ML20072R840
| ML20072R840 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072B118 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8304060383 | |
| Download: ML20072R840 (7) | |
Text
.
pp Etc f
UNITED STATES y 3 ',.-q y g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7
- j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565
...../
gv SlFETYEVALUATIONBYTHEOFFICEOFNUCLEAP,REACTORREGULATION RELATED TO AME!!DMENT NO. 66 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-66 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY OHIO EDISON COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA POWER COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-334 1.0 INTRG)UCTION To comply with Section V of Appendix I of 10 CFR Part 50, the Duquesne Light Company has filed with the Cotanission plans and proposed technical specifications developed for the purpose of keeping releases of radioactive materials to unrestricted areas during normal operations, including expected operational occurrences, as low as is reasonably achievable. The Duquesne Light Company filed this information with the Commission by letter dated October 22, 1982. H is letter requested changes to the h chnical Specifications appended to Facility Operating License No. DPR-66 for Beaver Valley Power Station. Unit No'. 1.
The proposed technical specifications update those portions of the technical specifications addressing radioactive waste management and make them consistent with the current staff positions as expressed in NUREG-0472.
These revised technical specifications would reasonably assure com-pliance, in radioactive waste management, with th's provisions of 10 CFR Part 50.36a, as supplemented by Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, with 10'CFR Parts 20.105 (c),106 (g), and 405 (c); with 10 CFR Part' 50, Appendix ~ A, General Design Criteria 60, 63, and 64; and with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 3.
~
8304060383 830328 PDR ADOCK 05000334 P
- I
2.0 BACEGROUND AND DISCUSSION 2.1 nequlations 10 CFR[Part 50, " Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilisation Facilities," Section 50,36a, "Mehnical Specifications on Effluents from Nuclear Power Reactors," provides that each license authorising operation of a nuclear power reactor will include technical specifications that (1) require compliance with applicable provisions of Part 20.106,
" Radioactivity in Effluents to Restricted Areas;" (2) require that operating procedures developed for the control of effluents be established and followed; (3) require that squipment installed in the radioactive waste system be maintained and used; and (4) require the periodic submission of reports to the NRC specifying the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas in liquid and gaseous effluents, any quantities of radioactive materials released that are significantly above design objectives, and such other information as may be required by the Commission to estimate maximum potential radiation dose to the public resulting from the effluent releases.
10 CFR Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation," paragraphs 20.105(c), 20.106 (g), and 20.405(c), require that nuclear power plant and other licensees comply with 40 CFR Part 190, " Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations," and submit reports to the NIC when the 40 CFR Part 190 limits have been or may be exceeded.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A - General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, contains Criterion 60, Control of releases of radioactive materials to the environments Criterion 63, Monitoring fuel and waste storage; and Criterion 64, Monitoring radioactivity releases. Criterion 60 requires that the nuclear power unit design include means to control suitably the release of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents and to handle radioactive solid wastes produced during normal reacter operation, including anticipated operational occurrences.
Criterion 63 requires that appropriate systems be provided in radioactive waste systems and associated handling areas to detect conditions that may 1.
.---.,m
~
.. s b
result in excessive radiation levels and to initiate approgriate safety actions. Criterion 64 requires that means be provided for monitoring effluent discharge paths and the plant environs for radioactivity that may be released from normal operations, including anticipated operational
~,
occurrences and postulated accidents.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, establishes quality assurance requirements for nuclear power plants.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Section IV, provides guides on technical specifications for limiting conditions for operation for light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors licensed under 10 CFR Part 50.
2.2 Standard Radiological Effluent h chnical Specifications NUREG-0472 provides radiological effluent technical specifications for pressurized water reactors which the staff finds to be an acceptable standard for licensing actions. Further clarification of these acceptable methods is provided in NUREG-0133, " Preparation of Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants." NUREG-0133 describes methods found acceptable to the staff of the NBC for the calculation of certain key values required in the preparation of proposed radiological effluent technical specifications for light-water-cooled nuclear power plants. NUREG-0133 also provides guidance to licensees in preparing requests for changes to existing radiological effluent technical specifications for operating reactors.
It also describes current staff positions on the methodology for estimating radiation exposure due to the release of radioactive materials in effluents and on the administrative control of radioactive waste treatment systems.
The above NUREG documents address all of the radiological effluent technical specifications needed to ensure compliance with the guidance and require:nents provided by the regulations previously cited. However, alternative approaches to the preparation of radiological effluent
^
b technical specifications and alternative radiological effluent technical specifications may be acceptable if the staff determines that the alternatives are in compliance with the regulations and with the intent of the-regulatory guidance.
The standard radiological effluent technical specifications can be grouped under the following categories:
(1)
Instrumentation (2) Radioactive effluents (3) Radiological environmental monitoring
(
(4) Design features (5) Administrative controls.
Each of the specifications under the first three categories are comprised of two parts:
the limiting condition for operation and the surveillance requirements. The limiting condition for operation provides a statement of the limiting condition, the times when it is applicable, and the actions to be taken in the event that the limiting co+.iition is not met.
In general, the specifications established to assure compliance with 10 CFR Part 20 standards provide, in the event the limiting conditions of operation are exceeded, that without delay conditions are rectored to within the limiting conditions. Otherwise, the facility is required to effect approved shutdown procedures. In general, the specifications established to ensure compliance with 10 CFR Part 50 provide, in the event the limiting conditions of operation are exceeded, that within specified times corrective actions are to be taken, alternative means of
)
operation are to be employed, and certain reports are to be submitted to the NRC describing these conditions and actions.
