ML19274F804
| ML19274F804 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19274F803 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908060186 | |
| Download: ML19274F804 (5) | |
Text
.
,,/.[ %,h f
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGl' ATORY COMMISSION
) g( { 1g l% v/ i WASW.iToN, D. C. 20556 A
g....f SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 53 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-28 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATI0fl VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATI0fl DOCKET N0. 50-271 Introduction By letter dated April 29, 1977, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (the licensee) requested exemption for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VY) from the effective date provision of 10 CFR 50.55a(g).
The specific request would extend the date by which the VY Inservice Inspection and Testing Program must be in conformance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) by six months (from July 30, 1979 to January 30,1980).
By letter dated April 11, 1979 we denied the request for delaying inservi tes ti ng.
By letter dated April 25, 1979, the licensee requested that we reconsider a six month delay for implementing the inservice testing program and provided additional support for their request.
This is being separately evaluated af a request for interim relief. ~ ~ ~ ~
Background
10 CFR 50.55a(g), " Inservice Inspection Requirements", requires VY to update the Inservice Inspection (ISI) program to the latest applicable edition and addenda of the ASME Section XI Code on July 30, 1979 which is the starting date of the third 40-month period of the first inspection interval (10 years).
Because of the relatively new ISI requirements at the time of its commercial operation, VY was permitted to have its required first 40-month inspection program completed in the 60-month period (11/30/72 -
11/30/77). This results in a short 20-month second period (11/30/77 -
7/30/79),
Most of the inspections of Class I. components require that the plant be down to accomplish the inspections.
Consequently, the inservice inspec-tions are scheduled to be performed during refueling outages.
Normally there are two or three refueling outages during a 40 month inspection period.
The attached sketch shows the Code inspection periods for Vermont Yankee vs the refueling outages. As can be noted, during the present 20 month second period (which is presently scheduled to end July 30,1979) there was only one refueling outage - the fall 1978 outage.
Over 50%
of the inservice inspections that should be completed during the second period were accomplished during the fall of 1978 refueling outage. WP'le the refueling outage could have been extended (at considerable cost) t-perform all the second period inspections at one time, this would not in accord with the intent of the Code.
While a specific component may 7908060 W 6)
. normally only be inspected once during the ten year period, the inteiit of the Code is to inspect a representative sample of each type of component periodically (e.g., at each refueling outage).
For this reason, the bal-ance of the inspections to be performed during the second period are scheduled to be accomplished during the fall 1979 refueling outage (September 15, 1979 to October 30,1979).
However, as noted above, the second period ends 1 1/2 months prior to the refueling outage.
The licensee requested a six month delay in implementing the updating requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) so that VY will have two refueling out-ages to complete all the required 2nd 40-month period Class 1 components inspections.
The licensee presented as a basis for his request that:
1.
Attempting to complete all the ISI requirements of Technical Specifi-cations for the second period during a six-week outage would place an undue Surden on the company.
A six month extension would allow them to pertorm all the required inspections during two maintenance refueling outages.
2.
If all the required inspections were not completed during the 2nd period, the remainder would have to be completed during the 3rd period.
Further, because the required inspections for the 3rd period would have to follow the latest NRC endorsed code edition and addenda which are different in many respects from those for the 2nd period, this would cause tremendous confusion in accounting scope, and examin-ation and calibration techniques.
Evaluation The principal basis for the licensee's request for a six month extension of the effective date of an updated inservice inspection program is hard-ship or inconvenience.
Although we agree that hardship would result, this does not constitute an acceptable basis for the extension request.
The proper basis for this request is the consideration of whether a six month extension in updating the ISI program would place the plant in an unsafe condition during that period giving due consideration to the burden on the licensee that could result if the request is denied.
Our review indicated that:
1.
Based on the licensee proposed inspection schedule (attached), a six month delay in implementing the updating -~1uirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) will not reduce the required Class 1,2 and 3 components inspections during the 3rd period.
This occurs because routine inspections are perfonned only during the scheduled refueling outages and VY will still have 3 refueling outages to complete all the required inspections.
2.
There is no major difference in the Class I component inspection require-ments between the present VY Technical Specifications and the 1974 Edition up to the Summer 1975 Addenda of the Section XI Code.
A six month extension will permit the licensee to complete all the required Class I component inspections for the 2nd period and thus maintain continuity for a 10-year inspection program.
3.
The major differences in ISI requirements between the Technical Spec-ifications and the applicable 1974 Edition of Section XI Code are the inspection provisions for Class 2 and 3 components.
There are no Class 2 and 3 component inspection requirements in the VY Technical Specifications.
In addition, the Section XI Code specifies that only a certain percentage of the total required inspections over the 10-year interval need be completed during each 40-month period, and does not require inspection to be carried out during each refueling outage.
In fact, the staff understands that the licensee is not planning to perform any Class 2 and 3 component inspections during the 1979 Fall refueling outage. Therefore, a six month delay will not reduce the confidence in the structural integrity of Class 2 and 3 components.
Accordingly, we conclude that granting an exemption from the provisions of 10 CFR 55a(g) as it relates to inservice inspection pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, to pennit extension of the effective date for compliance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g) from July 30, 1979 to January 30, 1980, will not endanger life or property or the comon defense and, insofar as the extension would pennit an orderly implementation of the upgraded program, the exemption is in the public interest.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the ame:.dment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
!!aving made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 351.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact state-ment or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Conclusion We have concluded based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reason-able assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered
. by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be con-ducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations 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: July 9, 1979
I!;3E9VICE I':SPECTION Proposed Schedul:
Sate Event 4:ov.2 er 30, 197'.
"or.rercial Operation; Start Period 1 Period 1 Fall 1977 Refueling /!!aintenance Outage
';ove=ber 30, 1977 End of Period 1/Beginning of Period 2 Fall 1978 Refueling / Maintenance Outage a
Period 2 January 30, 1979 VY vill submit new Tech. Spec. with exceptions July 30, 1979 Scheduled update as required by 10C7250 Fall 1979 Refueling / Maintenance Outage January 30, 1980 Proposed implementation of update required by 10CFR50. Also end of period 2/ Start of period 3.
Tall 1980 Refueling / Maintenance Outage Period 3 Fall 1981 Refueling /:taintenance Outage Fall 1982
- Refueling / Maintenance Outage "r"c.Scr 30, 1992 End of first 10 year peried
- Refueling / Maintenance Outages