ML050380482
| ML050380482 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 01/31/2005 |
| From: | Donohew J NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD4 |
| To: | Muench R Wolf Creek |
| Donohew J N, NRR/DLPM,415-1307 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML050380495 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC MC3862 | |
| Download: ML050380482 (12) | |
Text
January 31, 2005 Mr. Rick A. Muench President and Chief Executive Officer Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation Post Office Box 411 Burlington, KS 66839
SUBJECT:
WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE:
ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR HYDROGEN RECOMBINERS AND HYDROGEN MONITORS (TAC NO. MC3862)
Dear Mr. Muench:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 157 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 for the Wolf Creek Generating Station. The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated July 23, 2004 (WO 04-0027).
The amendment eliminates the requirements in the TSs associated with hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen monitors. A notice of availability for this TS improvement using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on September 25, 2003 (68 FR 55416).
A copy of our related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. The Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Jack Donohew, Senior Project Manager, Section 2 Project Directorate IV Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-482
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 157 to NPF-42
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page
January 31, 2005 Mr. Rick A. Muench President and Chief Executive Officer Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation Post Office Box 411 Burlington, KS 66839
SUBJECT:
WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE:
ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR HYDROGEN RECOMBINERS AND HYDROGEN MONITORS (TAC NO. MC3862)
Dear Mr. Muench:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 157 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 for the Wolf Creek Generating Station. The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated July 23, 2004 (WO 04-0027).
The amendment eliminates the requirements in the TSs associated with hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen monitors. A notice of availability for this TS improvement using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on September 25, 2003 (68 FR 55416).
A copy of our related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. The Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Jack Donohew, Senior Project Manager, Section 2 Project Directorate IV Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-482 DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC GHill (2)
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 157 to NPF-42 PDIV-2 Reading
- 2. Safety Evaluation RidsNrrDlpmLpdiv (HBerkow)
RidsNrrDlpmLpdiv2 (RGramm)
RidsNrrPMJDonohew cc w/encls: See next page RidsNrrLAEPeyton RidsOgcRp RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter RidsRgn4MailCenter (DGraves)
TBoyce TS: ML050350255 NRR-100 PKG.: ML050380495 ACCESSION NO.: ML050380482 NRR-058 w/comments OFFICE PDIV-2/PM PDIV-2/LA CLIIP LPM OGC Nlo PDIV-2/SC NAME JDonohew:mp EPeyton WReckley SZipkin SDembek DATE 1/5/05 1/3/05 1/5/05 1/10/05 1/27/05 DOCUMENT NAME: E:\\Filenet\\ML050380482.wpd OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Wolf Creek Generating Station cc:
Jay Silberg, Esq.
Shaw Pittman, LLP 2300 N Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20037 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-7005 Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 311 Burlington, KS 66839 Chief Engineer, Utilities Division Kansas Corporation Commission 1500 SW Arrowhead Road Topeka, KS 66604-4027 Office of the Governor State of Kansas Topeka, KS 66612 Attorney General 120 S.W. 10th Avenue, 2nd Floor Topeka, KS 66612-1597 County Clerk Coffey County Courthouse 110 South 6th Street Burlington, KS 66839 Vick L. Cooper, Chief Air Operating Permit and Compliance Section Kansas Department of Health and Environment Bureau of Air and Radiation 1000 SW Jackson, Suite 310 Topeka, KS 66612-1366 Site Vice President Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P.O. Box 411 Burlington, KS 66839 Superintendent Licensing Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P.O. Box 411 Burlington, KS 66839 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspectors Office/Callaway Plant 8201 NRC Road Steedman, MO 65077-1032
WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-482 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 157 License No. NPF-42 1.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A.
The application for amendment to the Wolf Creek Generating Station (the facility)
Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 filed by the Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the Corporation), dated July 23, 2004, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D.
The issuance of this license amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E.
The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
2.
Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment and Paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.
Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 157, and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, both of which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated in the license. The Corporation shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
3.