The specifications concerning design features and administrative controls contain no limiting conditions of operation or surveillance requirements.
Table 1 indicates the standard radiological effluent technical specifications that are needed to ensure compliance with the particular provisions of the regulations described in Section 1.0.
- 1 1
i
_g.
a :
~
m u
, o w-
-x
, nn n n,
m x -=.
e e
g 3%g -~~E%i 11 1 1".8 52**%9 3
r 8*_2t 2&E E 8 7 g g$ oL LEaCat
- gog 8
- "en,oE:t 11 1 1> Q "118:"
E 1*g
=
2 2o2*iE2*G" 4 3 88 8 EE "W 22"ani -
3
- pg
=
S EEE"arE" 2 2 3
.3 3ri"B*.932 e
gaa n23**
S S *" ~
S o~ 2 ara ?
ong at g
8 : _2, _8 t c s_:
P.g* 5
,_2,R. d ga or wz=
n>
o-2
.=. -
e=
2 5*n:c"o":*
882828.
e4
- 1= ~ r g:W
==
=
t%2' t*
- S Ein 2 1 E i;je
,gn sa ee 2 o." 2 29?i 2 %%2%112 r so uo,2 ag:
- 4
- t r T 's." er:R rTO % Ec a 8 R 2 ', 0 1,2 52 E
~
e ges%s ga8* G**ra*'*
2 0 2*2K a1 Em j
",27%
m3&E 2F%*o2e $ ~E EoO*
o rF
'2 2 %g a g.8
=
es: :
r,: 21-ra x :.
- s o
E % 21r*
%=>. 4 2 0"T*
C "
"R*.
?
ag R*
3
- EO-F FS9"
$ 0EEE.0"
% E E r*
e8 n
o I
i 2*1E. "Tss 2 7: 2EEo? J I 2
g.
J*
n 24..
Ea:*
- T':
5 8 eg a
e n
i isaar ar5[ 1*s a$2r
{E 2*
r 7
2, 2
a
-EST2 5' 3 "
E 2.
a E
i gg
?
A
=
r a r.e, a 2
.a r e
l = *- e n
n 2
R E7 82 1
G a
C 1
3
~
g 3
e o
5 O
G S S S S
Rad. Liquid Effl. Monitoring sT 8
om.
3--
9 9 9 g g g
Rad. Gas. Effl. Monitoring
.g g
a 80 9
Effluent Concentration r-O##
eG 9 Dose I
O O
O 9 O O Liquid Radwaste Treatment E {E 9
'S SS Liquid HolduD Tanks a
a e
99 Dose hate im O##
S SS Dose houle Gases E k[
2.
O 94 9
9 99 Dose I-131. Trit. and Part.
D g
9 9
e ExDiosive Gas Mixture E
gl1 e
U ##
9 8 99 Gaseous Radmaste Treatment m3 q%
O G
ee Gas Storage Tanks
'E j 3 ]
a 8
6 4 99 Gaseous Radwaste Treatment 3 8 &
[
3g#
9 99 Ventilation Exnaust Treatment E
g 9
9 G
=
g e
ee Mark I or II Containment 9
9 G
Solid Radioactive Waste 2
E S S Total Dose
~'
A m
m M
O Rad. Env. Monitoring Program
_5,E 2
h S
9 Land Use Census
~,
l
%s n
G G
Interlab. Comparison Program
,E k g
E n
w E
3 n
2W 2
Site Boundaries
- c g
,e w
3" We o
o S
Review and Audits 2
o 9
9 9
Procedures C
o m
'O O
Reports h
E h
~
S Recoro Retention 1
g a
n
=
9 9
9 G
S 9 9 99 Offsite Dose Cale. Manual E.
.E 9
9 Major Changes to Rad.' Systems
- n G -
3 e
3.0 EVALUATION The enclosed report (TER-C5506-083) was prepared for us by Franklin Researc,h Center (FRC) as part of our technical assistance contract prograar.
This report provides FRC's technical evaluation of the i
ccumpliance of the Licensee's submittal wi'th NRC-provided criteria.
We have reviewed the TER and agree 'with the evaluation.
3.1 Safety conclusions The proposed radiological effluent technical specifications for the Beaver
-valley Power Station, Unit No. I have been reviewed, evaluated, and found to be in compliance with the requirements of the NRC regulations.and with the intent of NUREG-0133 and NURBG-0472 (the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.1 is comprised of one pressurized water reactor) and thereby fulfill all the requirements of the regulations related to radiological effluent.
technical specifications.
The proposed changes will not remove or relax any existing requirement related to the probability or consequences of acci' dents previously considered and do not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The proposed changes will not remove or relax any existing requirement needed to provide reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner.
4.0 ENVIROtGENTAL CONSIDERATION Ne have determined that the issuance of the proposed amendments to the M chnical Specifications appended to Facility Operating License No.
DPR-66 for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. I would not authorize a significant change in the types, or,a significant increase in the amounts, of l
effluents or in the authorised power level, and that the amendment will l
not result in any significant environmental impact. Baving made these-determinations, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50.5(d) (4), that an environmental impact statement, negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
~..
s 5.0 GENEhAL COICLUSION We havt concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) betause the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from l
any evaluated previously, and does not involve a significant reduction j
in a margin of tafety, the amendment does 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.
4 Principal contributors:
F. Congel W. Meinke Dated:
March 28,1983 l!
. :I