94-15266. Illinois Power Co.; Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing  

  • [Federal Register Volume 59, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 22, 1994)]
    [Unknown Section]
    [Page 0]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 94-15266]
    
    
    [[Page Unknown]]
    
    [Federal Register: June 22, 1994]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket No. 50-461]
    
     
    
    Illinois Power Co.; Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to 
    Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards 
    Consideration Determination, 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 the Illinois Power Company (the licensee), for 
    operation of the Clinton Power Station, Unit 1, located in DeWitt 
    County, Illinois.
        The proposed amendment would modify Technical Specification 3/
    4.4.3.1, ``Reactor Coolant System Leakage--Leakage Detection Systems,'' 
    to permit continued plant operation with inoperable drywell floor drain 
    sump flow rate monitoring instrumentation. Continued plant operation 
    would be permitted until the first time the plant is required to be 
    brought to COLD SHUTDOWN after July 10, 1994.
        Technical Specification 3/4.4.3.1 requires that systems capable of 
    monitoring unidentified reactor coolant system leakage rates remain 
    operable. Rector coolant system leakage that falls on the drywell 
    floors is channeled through the floor drains and enters the drywell 
    floor drain sump. Prior to entering the floor drain sump, water passes 
    through the drywell floor drain sump flow monitoring instrumentation 
    where the instantaneous flow rates and total integrated flow are 
    measured. The flow monitoring instrumentation consists of a V-notch 
    weir box containing a capacitance probe. Water flows through a V-notch 
    water level which is directly proportional to the flow through the weir 
    box. Thus, flow through the V-notch is equal to the sump inlet flow 
    rate. The capacitance probe is calibrated to correspond to the incoming 
    flow rate and provides a continuous control room indication of the 
    unidentified reactor coolant system leakage rate. An alarm is generated 
    when the technical specification limit of 5 gpm of unidentified leakage 
    occurs. The V-notch weir box instrumentation meets the accuracy and 
    sensitivity requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.45 for drywell floor 
    drain sump flow monitoring.
        The licensee began to observe questionable readings from the 
    indicated drywell floor drain sump inlet flow and subsequently declared 
    the drywell floor drain sump monitoring instrumentation inoperable on 
    June 10, 1994. Technical Specification 3.4.3.1 permits 30 days of 
    continuous plant operation provided the drywell floor drain sump flow 
    rate is monitored and determined by alternative means at least once 
    every 8 hours.
        All efforts by the licensee to restore the drywell sump inlet flow 
    monitoring instrumentation to operable status have been unsuccessful. 
    The instrument loop has been recalibrated and equipment external to the 
    drywell has been verified to be operating properly. The only option 
    remaining for the licensee is to enter the drywell in order to examine 
    the V-notch weir box and associated capacitance probe. However, the V-
    notch weir box is located in a keyway beneath the reactor vessel and 
    inside the biological shield wall. Due to the high radiation and 
    temperatures in this location, a plant shutdown would be required 
    before personnel would be able to reach the instrumentation.
        In a letter dated June 20, 1994, the licensee requested that this 
    amendment application be treated as an emergency because unless 
    approved, technical specifications would require a plant shutdown. The 
    licensee stated that such action would be necessary to preclude an 
    unnecessary plant transient and related plant risk associated with a 
    plant shutdown. Due to time constraints, sufficient time is not 
    available to permit the customary public notices in advance of this 
    action.
        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.
        Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under 
    exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine 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:
    
