ML20085D309
| ML20085D309 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 10/04/1991 |
| From: | J. J. Barton GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20085D306 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9110160039 | |
| Download: ML20085D309 (13) | |
Text
a
. l
.- j GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION I OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION ;
facility Operating License No. OPR-16 i I
facility Operating License Amendment Request No. 199 Docket No. 50-219 Applicant submits, by this Facility Operating License Amendment Request No. 199 .)
to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Operating License, a change to '
Operating License page 6. p__ /
BY 'u J. J rton V ce sident and Director
- 0) e reek Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of h 1991.
Notary Public of NJ, Juonuu.cnown Nocery Pubneof NewJersey gy m p //a c / 0 8~
9110160039 911004 PDR ADOCK 05000219 P PDR
[
q 'J
Uf111[D STATIS Of AMERICA flUCl[ AR R[GULA10RY COMMISS10f1 in the Matter of ) i
) Docket flo. 50-219 l GPU N'iclear Corporation ) i E!iUf.lCAIL0f SDlylR j i
This is to certify that a copy of facility Operating License Amendment Request l flo.199 for Oyster Creek fluclear Generating Station Operating License, filed with l t he U.S. florinar Regulatory Commission on Oct.4.1991 has t his day of 0ct.4 J991, ;
lu:-en served on the Mayor of Lacey Township, Ocean County, flew Jersey by deposit !
in the United States mail, addressed as follows: l The Honorable Debra Madensky Mayor of Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road forked River f1J p 73y /
Uy- -
. J i -tton ....- .~ -.-.
'i c( l rpsident and Director
(" er/ Creek l
)
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-16 DOCKET NO. 50-219 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMEN1 REQUEST M. 199 Applicant hereby requests the Commission to change facility Operating License No.
DPR 16 > as below, and pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91, an analysis concerning the determination of no significant hazards consideration is also presented:
1.0 Sf(CTIONS TO BE CHANGEQ facility Operating License No. OPR 16, Page 6. !
2.0 fjLT1NT OF CHANGE -
Section 103.c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 provides that a license is i to be. issued for a specified period not exceeding 40 years. 10 CfR 50.51 specifies that each license will be issued for a fixed period of time not to exceed 40 years from the date of issuance. The current licensed term for DCNGS is 40 years commencing with issuance of the construction permit on December 15, 1964. Thus, the facility Operating License for OCNGS will expire at midnight December 15, 2004. Accounting for the time that was '
required for plant construction, this represents an effective operating license term of approximately 36 years rather than 40 years. Therefore, I GPUN requests that-the OCNGS facility Operating Licene be extended from December 15, 2004 to April 9, 2009 to reflect forty u) years from the date of issuance of the full power license. This request represents a ,
license extension of four years and four months to allow operation for the ;
full design life.
Operation of OCNGS until April 9, 2009 will be both practicable and economical. The plant is a major asset to Ocean County and surrounding communities by virtue of its ongoing contributions to the property tax base and secondary benefits to the local economy from employee payroll, and from expenditures for goods and services to operate the plant. As a baseload generating station, it provides power and stability to the ;
t Pennsylvania New Jersey-Maryland interconnection. The additional years of plant operation allowed by the proposed change would defer the need to #
install replacement baseload capacity, which would result in substantial >
additional- capital expenditures. Utilization of domestic sources of ;
energy such as nuclear power helps reduce our nation's dependence on expensive imported oil.
This change is consistent with actions taken by the Commission in granting similar license extensions for the period between construction permit '
issuance and full power license issuance.
l l l
l l .e l ----
_.a..._ . _ _. _ _ _ _ ...-__-.--.,e
. . -, . .. -. . ~. - ._- _ _ - . - .- _ - .-. _---.
1 3.0 CFANGES REQtl[51[Q '
The requested change is shown on the attached Oyster Creek Facility l Operating License No. OPR-16. Page 6.
l 4.0 Q}SCUSSIONS I The justification for this change addresses the sugested 9didelines issued by NRC to supplement the April 30, 1985 policy letter from H. L.
