ML20004D160

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 68 to Licenses DPR-32 & DPR-37.Franklin Research Ctr TER-C5257-50/51 Encl

ML20004D160
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	05/19/1981
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20004D159	List: ML20004D158 ML20004D160 ML20004D162
References
NUDOCS 8106080495
Download: ML20004D160 (4)

Text

W4 L NITED STATES g

3%

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

^j 3 y d. i WASm MTON, D. C. 20555 W -l/

s gv SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCL. EAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 68 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-32 AND AMENDMENT N0. 68 TO FACILITY CPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-37 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY l

f SURRY POWER STATION, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-230 AND 50-281 l

l Introduction i

By letter dated September 22, 1978, as supplemented January 9 and l

September 24, 1979, Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) requested amendmentsto License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 for the Surry Power Station, Unit Nos.1 and 2.

These proposed amendments relate to Containment Leakage Testing, Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50. This request also asked for an exemption to certain provisions of Appendix l

J related to personnel air lock testing.

Discussion On August 4,1975[1], the NRC requested the licensee to review its containment leakage testing program for Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2, and the associated technical specifications, for comoliance r

with the requireaents of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50.

1 Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 was published on February 14, 1973. Since by this date there were already many operating nuclear plants and a number more in advanced stages of design or construction, the NRC de-cided to have these plants re-evaluated against the requirements of this new regulation. Therefore, beginning in August 1975, requests for review of the extent of compliance with the requirements of Appen-dix J were made of each licensee. Following the initial responses to these requests, NRC staff positions were developed which would assure l

that the objectives of the testing requirements of the above cited l

regulation were satisfied. These staff positions have since been applied in our review of the submittals filed by the licensee for the Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2.

The results of our evaluation are provided below.

1810 a o s o %S 1

Evaltnl on vur consultant, th'e Franklin Kesearch Centei- (FRC), nas reviewed the licensee's submittals [2, 3, 4, 5] and prepared the attached evaluation of containment tests for Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2.

We have reviewed this evaluation and concur in its bases and findings.

Based on our review of the attached technical evaluatio report as pre-pared by the FRC, the following conclusions are made regarding the Ap-pendix J review for Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2:

1.

The licensee's request for exemption frem the myirement of Appendix J regarding the containment air lock testirg is found to be no longer necessary because of the revision to Section III.D.2 of Appendix J (effective October 22, 1980). However, the licensee's proposed approach as stated in Reference 4 sho61d be revised to include the following requirements:

Within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> after use of the airlock, the seals will be test-ed at the peak calculated accident pressure to verify that they are properly seated.

We have discussed this change with the licensee and the licensee agrees and these words have been added to the T.echnical Specifi-cations (T.S.)

2.

The licensce's proposed changes to T.S. 4.4.A through 4.4.0 (Re-ference 3) are found to be acceptable. However, due to the Appen-dix J revision, the exception made for the personnel hatch is no longer necessary, and the proposed T.S. 4.4.A and T.S. 4.4.0 should be worded as follows.

Proposed T.S. 4.4. A 1

" Periodic and post-operational integrated leakage rate tests of the containment shall be perfomed in accordance with the require-ments of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, ' Reactor Containment Leakage Testing For Water Cooled Power Reactors.'"

Proposed T.S. 4.4.0 "The reset schedules for Type A, B and C tests will be in accord -

ance with Section III.D of Appendix J."

In addition, specific references to the Federal Register Notices have been deleted.

Envircemental Ccnsideratic.,

We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total a= cunts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an attien which is insignificant frca the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR {51.5(d)(4),.that an environmental impact statement er negative declaration and envi/cn-

~

mental impact tppraisal need net be prepared in connection with the issuance cf these amendman:s.

Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the prcbability er consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reascnable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by cperatien in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Cc missien's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be ini.tical to the ccamen defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Date: May 19,1981 l

.p Fl.;EREZE5

[1] NRC Generic Letter from Mr. Karl Goller, Acting Director for Operating Reactors, to Virginia Electric and Power Company, dated August 4, 1975.

[2] VEPC0 letter from C. M. Stallings to R. W. Reid, Chief, ORB-4, dated October 20, 1975.

[3] VEPC0 letter from C. M. Stallings to H. R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, dated September 22, 1978, forwarding Proposed Technical Specification Change No. 69.

[4] VEPC0 letter from C. M. Stallings to H. R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, dated January 9,1979.

[5] VEPC0 letter from C. M. Stallings to H. R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, dated September 24, 1979.

I s

I

-,-,.._nm.

+ *,,, - -,

-r--

- - > - -. - ~

w

~-

, : -:c p e.

i TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT l

CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE TESTING VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY UNITS 1 AND 2 i

NRC DOCKET NO.

50.-280, 50-281 N RC TAC NO.

08638, 08639 FRC PROJECT C5257 NRC CONTRACT NO. NRC-43-79-118 FRC TASK 50, 51 Prepared by Franklin Research Center Author:

J. E. Kaucher The Parkway at Twentieth Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader:

T. J. Delgai o Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Lead NRC Engineer:

Y. S. Euang Apri.1, 1981 This report was prepared as an account of work spenscred by an agency of tne United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third par:y's use, cr the results of such use, of any information, a paratus, Oroduct or process disc!csed in this report, or represents that its use by sucn third party wculd not infringe privately owned ri;nts.

N

~

[ 2L. -

DUPLICATE DOCUMENT

+

L Entire document previously entered into system under:

___ Franklin Research Center i

A Divis;on of Tn. ranklin Institute T. l 6 /////h////,

Ano No. of paces:

/d mwav'mue"~n**^ *** "

7

.~

i-

'au

$1,

~

.-..d.

~

s 3

- - - ' ' '