ML19339A434
| ML19339A434 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1976 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339A433 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011030803 | |
| Download: ML19339A434 (3) | |
Text
'
)#
'4 UNITE] STATES
.{
4
,7 g *g NUCLEAR REZULATORY COMMISSION y
/ g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 e
k
,o SAFETY EVALUATION BY TIIE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 24 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-3 YANKEE A7DMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION (YANKEE-ROWE)
DOCKET NO. 50-29 Introduction By letter dated August 19, 1975, and supplement dated March 15, 1976, Yankee Atomic Electric Company (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications and amendment to the license conditions for the receipt, possession, and use of special nucicar, source, and byproduct materials at the Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Yankee-Rowe). The licensee proposed the changes in response to our letter dated November 21, 1974.
Discussion Our letter dated November 21, 1974, provided the licensee with a recommended license fomat for special nuclear, source, and byproduct material to be incorporated in License No. DPR-3 for the Yankee-Rowe facility. The recom-mended language would replace specific descriptions of special nuclear, source, and byproduct materials which appear in the license with generalized descriptions. The generalized descriptions included limits of 100 millicuries for byproduct material and 100 milligrams of source or special nuclear material.
Any amounts greater than these would still be specifically des-cribed in the license. Our letter also requested that the licensee submit the information indicated in Regulatory Guide 1.70.3 in support of an amend-ment to the Yankee-Rowe facility license that would incorporate the new format and add sealed source leak testing requirements to the Technical Specifications.
By letters dated August 19, 1975, and March 15, 1976, the licensee submitted the recommended license amendment for our approval. The submittals included the information indicated in Regulatory Guide 1.70.3.
This information in-volved descriptions of the laboratory facilities and equipment, survey and measuring instruments, personnel and procedures, and the byproduct, source, and special nuch:ar material at the facility.
80110 80 h63
/
r'
' e g
Evaluation The facility license for Yankee-Rowe, similar to all other facility licenses, has always authorized possession of such byproducts as may be produced by operation of the facility. This includes the fission products in the spent
,s l
fuel and the small fraction of fission products that escape the fuel cladding and enter the primary coolant.
It also includes activation products from neutron bombardment of reactor internal structures, reactor vessel, E=g piping, shielding, and reactor coolant.
Some of this radioactivity in the k
primary coolant contaminates primary system components such as piping, valves, pumps, c'd h et exchangers. The associated source strength for the above items can be very large.
We have reviewed the information submitted by the Iicensee in support of the license amendment request. We find that this infomation confoms with Regulatory guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.70.3 and provides reasonable l
assurance that radioactive materials will be stored and used in a manner to meet applicable radiation protection requirements in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, and 70.
During the 15 years of facility operation which included handling and working with large and varied types of byproduct sources, the licensee g
has demonstrated that low occupational exposures, well within the limits of
[
i 10 CFR Part 20, can be achieved. This further supports our finding that the
.z radiation protection program at the Yankee-Rowe facility is acceptable.
7 Based upon the above considerations, we have modified the proposed license
[
a=endment to delete the specific 100 millicurie and 100 milligram limits
{
on byproduct and source materials.
Such limits represent insignificant sources compared to the sources nomally being handled as byproducts pro-duced by operation of the facility and are therefore unnecessary.
We discussed this modification with the licensee and they concurred in the codification.
,,yy We have added page 509:4 " Radioactive Source Leak Test" to Section 509 of the Facility Hazards Summary Report which is incorporated in the Technical Specification appended to License DPR-3 for the Yankee-Rowe facility.
Page 509:4 specifies the testing requirements for sealed sources.
We have also added to Section E in Appendix A the requirements for reporting of source Icakage test results.
We have determined that the amendment 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. Having made this detemination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR 151.5(d)(4) that an environmental statement, g
negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
l r
x
=
=
l
(
- _ Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previou' sly considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the change does F
not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable 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
~
conducted 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.
Date: April 26, 1976 t.i
.+
t'
.