Thompson, Jr. to H. R. Denton on ex, iding the operating life of nuciear >
L power plant . These guidelines suggest that the following items be addressed: significant environmental impacts, equipment qualification and technical specifications for inservice inspection and testing.
OC"GS was designed, constructed and licensed for a 40-year service life as discussed in the OCNGS Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). This design life is based upon operation at a thermal power level of 1930 MWt with a cumulative lifetime capacity factor of 807. The Unit cumulative capacity factor to date is less than -807.. Accordingly, none of the licensing ;
issues forming the basis for the initial issuante of the operating license i need be reconsidered in connection with this pre sed amendment, since the pendment, if granted, would be fully supported i the initial licensing record. The rated thermal power upgrade to 1930 MWt was described in OCNGS Technical Specification Change Request No. 7 which resulted in License Amendment No. 3, dated November 5, 1971.
The 40 year service life design criteria does not imply that some equipment and components will not wear out or require replacement during the plant lifetime. Design features were included in the construction and subsequent modification of OCNGS which ensure the ability to test, e inspect, and perform preventive and corrective maintenance of the plant structures, systems and components. Existing surveillance and maintenance '
programs are sufficient to maintain or determine the need for replacement .
of safety related components. Periodic inservice inspection and testing requirements have. been incorporated into the plant Technical Speciffcations and procedures to provide further assurance that any unanticipated degradation of safety related systems, equipment or structures will be identified and corrected in a timely manner.
A. Eauinment Imnact
- 1. Mechanical Equipment The reactor coolant pressure boundary components within the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) scope were designed and '
constructed for a 40-year design life. The equipment design life is based on the time period of exposure to an operating environment. The 40-year design life is equivalent to 32 Effective Full Power Years (EFPYs). During the plant construction, materials were not exposed to the operating environment except fc' system functional tests. The system components were not subjected to a radiation environment until after the operating license became effective. GPUN is committed to a periodic inservice inspection program for the Reactor Coolant System per Technical Specification Section 4.3.
2-
.m__.m, ,._., ~,,- . ,,,,_, .,,,-,.,,_.,y.,,m..,,. , , . . ~ . . . _ . . , , _.y - .. . . , . . . m...._m- . . , . . . . , . . , _ _ , , - . - . , .
I 4
The Reactor Vessel Materials Surveillance Program provides the 4 means for continuously monitoring the cumulative effects of !
the neutron exposure on the materials of the reactor vessel throughout the life of the plant. The analyses of the OCNGS plant specific surveillance capsules have confirmed that the predictions used in the analytical techniques for establishing operating limitations for the reactor vessel are conservative.
Future OCNGS plant specific material surveillance capsules will be analyzed at specified times throughout plant life in ,
order to continue to ensure that the predictions used in the analytical icchniques for establishing future operating limitations for the reactor vessel remain conservative.
The Oyster Creek Drywell Long Term Monitoring- Program presently cnnsists of taking ultrasonic testing (UT) measurements during outages of opportunity. These measurements will determine the corrosion rate in the sand bed region and monitor any such corrosion over time until-it is determined that such corrosion .has been abated. UT measurements are also conducted at various locations on the .
drywell shell to confirm thG excessive corrosion i s not '
occurring in those regions. This program will provide assurance of continued integrity of the drywell over the lifetime.of the plant.
- 2. Electrical Equipment and Environmental Qualification The Environmental Qualification (EQ) program for electrical equipment cperating in a harsh environment is described in the OCNGS FSAR, Section 3.11. The program ensures that EQ is maintained for required electrical equipment within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49, 3 Aging analyses have been performed for safety-related electrical equipment in accordance with 10 CFR 50.49, Environmental Qualification, to identify qualified lifetimes for this equipment. These lifetimes are incorporated into plant equipment maintenance and replacement practices to ensure that safety-related' electrical equipment remains qualified and available to perform its safety function regardless of the overall age of the plant. Therefore, the electrical system design, electrical equipment selection and application, and the environmental qualification of electrical ,
equipment has adequately considered or is not impacted by a 40 year operational-11fetime.