The license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 90 days of the date of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA/
Robert A. Gramm, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate IV Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: January 31, 2005
ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 157 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-42 DOCKET NO. 50-482 Replace the following pages of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change. The corresponding overleaf pages are provided to maintain document completeness.
REMOVE INSERT ii ii 3.3-38 3.3-38 3.3-40 3.3-40 3.6-21*
3.6-21 3.6-22 3.6-23 5.0-30 5.0-30
- Page 3.6-21 is provided because it is the overleaf page for 3.6-22. Amendment No. 157 does not appear on page 3.5-21 since there were no changes to the page.
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 157 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-42 WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-482
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated July 23, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML042110340), Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in Appendix A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 for the Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS). The proposed amendment eliminates the requirements in the TSs associated with hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen monitors. A notice of availability for this TS improvement using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on September 25, 2003 (68 FR 55416).
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has revised 10 CFR 50.44, "Standards for Combustible Gas Control System in Light-Water-Cooled Power Reactors." The amended standards eliminated the requirements for hydrogen recombiners and relaxed the requirements for hydrogen and oxygen monitoring. In letters dated December 17, 2002, and May 12, 2003, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) proposed to remove requirements for hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen and oxygen monitors from the standard technical specifications (STS) (NUREGs 1430 - 1434) on behalf of the industry to incorporate the amended standards. This proposed change was designated TSTF-447.
The NRC staff prepared a model safety evaluation (SE) for the elimination of requirements regarding containment hydrogen recombiners and the removal of requirements from TSs for containment hydrogen and oxygen monitors and solicited public comment (67 FR 50374, published August 2, 2002) in accordance with the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process (CLIIP). The use of the CLIIP was intended to help the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to remove the hydrogen recombiner and hydrogen and oxygen monitor requirements from TSs. Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which this model applied were informed (68 FR 55416, published September 25, 2003) that they could request amendments conforming to the model, and, in such requests, should confirm the applicability of the SE to their reactors and provide the requested plant-specific verifications and commitments. The licensee stated in its July 23, 2004, application that the NRC staff's findings presented in the model SE are applicable to WCGS.
2.0 BACKGROUND
Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, "Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power Reactors," was issued on March 20, 2000. The CLIIP is intended to improve the efficiency of NRC licensing processes.
This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the STS in a manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The NRC staff evaluates any comments received for a proposed change to the STS and either reconsiders the change or proceeds with announcing the availability of the change for proposed adoption by licensees. Those licensees opting to apply for the subject change to TSs are responsible for reviewing the NRC staff's evaluation, referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant-specific information. Each amendment application made in response to the notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
The Commissions regulatory requirements related to the content of TSs are set forth in 10 CFR 50.36. This regulation requires that the TSs include items in five specific categories.
These categories include (1) safety limits, limiting safety system settings and limiting control settings, (2) limiting conditions for operation (LCO), (3) surveillance requirements, (4) design features, and (5) administrative controls. However, the regulation does not specify the particular TSs to be included in a plants license.
Additionally, 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) sets forth four criteria to be used in determining whether an LCO is required to be included in the TSs. These criteria are as follows:
1.
Installed instrumentation that is used to detect, and indicate in the control room, a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
2.
A process variable, design feature, or operating restriction that is an initial condition of a design-basis accident or transient analysis that assumes either the failure of or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
3.
A structure, system, or component that is part of the primary success path and which functions or actuates to mitigate a design-basis accident or transient that either assumes the failure of or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
4.
A structure, system, or component which operating experience or probabilistic risk assessment has shown to be significant to public health and safety.
Existing LCOs and related surveillances included as TS requirements that satisfy any of the criteria stated above must be retained in the TSs. Those TS requirements which do not satisfy these criteria may be relocated to other licensee-controlled documents.
