ML14183A074
| ML14183A074 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14183A073 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8611140334 | |
| Download: ML14183A074 (2) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 108 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-23 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261 Introduction Generic Letter No. 85-19, "Reporting Requirements on Primary Coolant Iodine Spikes," discussed changing the requirements from a Licensee Event Report (LER) to a Special Report for operating conditions where specific activity limits of the reactor coolant are exceeded (See Generic Letter No. 83-43). The letter provided guidelines for licensee's reporting requirements and for including the information in the Annual Report. Guidelines were also provided to eliminate the Technical Specification requirement to shut down a plant if the coolant iodine activity limits are exceeded for 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> in a 12-month period. A sample Technical Specification,.acceptable to the staff, was also provided.
By letter dated January 8, 1986, Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee) submitted an application to revise their Technical Specification in accordance with the guidance of Generic Letter 85-19.
Evaluation Generic Letter No. 85-19 provided the following evaluation with reqard to iodine spiking:
"As part of our continuing program to delete unnecessary reporting require ments, we have reviewed the reporting requirements related to primary coolant specific activity levels, specifically primary coolant iodine spikes. We have determined that the reporting requirements for iodine spiking can be reduced from a short-term report (Special Report or Licensee Event Report) to an item which is to be included in the Annual Report.
The information to be included in the Annual Report is similar to that previously required in the Licensee Event Report but has been changed to more clearly designate the results to be included from the specific activity analysis and to delete the information regarding fuel burnup by core reoion.
In our effort to eliminate unnecessary Technical Specification requirements, we have also determined that the existing requirements to shut down a plant if coolant iodine activity limits are exceeded for 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br />sin a 12-month period can be eliminated. The quality of nuclear fuel has been greatly improved over the past decade with the result that normal coolant
- ADac~ 09000261
~
2 iodine activity (i.e., in the absence of iodine spiking) is well below the limit. Appropriate actions would be initiated long before accumulating 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> above the iodine activity limit. In addition, 10 CFR 50.72(b)(1)(ii) requires the NRC to be immediately notified of fuel cladding failures that exceed expected values or that are caused by unexpected factors. Therefore, this Technical Specification limit is no longer considered necessary on the basis that proper fuel management by licensees and existing reportina requirements should preclude ever approaching the limit."
We have reviewed the licensee's application and find that their requested TS change meets the guidance of the model TS contained in Generic Letter No. 85-19. Therefore, based on this, as well as the above discussion, we find the Technical Specification acceptable.
Environmental Consideration This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part ?0.
The 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such findina. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.??(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endanqered by operation in the proposed manner, and (9) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's requlations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
October 28, 1986 Principal Contributor:
G. Requa