        (1) The proposed change does not affect any initiators of any 
    previously evaluated accidents. Additionally, the proposed change 
    involves equipment that only provides indication and therefore, it 
    cannot increase the probability of any accident previously 
    evaluated.
        As stated in Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) Section 
    7.7.1.24.1, no credit is taken in the safety analysis for operation 
    of or operator reliance upon the leakage detection monitoring 
    instrumentation associated with the drywell sumps. Notwithstanding, 
    the drywell floor drain sump flow monitoring system provides the 
    capability to detect and measure leakage from unknown sources of 
    leakage in the drywell. The drywell floor drain sump inlet flow 
    monitoring V-notch weir box instrumentation is designed to meet the 
    accuracy requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.45. This instrumentation 
    does not provide any automatic action or control functions. In 
    addition to the V-notch system, drywell floor drain sump flow rates 
    can be determined by using the sump pump pump-out timers, cycle 
    counters and level switches. In addition, unidentified leakage into 
    the drywell is monitored by a flow rate meter in the condensate 
    discharge line from the drywell air coolers and by a particulate and 
    a gaseous radiation monitoring channel of the drywell fission 
    product monitor. While the drywell fission product monitor does not 
    provide a quantitative leakage rate, it is sensitive enough to 
    provide plant operators with early indication of an unanticipated 
    increase in unidentified leakage. Furthermore, a number of other 
    parameters are monitored with appropriate instrumentation to provide 
    the plant operators with indirect indication of increases in 
    unidentified leakage. These parameters include drywell pressure and 
    drywell temperature. These alternative methods of detecting 
    increases in unidentified leakage rates provide operators with 
    sufficient information to take appropriate action to respond to an 
    increase in leakage. Based on the above, Illinois Power concludes 
    that the proposed change will not increase the consequences of any 
    accident previously evaluated.
        (2) The proposed change does not involve any modification to 
    plant structures or components and only involves equipment that 
    provides indication of leakage to the plant operators. The affected 
    equipment does not provide any automatic action or control 
    functions. As a result, the proposed change does not involve a 
    change in the operation of the plant, nor does it introduce any new 
    failure modes. Therefore, this proposed change cannot create the 
    possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
    previously evaluated.
        (3) The margin of safety associated with the instrumentation 
    affected by the proposed change may be related to the limits on 
    unidentified leakage. As stated in the Bases for Technical 
    Specification 3/4.4.3.2. ``The allowable leakage rates from the 
    reactor coolant system have been based on the predicted and 
    experimentally observed behavior of cracks in pipes . . . The 
    evidence obtained from experiments suggests that for leakage 
    somewhat greater than that specified for unidentified leakage the 
    probability is small that the imperfection or crack associated with 
    such leakage would grow rapidly. With respect to Intergranular 
    Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) related cracks in service 
    sensitive austenitic stainless steel piping however, an additional 
    limit on the allowed increase in unidentified leakage (within a 24-
    hour period or less) is imposed in accordance with NRC Generic 
    Letter 88-01, `NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless 
    Steel Piping,' since an abrupt increase in the unidentified leakage 
    could be indicative of leakage from such a source.'' The proposed 
    change does not alter any of these limits on the unidentified 
    leakage.
        As previously described, flow rates into the drywell floor drain 
    sump can be determined based on the indicated run time for the sump 
    pumps and the known pump flow rates or by monitoring the sump fill-
    up times and considering the volume corresponding to the current 
    level control band. These alternate methods are sufficient to 
    determine whether unidentified leakage in the drywell exceeds the 5 
    pgm limit and whether changes in this leakage exceed the limit of a 
    2 gpm increase in any 24-hour period or less.
        Additionally, with respect to the ability to detect changes in 
    unidentified leakage rates, in addition to the V-notch system, 
    drywell floor drain sump flow rates can be determined by using the 
    sump pump pump-out timers, cycle counters and level switches. In 
    addition, unidentified leakage into the drywell is monitored by a 
    flow rate meter in the condensate discharge line from the drywell 
    air coolers and by a particulate and a gaseous radiation monitoring 
    channel of the drywell fission product monitor. While the drywell 
    fission product monitor does not provide a quantitative leakage 
    rate, it is sensitive enough to provide plant operators with early 
    indication of an unanticipated increase in the unidentified leakage 
    rate involving reactor coolant. Furthermore, a number of other 
    parameters are monitored with appropriate instrumentation to provide 
    the plant operators with indirect indication of increases in 
    unidentified leakage. These parameters include drywell pressure and 
    drywell temperature.
        As stated above, the drywell floor drain sump flow monitoring 
    instrumentation does not provide any automatic action or control 
    functions. Further, as stated in USAR Section 7.7.1.24.1, no credit 
    is taken in the safety analysis for operation of or operator 
    reliance upon the leakage detection monitoring instrumentation 
    associated with the drywell sumps.
        In light of all the above, Illinois Power concludes that the 
    proposed change does not involve a reduction in the 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 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 15 days after 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 15-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 15-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. The Commission expects that the need to 
    take this action will occur very infrequently.
        Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules Review and 
    Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications 
    Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
    Washington, DC 20555, and should cite the publication date and page 
    number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be 
    delivered to Room 6D22, Two White Flint North, 11555 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 
    20555.
        The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to 
    intervene is discussed below.
        By July 22, 1994, 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 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 accordance with the 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, DC 20555 and at the local 
    public document room located at the Vespasian Warner Public Library, 
    120 West Johnson Street, Clinton, Illinois, 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 by 
    the Commission 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 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 particularly 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 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 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 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 providing 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 significant 
    information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on 
    a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to 
    matters within the scope of the amendment 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 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 the amendment is issued before the expiration of the 30-day 
    hearing period, the Commission will make a final determination on the 
    issue of no significant hazards consideration. If a hearing is 
    requested, 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.
        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 Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
    Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Services 
    Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, 
    the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC 20555, by the 
    above date. Where petitions are filed during the last 10 days of the 
    notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform 
    the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-
    (800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700. The Western Union 
    operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the 
    following message addressed to John Hannon, Director, Project 
    Directorate III-3; 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 Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
    Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Sheldon Zabel, Esq., Schiff, 
    Hardin and Waite, 7200 Sears Tower, 233 Wacker Drive, Chicago, Illinois 
    60606, 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)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
        For further details with respect to this action, see the 
    application for amendment dated June 20, 1994, which is available for 
    public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
    Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the local 
    public document room, located at the Vespasian Warner Public Library, 
    120 West Johnson Street, Clinton, Illinois 61727.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Douglas V. Pickett,
    Acting Director, Project Directorate III-3, Division of Reactor 
    Projects-III-IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 94-15266 Filed 6-21-94; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
06/22/1994
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Uncategorized Document
Document Number:
94-15266
Pages:
0-0 (1 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Federal Register: June 22, 1994, Docket No. 50-461