The OCNGS EQ program was evaluated by NRC and found acceptable in a safety evaluation dated May 28, 1985 and in Inspection Report 50-219/86-08, cated August 5, 1986.
- 3-
, ,_- . . . , , - . _ . ., . . - , -- -.,-.,,-...,,---y ,,. .--.,-,.,,.,%.,.,-,,- - . . . . , , . . , , , . , , - - -,,,,y -,4 ,.r.,-r - . . ,
- y. . i
. i
- 3. . Spent Fuel Storage -
For the period f rom 2004 to 2009, Oyster Creek will rely on a combination wet and dry storage technology for its spent m nuclear fuel. Without the addition of incremental dry storage l capaci ty . at mt er Creek, the plant would loose full. core ;
reserve margi following the refueling in late 1994, and' exhaust all spent fuel pool storage capacity in 2000. The Oyster Creek spent fuel pool has been reracked with _ high ;
density poison racks and no further rack capacity expansion 1; possible. GPU Nucicar recognizes this eventuality and. is currently soliciting pronosals to augment the existing pool capacity with dry storage technology to provide suf ficient on-site spent fuel storaga beginning in 1994 to maintain the plant's full core reserv! margin and to provide storage for all spent fuel projects to be discharged by Oyster Creek through 2009. Irmmental modulsr dry storage capacity would be added each -opei: ing cycle to support continuing plant operation. It is projecta. thet some 1250 spent fuel 3 assemblies will. be in dry storage at Oyster Creek by 2009.
OCNGS is implementing 24 month operating cyc'.as beginning with tycle 13. As 3 consequence, the extended operating pericd represented by the proposed license changa is expected to result in an insignificant increase in the total number of t spent fuel generated when compared to the total quantity of spent fuel that would have been generated at the current license expiratior date assuming previously utilized 18 month cycle lengths.
1
- 4. Inservice inspection (ISI) and inservice Test (151) Programs The OCNGS ongoing 151 and IST programs -are maintained in t accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a. The surveillance requirements i for the ISI and IST programs for ASME Code Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 components are contained in OCNGS Technical Specification Section 4.3, Reactor Coolant. These surveillance requirements ensure the continuing integrity of the reactor coolant system throughout the life of the plant.
Rnnical Specifications'also provide additional requirements for monitoring component 'ging and he cumulative effects of ~
power operation over the iife of the plant. '
- a. Specification 3.3 Reactor Coolant Pressure Temperature Relationships Temperature and pressure changes during heatup, cooldown and normal operation of the reactor coolant system are limited to protect against non ductile failure of the reactor coolant system. These limits are established in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G, and calculated utilizing the procedures defined in Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2.
4-
, , m n~n, n,...--- -en.-~. .n-,--.-.e--- wa -a,--w---nv+ --n,~, ,-n---v.~ .n-- ,,,m, -,wn n---.- - - + , - ~~m -.a,- ,,-~r
To monitor the effects of irradiation on reactor !
pressure vessel materials, test specimens fabricated from similar materials used to fabricate the reactor vessel are installed in the reactor vessel. The reactor vessel material surveillance program monitors reactor vessel embrittlement over the 40-year design life in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix H. Reactor vessel irradiation specimens are periodically removed, tested and analyzed at specific intervals to determine changes in material properties. The results of these examinations are then submitted for NRC review and are used to update the pressure and temperature limits.
- b. Specification 4.5.A and 4.5.E Primary Containment Leakage Tests This specification establishes the requirements for the performance of periodic integrated and local leakage rate tests in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix J.
These tests are performed during the life of the plant to ensure that the primary containment leakage remains within allowable limits.