As part of the rulemaking that revised 10 CFR 50.44, the Commission retained requirements for ensuring a mixed atmosphere, inerting Mark I and II containments, and providing hydrogen control systems capable of accommodating an amount of hydrogen generated from a metal-water reaction involving 75 percent of the fuel cladding surrounding the active fuel region in Mark III and ice condenser containments. The Commission eliminated the design-basis loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) hydrogen release from 10 CFR 50.44 and consolidated the requirements for hydrogen and oxygen monitoring to 10 CFR 50.44 while relaxing safety classifications and licensee commitments to certain design and qualification criteria. The Commission also relocated without change the hydrogen control requirements in 10 CFR 50.34(f) to 10 CFR 50.44 and the high point vent requirements from 10 CFR 50.44 to 10 CFR 50.46a.
3.0 EVALUATION 3.1 Proposed Change In its application, the licensee has proposed the following changes to the WCGS TSs:
1.
Delete the reference to the "Hydrogen Recombiners" from the table of contents of the TSs.
2.
Delete the Note about the hydrogen analyzer channels in Condition C of the actions for LCO 3.3.3 in TS 3.3.3, "Post Accident Monitoring (PAM) Instrumentation."
3.
Delete Condition D and its required actions and completion times for LCO 3.3.3, and re-number references to Conditions E, F, and G as Conditions D, E, and F in the actions for LCO 3.3.3 and in TS Table 3.3.3-1, "Post Accident Monitoring Instrumentation."
4.
Delete the "containment hydrogen concentration level" from TS Table 3.3.3-1 by replacing that function with the phrase "Not Used."
5.
Delete TS 3.6.8, "Hydrogen Recombiners," including the LCO, actions, and surveillance requirements.
6.
Re-number the reference to Condition G of TS 3.3.3 in TS 5.6.8, "PAM Report," to Condition F.
3.2 Technical Evaluation The ways in which the requirements and recommendations for combustible gas control were incorporated into the licensing bases of commercial nuclear power plants varied as a function of when plants were licensed. Plants that were operating at the time of the Three Mile Island (TMI), Unit 2 accident are likely to have been the subject of confirmatory orders that imposed the combustible gas control functions described in NUREG-0737, "Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements," as obligations. The issuance of plant-specific amendments to adopt these changes, which would remove hydrogen recombiner and hydrogen monitoring controls from the TSs, supersede the combustible gas control specific requirements imposed by post-TMI confirmatory orders.
3.2.1 Hydrogen Recombiners The revised 10 CFR 50.44 no longer defines a design-basis LOCA hydrogen release, and eliminates the requirements for hydrogen control systems to mitigate such a release. The installation of hydrogen recombiners and/or vent and purge systems required by 10 CFR 50.44(b)(3) was intended to address the limited quantity and rate of hydrogen generation that was postulated from a design-basis LOCA. The Commission has found that this hydrogen release is not risk-significant because the design-basis LOCA hydrogen release does not contribute to the conditional probability of a large release up to approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after the onset of core damage. In addition, these systems were ineffective at mitigating hydrogen releases from risk-significant beyond design-basis accidents. Therefore, the Commission eliminated the hydrogen release associated with a design-basis LOCA from 10 CFR 50.44 and the associated requirements that necessitated the need for the hydrogen recombiners and the backup hydrogen vent and purge systems. As a result, the NRC staff finds that the requirements related to hydrogen recombiners no longer meet any of the four criteria in 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) for retention in the TSs and the existing TS requirements may, therefore, be eliminated for all plants.
3.2.2 Hydrogen Monitoring Equipment Section 50.44(b)(1), the STS, and plant-specific TSs currently contain requirements for monitoring hydrogen. Licensees have also made commitments to design and qualification criteria for hydrogen monitors in Item II.F.1, Attachment 6 of NUREG-0737 and Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.97, "Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident." The hydrogen monitors are required to assess the degree of core damage during a beyond design-basis accident and confirm that random or deliberate ignition has taken place. If an explosive mixture that could threaten containment integrity exists during a beyond design-basis accident, then other severe accident management strategies, such as purging and/or venting, would need to be considered.
The hydrogen monitors are needed to implement these severe accident management strategies.
