ML20081A622
| ML20081A622 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20081A612 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8310260342 | |
| Download: ML20081A622 (8) | |
Text
'
[: ur o
"g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
h WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 a.,
e
/
++.**
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 88 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-50 METROPOLITAN EDISON C0WANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COWANY PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COWANY GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DCCKET NO. 50-289 Introduction By letter dated June 24, 1983, GPU Nuclear Corporation (the licensee) transmitted Technical Specification Change Request No.128 requesting amendment to Appendix A of Facility Operating License No. DPR-50.
The subject change involves Sections 3.21.1, 4.21.1 and 4.22.1 of the Technical Specifications for TMI-1. The licensee has stated that.the reason for the proposed change. is to transfer the station discharge effluent. monitoring responsibility from monitor RM-L7 to the new monitor, RM-L12, which provides better sensitivity for iodine detection. RM-L7 is located on the station discharge effluent line. RM-L12 will be located upstream at the Industrial Waste Treatment System (IWTS)/ Industrial Waste Filter System (IWFS) common discharge, before the effluent is diluted by the flow from the mechanical draft cooling tower. This location would provide better detection and resolution of any radioactive discharge through the station discharge' effluent line.
1 Background'
. The ifcensee has proposed to amend Section 3.21.1 by deleting "RM-L7" from the footnote under ~" Applicability" and by adding two footnotes under " Applicability."
One footnote would state that operability of RM-L12 and associated IWTS/IWFS flow interlocks is not required when disc.harges are positively controlled through the closure of IW-V-72,- 75. and IW-V-280, 281. The other footnote to be added would state that operability'of FT-146 is not ' required when discharges are positively controlled through ti e closure of WDL-V-257, IW-Y-72, 75, and IW-V-280, 281. The l
licensee has proposed to further amend Section 3.21.1 by deleting " Station Effluent Line (RM-L7)" from Table 3.21-1 under the headin Monitors Not Providing Automatic Tennination of Release" g " Gross Radioactivity and by adding "IWTS/IWFS Discharge Line (RM-L12)" to Table 3.21-1.under the heading " Gross Radioactivity Monitors Providing Automatic Termination of Release." The licensee inas 'also proposed to further amend Section 3.21.1 by stating in Table 3.21-1, Action 20, that samples are also reouf red to be collected and analyzed prior to initiating.
a release as well as at least once per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> during release.
~
(
8310260342 831014 DR ADOCK 05000289 l
PM l._
. The licensee has also proposed to amen'd Section 4.21.1 by deleting " Station Effluent Line (RM-L7)" from Table 4.21-1 unoer the heading " Gross Beta or Gamma Radioactivity Monitors Providing Alarm But Not Providing Automatic Termination of Release" and by. adding "lWTS/IWFS Discharge Line (RM-L12)"
under the heading " Radioactivity Monitors Providing Alarm and Automatic Isolation." The licensee has also proposed to amend Section 4.22.1 by deleting "(RM-L7)" from Table 4.22-1.
Evaluation Technical Specification 3.21.1 provides that the radioactive. liquid effluent monitoring ir.strumentation channels shown in Table 3.21-1 be operable at all times with their alarm / trip setpoints set to ensure that the limits of Technical Specification 3.22.1.1 are not exceeded. Table 3.21-1 also prescribes the action to be taken when the number of channels operable is less than the minimum number of channels operable. tabulated for any of the instrumentation channels.
Technical Specification 4.21.1 provides.that'each radioactive liquid effluent monitoring instrumentation channel be demonstrated operable by performance check, calibration, and test operations during the modes and at the frequencies shown in Table 4.21.1.
Technical Specification 4.22.1 provides that radioactive liquid waste sampling and analysis be done in accordance with Table 4.22-1.
The purpose of the Technical Specifications which the licensee seeks to amend is twofold:
(1) to ensure that the concentration of radioactive materials released from the site in liquid effluents does not' exceed the maximum permissible concentration (MPC) set by -10 CFR 20, and (2) to provide data on the quantities of radioactive materials released in liquid effluents.
~
NUREG-0472 provides radiological effluent Technical Specifications for pressurized water reactors which we find to be an acceptable standard for licensing actions.
Further clarification of these acceptable methods is provided in NUREG-0133, " Preparation of Radiological Effluent Technical l
Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants." NUREG-0133 describes methods found l
acceptable to the NRC staff for ~the calculation of certain key values l
required in the preparation of proposed radiological effluent Technical Specifications for light-water-cooled nuclear power plants.
