[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 142 (Friday, July 24, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39913-39915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19804]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-397]
Washington Public Power Supply System; Notice of 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-21, issued to Washington Public Power Supply System (Supply System
or the licensee), for operation of the Nuclear Project Number 2 (WNP-2)
located in Benton County, Washington.
This technical specification (TS) change authorizes the licensee to
conduct TS Surveillance 3.8.4.8 (performance test) in lieu of TS
Surveillance 3.8.4.7 (service test) for the WNP-2 Division 2 Class 1E
125 VDC battery on a one-time basis. The change to the TS is authorized
until the licensee can perform the sevice test during the next
scheduled refueling outage or during the next unplanned outage of
sufficient duration. This amendment has been requested in accordance
with the notice of enforcement discretion granted to the licensee on
July 17, 1998.
This amendment needs to be processed on an exigent basis to
promptly bring the plant into literal compliance with the technical
specifications due to an inadvertent missed surveillance. Without this
amendment the licensee would be required to shut down the plant and
create an unnecessary plant transient.
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 involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The safety function of the Battery E-B1-2 is to provide 125 VDC
power to the Division 2 safety-related loads including: RCIC Turbine
Exhaust Valve, CAC Isolation Valves, Diesel (DG-2) Engine Backup
Lube and Fuel Oil Pumps, Critical Switchgear control power, Critical
Instrument Power Supply Inverter, NSSS Instrument and Control Board
power, and control power to the Remote Shutdown Panel. This
establishes the Division 2, 125 VDC Power system as an accident
mitigation system, and is not an individual precursor of an
evaluated accident. Battery E-B1-2 has no role in the initiation of
design basis accidents (DBAs) or transients identified in the FSAR.
The proposed change entails a one time relief from verbatim
compliance with SR 3.8.4.7 by permitting the performance test in SR
3.8.4.8 to suffice for performance of the SR 3.8.4.7 service test.
Improved Technical Specifications (ITS) SR 3.8.4.7 presently allows
the ``modified'' performance test in SR 3.8.4.8 to be performed in
lieu of the service test in SR 3.8.4.7. The difference between the
modified performance test short duration load of 400 amperes for six
seconds and the performance test load of 350 amperes is small when
compared to the 922 ampere one-minute rating of the battery. Testing
at the levels defined in either situation provides a satisfactory
battery performance demonstration. Additionally, documented test
results since the date of manufacture (1994) of Battery E-B1-2
substantiate the battery's capability to perform its intended safety
functions. The performance test completed in April of 1997
demonstrated a battery capacity of 104.7% which is above the battery
replacement criteria of 80% capacity. The performance test performed
when the battery was new as part of acceptance testing in May of
1994 documented a capacity of 104.17%. Comparing the 1994 and 1997
performance test results indicates that the battery has not degraded
during the 4 years since it was manufactured and installed. Based on
the substantial battery capacity demonstrated by these performance
tests and the short duration peak load required by the service test
(400 amps) as compared to the one-minute rating of the battery (922
amps), the battery is fully capable of meeting the requirements of
the modified performance test and the service test.
Regular battery surveillances are routinely performed which
include specific gravity and battery terminal voltage measurements.
As a compensatory measure, in addition to the visual corrosion
inspection, the Supply System will measure Battery E-B1-2 connection
resistance on a 92 day interval and verify that the intercell
connector resistance is 24.4 E-6 ohms. These
surveillance measures will ensure that Battery E-B1-2 remains
operable.
The probability of an evaluated accident is derived from the
probabilities of the individual precursors to that accident. The
consequences of an evaluated accident are determined by the
operability of plant systems designed to mitigate those
consequences. Since Battery E-B1-2 is operable and will remain in
service, this action will not change the availability of any safety
related equipment and no individual precursors of an accident are
affected. Therefore, this change does not increase the probability
of an accident previously evaluated. In addition, since the
functions and capabilities of systems designed to mitigate the
consequences of an accident have not changed, the consequences of an
accident previously evaluated are not expected to increase.
Therefore, there is no significant increase in the probability or
consequence of an accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The service test requires a discharge rate of 400 amps for the
first six seconds and drops to less than 250 amps for a duration of
two hours. The performance test requires a constant 350 amps
throughout the test. Therefore, a difference of 50 amps for the
first six seconds is not enveloped by the performance test. The
service test requirement of 400 amps is small compared to the
manufacturer's one-minute discharge rating of the battery (922
amps). The 50 amperes for six seconds difference in the testing
profiles of the SR 3.8.4.7 service test and the SR 3.8.4.8
performance test was confirmed by the manufacturer as insignificant
relative to demonstration of the battery capacity and its short
duration discharge rate.
Creation of the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident would require the creation of one or more new precursors of
that accident. New accident precursors may be created by
modifications to the plant configuration. No modifications to plant
configuration will result from this proposed one time surveillance
test change. Documented test results demonstrate that Battery E-B1-2
is capable of performing its intended safety function. Since Battery
E-B1-2 has not been modified and will remain in operation during
Operational Modes 1, 2, and 3 as required by the Technical
Specifications, no new failure modes of the 125 VDC Distribution
System are introduced.
Therefore, this change will not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. The proposed change does not involve a signficant reduction
in a margin of safety.
The basis for the margin of safety for the Division 2, 125 VDC
battery is the two hour operating time defined in the DC System
[[Page 39914]]
design basis. Battery E-B1-2 is properly sized using the methodology
prescribed in IEEE Standard 485-1983 and includes the emergency
loads anticipated during a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) with a
coincident Loss of Offsite Power (LOOP), for two hours.
Additionally, the battery is relatively new having been manufactured
and installed in 1994 and is in the prime of its service life. The
battery service test performed in April of 1995 documented 114.2
volts @ 459 amps (in-rush) and 111.0 volts @ 279.0 amps (120 mins.).
This service test encompassed the safety-related two hour duty cycle
and demonstrated that the battery is able to supply and maintain the
operable status of all emergency loads for their respective duty
times.
The performance test uses the manufacturer's two hour discharge
rate and is used to establish baseline capacity for trending battery
degradation. The modified performance draws approximately 700.1
ampere-hours and the performance test draws 700 ampere-hours. Both
of these tests are more severe than the service test which, when
corrected for temperature, draws approximately 413 amp-hours. Since
the performance test done in April 1997 demonstrated a capacity of
104.7% (of 700 A-h) there is no decrease in the margin of safety
when compared to the total amp-hour demands of the LOCA with LOOP
duty cycle, (i.e., the service test).
Battery E-B1-2 will not be removed from service during plant
operation. Therefore, there is no change in availability of the
Division 2 125 VDC battery, charger, or distribution system, and as
such, there is no change in the base assumptions of our PRA models.
Thus there is no impact on the WNP-2 PSA. Therefore, this change
will not involve a significant 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 14 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 14-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 14-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 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 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 August 24, 1998, 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, and at the local public
document room located at the Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate
Street, Richland, Washington 99352. 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 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 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 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 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
[[Page 39915]]
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 20555-0001, Attention: 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 Perry D. Robinson, Esq., Winston &
Strawn, 1400 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-3502, 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 July 17, 1998, which is 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 Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate
Street, Richland, Washington 99352.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Raynard Wharton,
Acting Project Manager Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-19804 Filed 7-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
