 62525, attorney 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 a 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, see the application for amendment dated January 20,1999, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document

.+,,aa . -mv s -

7 8 9

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, Clinte, :

IL 61727.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of January 1999.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t

Jon B. Hopkins, enior roject Manager Project Directorate ill-2 d Division of Reactor Projects -lil/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation e

=**-e*+s a e.m ase s-%- iA .p .swe +5s

• a  %