- c. Specification 4.5.P Suppression Chamber Surveillance This specification defines the requirements for the Suppression Chamber Integrity Surveillance Program. .
This surveillance program monitors the conditions of the coating material on the interior surfaces of the suppression chamber to ensuro continued integrity of the suppression chamber.
knvironmentalImpact B.
NRC Environmental Assessment issued in April 10, 1986, in support of the Full Term Operating License, determined that the conclusions of the Final Environmental Statement (FES) dated December 1974 were still valid. GPUN has reviewed the initial Environmental Report issued hovember 17, 1972, in conjunction with the Full Term Operating License application, to determine if the license expiration extension would involve any previously unconsidered-environmental impacts. Since this environmental report was written presuming a 40-year plant life, we have identified no additional impacts associated with plant operation for a 40-year operating period. This is substantiated further in the annual environmental reports provided in March of each year.
_1- _ ._ _ ,_ _ . . _ _ _ . . ,. _ _ , .- _ - _ ~_
4
- 's in addition, a Final Environmental Statement was issued in f ebruary, 1973-in support of the construction . permit for the forked River tiuclear Generating Station Unit 1. which was located on the same site shared with the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. This FES considered the existing environmental conditions with the Oyster Creek Station in operation, and concluded that there would be no significant compounding of potential adverse environmental ef fects attributable to the addition of the forked River Station.
Since the forked River Station has since been canceled, the previous environmental assessments bound the present site conditions.
- 1. Radiological Impact l
The OCNGS is located on the coastal pine barrens of Few Jersey l in Lacey and Ocean Townships, Ocean County. The site is j approximately 35 miles north of Atlantic City, New Jersey and 45 miles east of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Several small- '
residential communities are _ located approximately 9.5 miles north of the site. Local beaches' and bays attract a large-transient seasonal population. The original licensing basis ,
utilized the 1970 censu:; data which showed a combined resident and seasonal population of 97,315 in the -0 -
10 mile i distribution and projected a population distribution of 277,877 for '2010. Recent population estimates based on-the results of a 1987 population study, which is the most current available. Indicated a combined resident and transient population of 181,001~ within 10 miles of the plant.. The population growth rate experienced in Ocean County during the 1970's and early 1980's is expected te decline in the next two decades. The original Environmental Report projected an
.overall increase of 1867. which is expected to remain a bounding projection. GPUN is required to update its population distribution and- resulting Emergency Plan evacuation time estimates on the- basis of 1990 census' data when it becomes available. This action will ensure that population-distribution changes are implemented in emergency ,
planning requirements. . -
The low population zone distance for Oyster Creek is 0.75 miles. The original Environmental Report, based on the 1970 :
census data, projected a resident and seasonal population of l 4264 in- 2010 within 1 mile of the plant. The present population center is 9.5 miles north of the site and it is unlikely that the population growth _in the vicinity of the Oyster Creek site will challenge the 10 CFR Part 100 siting criteria.
Ei_.._.._._____..._____________._.._.__,_._._._,_....._,
. . \
Based on the above data, the projected population at the proposed license expiration date would not change the overall conclusion of the OCNGS FSAR or Environmental Report consequences following postulated accidents. Therefore, the conclusions reached in the original FSAR and Environmental ;
Report rnmain valid.
- 2. General Public -
The original estimates of dose to the human population residing ;round OCNGS was calculated for normal gaseous and liquid releases in Section 5.2 of the 1974 Environmental Report. 1hese dose calculations for normal operation are based on cverage release rates over the 40 year life of the plant. In Octot,ar 1986, NRC issued Technical Specifications requiring conformance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix 1. Annually, OCNGS provides a Radiological Environmental Monitoring Repurt which sum arizes the types and constituents of releases and ;
assesses the potential radiological impact to the public due to operation of OCNGS. These assessments have indicated that radiation doses to the public from operations at OCNGS have been will below all applicable regulatory limits and typically are significantly less than doses received from common sources of radiation.
