[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 180 (Monday, September 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-23140]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: September 19, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-423]
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company; 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-49, issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO/the
licensee), for operation of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit
No. 3, located in New London County, Connecticut.
The proposed amendment would revise the Technical Specifications
(TS) to modify surveillance requirements by increasing the acceptance
criterion for the closure of the main steam isolation valves (MSIVs)
from 5 seconds to 10 seconds.
The proposed change would permit Millstone Unit 3 to resume plant
operation. To resume plant operations Millstone Unit 3 must meet the
operability requirements of the Technical Specifications for the MSIVs.
On September 8, 1994, during monthly testing of the ``C'' MSIV, it was
determined that the MSIV was inoperable because its closure time was
determined to be greater than 5 seconds. Subsequent efforts to meet the
required closure time have been unsuccessful.
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 (SHC), which is
presented below:
* * * The proposed change does not involve an SHC because the
change would not:
1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously analyzed.
NNECO's proposal to modify Surveillance Requirement 4.7.1.5.1 of
the Millstone Unit No. 3 Technical Specifications does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously analyzed.
The increase in the MSIV stroke time from 5 seconds to 10
seconds has no adverse impact on the FSAR [Final Safety Analysis
Report] analyses for the feedwater line break and the main steam
line break. The applicable acceptance criteria (e.g., DNBR
[departure from nucleate boiling ratio] and pressure) for both 3-
loop and 4-loop operation continue to be met with an increase in the
MSIV closure time from 5 to 10 seconds. No other accident analyses
discussed in Chapter 15 of the FSAR are affected by the proposed
increase in the MSIV closure time.
Additionally, evaluations have determined that the proposal does
not affect the environmental qualification program for either the
main steam valve building or the containment, does not impact the
design basis accident radiological consequence calculations, does
not negatively impact fluid transient evaluations, has a negligible
impact on the long term cooling capacity of the steam generators,
and does not change pipe rupture mechanistic effects.
2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any previously analyzed.
The proposed change does not introduce any new failure modes. It
simply modifies an acceptance criterion for a surveillance
requirement. As such, increasing the MSIV stroke time from 5 seconds
to 10 seconds affects only the FSAR analyses for the feedwater line
break and the main stream line break. No other accident analyses
discussed in Chapter 15 of the FSAR are affected by the proposed
increase in the MSIV closure time. The applicable acceptance
criteria (e.g., DNBR and pressure) for both 3-loop and 4-loop
operation continue to be met with an increase in the MSIV closure
time from 5 to 10 seconds.
Additionally, evaluations have determined that the proposal does
not affect the environmental qualification program for either the
main steam valve building or the containment, does not impact the
design basis accident radiological consequence calculations, does
not negatively impact fluid transient evaluations, has a negligible
impact on the long term cooling capacity of the steam generators,
and does not change pipe rupture mechanistic effects.
Thus, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed.
3. Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The increase in the MSIV stroke time from 5 seconds to 10
seconds has no adverse impact on the FSAR analyses for the feedwater
line break and the main steam line break. The applicable acceptance
criteria (e.g., DNBR and pressure) for both 3-loop and 4-loop
operation continue to be met with an increase in the MSIV closure
time from 5 to 10 seconds. No other accident analyses discussed in
Chapter 15 of the FSAR are affected by the proposed increase in the
MSIV closure time. Additionally, the proposed change does not impact
the consequences of an accident previously analyzed.
Based on the above, there is no 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 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, 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
20555.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
By October 19, 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 Learning Resource Center, Three
Rivers Community-Technical College, Thames Valley Campus, 574 New
London Turnpike, Norwich Connecticut 06360. 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 aspects(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 then 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 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 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 F. Stolz: 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 Gerald
Garfield, Esquire, Day, Berry & Howard, City Place, Hartford,
Connecticut 06103-3499, 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 September 9, 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 Learning Resource Center,
Three Rivers Community-Technical College, Thames Valley Campus, 574 New
London Turnpike, Norwich, Connecticut 06360.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of September 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Guy S. Vissing,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-4, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-23140 Filed 9-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