NUREG-0133 also I
G
.. provides guidance to licensees in preparing requests for changes to existing radiological. effluent Technical Specifications for operating reactors. It also describes current NRC staff positions on the; methodology for estimat,ing radiation exposure due to the release of radioactive materials in effluents and on the administrative control of radioactive waste treatment-systems.
3 The above NUREG documents address all~ of the radiological effluent Technical Specifications needed to assure compliance with the guidance and requirements provided by 10. CFR 20.
However, alternative approaches to the preparation of radioactive effluent. Technical Specifications may be acceptable if we determine that the alternatives are in compliance with the _ regulations and with the intent of the regulatory guidance.
The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications. for TMI-l 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 NUREG-0472 (TMI-l utilizes a pressurized water reactor).
We have also determined that the nonradioactive flow from the mechanical draft cooling tower would dilute the station discharge effluent and that moving the monitor upstream should provide better detection and resolution of.any radio-active discharge through the station discharge effluent line.
We also agree that the automatic termination feature of the new monitor'on'high radiation detection should. provide added protection against inadvertent releases offsite via this release path.
Summary In view of the above considerations, we have concluded that moving the monitoring upstream and using a monitor which provides-better sensitivity
(
for iodine detection is acceptable, and therefore, the proposed' amend-t ment to Sections 3.21.1, 4.21.1, and 4.22.1 of the TMI'-l. Technical-Specifications is-acceptable.
Environmental' Consideration tu 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
~ determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an l
action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact L
and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact state-ment, or_ negative declaration and environmental -impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
l l
f.
- _. _ _ _. _,. ~
4-Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the comnon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: October 14, 1983 The following NRC personnel have contributed to this Safety Evaluation:
C. Nichols 9
l l
,e d'~7 c
q y
wm gy g
g SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 88 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-50 METROPOLITAH EDISON C0f'PANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 110. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-289 Introduction By letter dated June 24, 1983, GPU Nuclear Corporation (the licensee) transnitted Technical Specification Change Request No.128 requesting amendment to Appendix A of Facility Operating License No. OPR-50. The subject change involves Sections 3.21.1, 4.21.1 and 4.22.1 of the Technical Specifications for TMI-1. The licensee has stated that the reason for the proposed change is to transfer the station discharge effluent monitoring responsibility from monitor RM-L7 to the new monitor, RM-L12, which provides better sensitivity for iodine detection. RM-L7 is located on the station discharge effluent line. RM-L12 will be located upstream at the Industrial Waste Treatment System (IWTS)/ Industrial Waste Filter Systen (IWFS) common discharge, before the effluent is diluted by the flow from the mechanical draft cooling tower. This location would provide better detection and resolution of any radioactive discharge through the station discharge effluent line.
Backcround Tne licensee has proposed to amend Section 3.21.1 by deleting "RM-L7" from the footnote under " Applicability" and by adding two footnotes under " Applicability."
One footnote would state that operability of PJi-L12 and associated IWTS/IMFS flow interlocks is not required when discharges are positively controlled through the closure of IV-Y-72, 75 and IW-Y-280, 281. The other footnote to be added would state that operability of FT-146 is not required when discharges are positively controlled through the closure of HDL-V-257, IV-V-72, 75, and IW-V-280, 281. The licensee has proposed to further amend Section 3.21.1 by deleting " Station Effluent Line (RM-L7)" from Table 3.21-1 under the heading " Gross Radioactivity Monitors Not Providing Automatic Temination of Release" and by adding "IWTS/IWFS Discharge Line (RM-L12)" to Table 3.21-1 under the heading " Gross Radioactivity Monitors Providing Automatic Temination of Release." The licensee has also proposed to further amend Section 3.21.1 by stating in Table 3.21-1, Action 20, that samples are also required to be collected and analyzed prior to initiating a release as well as at least once per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> during release.
"' C ' >
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY W u.s. cno 198 3-4o0-247
" ' nacu 2'
7$
gacht g
pgg y'g;7 g
x W
p+&
- The licensee has also proposed to amend Secti 4.21.1 by deleting " Station Effluent Line (PJi-L7)" from Table 4.21-1 under the heading " Gross Beta or Gama Radioactivity Monitors Providing Alarm But Not Providing Automatic Temination of Release" and by adding "IUTS/IWFS Discharge Line (RM-L12)"
under the heading " Radioactivity Monitors Providing Alarm and Automatic Isolation." The licensee has also proposed to amend Section 4.22.1 by deleting "(RM-L7)" from Table 4.22-1.
