ML20040G295
| ML20040G295 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 02/02/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040G294 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202120127 | |
| Download: ML20040G295 (2) | |
Text
.
/
UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
a WASHINGTON, D. C. 20066 g7.....j SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 40 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-70 AND AMENtMENT NO. 5 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, AND ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 Introduction By letter dated November 20, 1980, the NRC informed all Power Reactor Licensees (except SEP Licensees) of the staff's revised position on inservice surveillance requirements for snubbers. Attached to that letter was guidance on the content of Technical Specifications (TSs) which the staff felt appropriate to provide assurance of the operability of snubbers (both* mechanical and hydraulic) during plant operation. This guidance included:
- 1) Addition of mechanical snubbers to the surveillance program;
- 2) Deletion of 50,000 lb. capacity limit on snubbers to be included on inservice testing program;
- 3) Deletion of requirement that seal material receive NRC approval;
- 4) Clarification of inservice test requirements; and
- 5) Provision for in-place inservice testing.
Evaluation By letter dated August 10, 1981, Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) responded to the November 20, 1980 NRC request and applied for changes to the Salem Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (TSs).
{
8202120127 820202 PDR ADOCK 05000272 P
l The Salem Unit 2 TSs were issued with the full power license on May 20, 1981.
These TSs paralleled the guidelines of the November 20, 1980 NRC letter with the exception that a table of mechanical snubbers was not included. PSE&G was required, by license condition, to provide a complete listing of mechanical snubbers within four months of issuance of the full power license. PSE&G's amendment request of August 10, 1981 included the required listing and some minor editorial changes for clarification. The requested changes are in accordance with the staff's guidelines and, therefore, acceptable.
The proposed changes to the Salem Unit 1 TSs for snubbers provide for Limiting Conditions for Operation and Surveillance Requirements identical to those approved for Salem Unit 2 and, therefore, are acceptable. Additionally, PSE&G has requested that the functional testing portion of snubber technical specifi-cation be delayed until the 4th Refueling Outage for Unit 1.
Salem Unit 1 is
~
currently shutdown for its 3rd Refueling Outage with an estimated startup date of March 14, 1982. Its 4th Refueling Outage is scheduled for October 1982.
We have reviewed PSE&G's request for delay and agree that the added functional testing requirements would be difficult to satisfy during the current refueling outage. The work scheduling difficulties are compounded by the limited avail-ability of commercial test equipment. The requested delay would provide the time needed for the effective implementation of these requirements and, therefore, is acceptable.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do 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 amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative -
declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve.a l
significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do 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 these amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public, i
Date:
February 2,1982 i
s 1
-,..e.,,,,,
.,-----,-m
- - - - - ~. -..
--