With the elimination of the design-basis LOCA hydrogen release, hydrogen monitors are no longer required to mitigate design-basis accidents and, therefore, the hydrogen monitors do not meet the definition of a safety-related component as defined in 10 CFR 50.2. RG 1.97 recommends classifying the hydrogen monitors as Category 1. Category 1 in RG 1.97 is intended for key variables that most directly indicate the accomplishment of a safety function for design-basis accident events and, therefore, are items usually addressed within the TSs. As part of the rulemaking to revise 10 CFR 50.44, the Commission found that the hydrogen monitors no longer meet the definition of Category 1 in RG 1.97. The Commission concluded that Category 3, as defined in RG 1.97, is an appropriate categorization for the hydrogen monitors because the monitors are required to diagnose the course of beyond design-basis accidents. Hydrogen monitoring is not the primary means of indicating a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary. Section 4 of Attachment 2 to SECY-00-0198, "Status Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 (Option 3) and Recommendations on Risk-Informed Changes to 10 CFR 50.44 (Combustible Gas Control)," found that the hydrogen monitors were not risk-significant. Therefore, the NRC staff finds that hydrogen monitoring equipment requirements no longer meet any of the four criteria in 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) for retention in the TSs and, therefore, may be relocated to other licensee-controlled documents.
However, because the monitors are required to diagnose the course of beyond design-basis accidents, each licensee should verify that it has, and makes a regulatory commitment to maintain, a hydrogen monitoring system capable of diagnosing beyond design-basis accidents.
The elimination of post-accident sampling system requirements from some plant-specific TSs (and associated CLIIP notices) indicated that during the early phases of an accident, safety-grade hydrogen monitors provide an adequate capability for monitoring containment hydrogen concentration. The NRC staff has subsequently concluded that Category 3 hydrogen monitors also provide an adequate capability for monitoring containment hydrogen concentration during the early phases of an accident.
The deletion of the requirements for the hydrogen recombiner and hydrogen monitors resulted in numbering and formatting changes to other TSs, which were otherwise unaffected by this proposed amendment. The NRC staff has confirmed that the related changes are appropriate and do not affect the technical requirements.
4.0 VERIFICATIONS AND COMMITMENTS As requested by the NRC staff in the notice of availability for this TS improvement, the licensee has addressed the following plant-specific verifications and commitments.
Each licensee should verify that it has, and makes a regulatory commitment to maintain, a hydrogen monitoring system capable of diagnosing beyond design-basis accidents.
In its application, the licensee has verified that it has a hydrogen monitoring system capable of diagnosing beyond design-basis accidents. As shown in Attachment V to its July 23, 2004, application, the licensee has also committed to maintain this capability and stated that the hydrogen monitors will be included in the Technical Requirements Manual (TRM), which is part of the WCGS Updated Safety Analysis Report. The licensee stated that it will implement this commitment within 90 days of issuance of this license amendment.
The NRC staff finds that reasonable controls for the implementation and for subsequent evaluation of proposed changes pertaining to the above regulatory commitments are provided by the licensees administrative processes, including its commitment management program.
Changes to the TRM are controlled by 10 CFR 50.59. Should the licensee choose to incorporate a regulatory commitment into the emergency plan, final safety analysis report, or other document with established regulatory controls, the associated regulations would define the appropriate change-control and reporting requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the commitments do not warrant the creation of regulatory requirements which would require prior NRC approval of subsequent changes. The NRC staff has agreed that NEI 99-04, Revision 0, "Guidelines for Managing NRC Commitment Changes," provides reasonable guidance for the control of regulatory commitments made to the NRC staff. (See Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-17, "Managing Regulatory Commitments Made by Power Reactor Licensees to the NRC Staff," dated September 21, 2000.) The commitments should be controlled in accordance with the industry guidance or comparable criteria employed by a specific licensee. The NRC staff may choose to verify the implementation and maintenance of these commitments in a future inspection or audit.
5.0 AMENDMENT REQUEST CONCLUSION Based on the licensee's statement that the model SE is applicable to WCGS, the technical evaluation given in Section 3.0 above, and the licensee's commitment discussed in Section 4.0 above, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed amendment is acceptable.
6.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Kansas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (69 FR 53115). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
8.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Jack Donohew Date: January 31, 2005