Northeast Nuclear Energy Company; Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed no Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

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