ML20044A551
| ML20044A551 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/25/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20044A549 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9006290199 | |
| Download: ML20044A551 (2) | |
Text
.
+
'e
+.,,-
8 1
@ A80g r
+j I
~ ~
o,,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a-1
, 7.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666 '
/
ENCLOSURE 2 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO EXEMPTION FROM APPENDIX J. LEAK RATE TESTING LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-322 o
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 8,1989, the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO),
=
the licensee for Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, requested an exemption from o
the primary containment leak rate testing requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(o) and 10 CFR Part 50, Ap)endix J. Section 111.D.1 through III.D.3 for Type A, B, and j
C tests. LILCO seets this exemption because under the Settlement Agreement with New York State, it is contractually prohibited from operating Shoreham.
LILCO states that Shoreham is shutdown and defueled, and will remain so until its operating license is transferred to an entity of New York State. The staff's evaluation of the licensee's submittal is provided below.
l On March 16, 1990, the staff sent a letter to the licensee that provided L
temporary relief from compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(o) and Appendix J, Sections III.D.1 through III.D.3. This exemption supersedes that March 16, 1990 letter.
2.0 EVALUATION l
The' licensee indicated that because it is contractually obligated not to R
. operate Shoreham--and given the plant's shutdown and defueled condition--the.
design basis loss-of-coolant accident has no significance at Shoreham. Therefore, the basis for primary containment leak rate testing to ensure continued integrity of principal fission product barriers to mitigate the consequences of.the design basis accident no longer exists. Also, Shoreham Technical Specification (TS) requirements to conduct primary containment leak rate testing are linked to the plant's operational condition. If containment integrity is not maintained, TS require that the plant be placed in cold shutdown. There are no requirements that surveillance be performed in cold shutdown, because containment integrity is not required. The licensee also stated that conducting' Appendix J testing would result in undue hardship and costs that are not necessary for public safety.
The staff has reviewed the licensee's suomittal as discussed above and concurs that there is no need to maintain primary containment integrity for the plant 4 the shutdown and defueled condition, and that cessation of primary containment leti rate testing would not present an undue risk to the public health and saW. Should the licensee decide to reload fuel due to changed circumstances, the staff will review the status of the primary containment and may require additional testing to demonstrate that the containment barriers have not suffered degradation in the absence of periodic testing.
9006290199 900625 PDR ADOCK 05000322 P
2,,-
2 l
3.0. CONCLtlSION Based on'the above, the staff concludes that the requested exemption from primary containment leak rate testing as specified in 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J, Sections III.D.1.through Ill.D.3 for Shoreham Nuclear Power Station is acceptable. If, due to changed circumstances, the licensee decides to reload fuel into the reactor, the licensee must demonstrate to the staff that the containment barriers have not suffered degradation in the absence of periodic testing.
Dated:
June 25, 1990 Principal Contributor:
R. Goel 1
i i
c i
.