/
Evaluation 4
I Technical Specification 3.21.1 provides that the radioactive liquid effluent monitoring instrumentation channels shown in Table 3.21-1 be operable at all l
times with their alam/ trip setpoints set to ensure that the limits of Technical Specification 3.22.1.1 are not exceeded. Table 3.21-1 also prescribes.the action to be taken when the number of channels operable is less than the minimum number of channels operable tabulated for any of the 3
instrumentation channels.
l I
Technical Specification 4.21.1 provides that each radioactive liquid t
effluent monitoring instrumentation channel be demonstrated operable by performance check, calibration, and test operations during the. modes and at the fre'quencies shown in Table 4.21.1.
Technical Specification 4.22.1 provides that radioactive liquid waste sampling and analysis be done in accordance with Table 4.22-1.
~
b The purpose of the Tech... a1 Specifications which the licensee seeks to amend is twofold:
(1) to ensure that the concentration of radioactivq materials released from the site in liquid effluents does not exceed tije maximum permissible concentration (PPC) set by 10 CFR 20, and (2) to provide data on the quantitie:: of radioactive materials released in liquid effluents.
NUREG-0472 provides radiological effluent Technical Specifications for pressurized water reactors which we find to be an acceptable standard for licensing actions. Further clarification of these acceptable nethods is provided in NUREG-0133, " Preparation of Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants." NUREG-0133 describes methods found 1
acceptable to the NRC staff for the calculation of certain key values required in the preparation of proposed radiological effluent Technical 1 s
Specifications for light-water-cooled nuclear poQer plants. NUREG-0133 also 1
'""C'>
Of.YE k..................
. NRC FOAM 318 (10s B01 NRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u.s. apo ass-4oo.m
%,w
_,,_ _ _ m _ w e e-q oc a.
,A _ _
.m,__
~ =. -
m m
n bi M
Q aw n
, provides guidance to licensees in preparing requests for changes to existing radiological effluent Technical Specifications for operating reactors. It also describes current NRC staff' positions on the methodology for estinating radiation exposure due to the release of radioactive materials in effluents and on the administrative control of radioactive waste treatment systems.
The above HUREG documents address all of the radiological effluent Technical Specifications needed to assure compliance with the guidance and requirements provided by 10 CFR 20. However, alternative approaches to the preparation of radioactive effluent Technical Specifications may be acceptable if we detemine that the alternatives are in compliance with the regulations and with the intent of the regulatory guidance.
The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications for TMI-1 have been reviewed, evaluated, and found to be in compliance with the requirements of the HRC regulations and with the intent of NUREG-0133 and NUREG-0472 THI-1 utilizes a pressurized water reactor). We have also determined that the nonradioactive flow from the mechanical draft cooling tower would dilute the station discharge effluent and that moving the monitor upstream should provide better detection and resolution of any radio-active discharge through the station discharge effluent line. We also agree that the automatic temination feature bf the new monitor as high radioactive detection should provide added protection against inadvertent releases offsite via this release path. '
Sumnary In view of the above considerations, we have concluded that moving the monitoring upstream and using a monitor which provides better sensitivity for iodine detection is acceptable, and therefore, the proposed amend-ment to Sections 3.21.1, 4.21.1, and 4.22.1 of the THI-1 Technical Specifications is acceptable.
Environnental Consideration; We have detemined 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 enviromental inpact. Having made this detemination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an actinn which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR $51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact state-ment, or negative declaration and environe. ental inpact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
"'C 4 N2C MN 318 HO!8m NRCM O240 OFFICIAL PECORD COPY
- U.S. GPO 1983-400-247 sr., ~.-,- a
~.
- ~... -. -. -
.~~ f w ~~~ i r,y CL
~-
- l o
m-a=. ~-
,b.
J L
a c.
v w-4-
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed canner, and (2) sucis activities will be conducted in compliance with the Coonission's regulations, and the issuance of this amendment will not be ininical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: Qctober 14, 1983 The following NRC personnel have contributed to this Safety Evaluation:
C. Hichols e
t ancr>
x usue>
circ >
w.c rom aia no,soi sacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u.s. opo 1983-4o0-247
..s c.- -.4 x
-..-