- 3. Occupational Exposure Impact Oyster Creek maintains an aggressive commitment to as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) exposures. Exposure goals are established for the station to minimize collective doses. All work receives a radiological review with a higher level of detail spent on all maintenance tasks and modifications projected to exceed 5 person-rem.
T Oyster Creek has had high collective annual doses. It is projected that average annual collective exposures will decrease with the implementation of dose reduction programs such as the plant decontamination program, a hot spot reduction program, a cobalt reduction program and the performance of chemical decontamination of the Recirculation and Reactor Water Cleanup Systems as part of a continuing source term reduction program.
The material condition of the plant is being improved as demonstrated by plant performance during the last two operating cycles and the low annual collective dose of 310 person-rem during 1990. That dose was the lowest annual exposure since 1971.
Given our continued successful efforts, the long term doses at Oyster Creek are estimated to average 650 person-rem per year until the end of operations. This is based on an operating cycle average dose of 400 person-rem and outage average doses ,
of 750 person-rem, projected beyond Cycle 14.
It is tikely that other ALARA improvements such as permanent shielding improvements, continuing dose reduction modifications, and the effects of the long term improvements being made today will further reduce all collective doses during the period of the extension. During this period of extension approx;mately two (2) more refueling outages would be expected based on 24-month cycles. Annually, GPUN pros ides person-rtm exposure data during normal operating maintenance, repair :.ad refueling activities for all personnel monitored by dosimetry.
- 4. Non-Radiological Impact intake Effectj on Acuatic Resources Mitigative measures have been implemented to minimize impact on aquatic biota due to impingement and entrainment. The conventional intake traveling screens have been replaced with .1 bucket screens using a low-pressure screen wash System for removal of bista and reduction of initial impingement e mortality, and screen wash effluent has been rerouted so that i , pinged biota are returned to ambient water in the discharge canal to reduce thermal stress. Water quality-related requirements were deleted from the OCNGS Technical Specifications in Amendment 66, dated March 24, 1983. The NPDES Permit syttem continues to regulate and protect the aquatic environment.
Chemical 0- M arqa The 1974 fts for OCNGS recogni:ed that copper released as a result of condenser tube corrosion, and chlorine added to the condenser cooling water for biofouling control had the potential to impact aquatic biota, in 1976, the original "
- condenser tubes were replaced with titanium tubing, thereby removing the source of copper in the circulating water.
Chlorine addition to the condenser cooling and effluent water has been reduced by routing chlovinated domestic and sanitary wastes to a municipal treatment plant, and by NPDES Perniit limitations on the quantities and duration of chlorine usage and releases.
Thermal Effluents and Station Shutdowns Operational procedures to minimize the impact of plant shutdown on fish in the discharge canal have been used at OCNGS since 1974. The mitigation measures in use have reduced thermal shock-related fish kills to a minimal level. NPDES Permit conditions will continue to ensure that thermal effluents will not create a significant environmental impact.
__ _ _ ____ - - . - - - - - - - '- ^- ~
- n. . -. . . . - - ~ - - , - - , .-- - .
H
- i A review of the history of the Environmental Reports provided annually shows no adverse impact to the environment from_the
- site. Adequate controls ~ are 'provided to ensure continued monitoring of the effects of plant operation on the environment throughout plant life. Extension of the operating license by - four years and four months would not- adversely affect the environment.
- 5. Economic Assessment Operation of Oyster CrF . b2 - nd its current operating license period will provide fi -
n benefit to the customers served by GPU. na
- ration oi Oyster Creek for an additional four years and four~ months would defer the need to design and-construct an equivalent replacement facility. GPU has evaluated the economics of continued operation of Oyster Creek through _2009 to that of a combined-cycle (oil / natural gas) facility replacing Oyster Creek as early as 1998. The present value of net benefits to the customer would be in the range of
$200-$400 million (1991 dollars) with coatinued' operation of Oyster Creek. This includes incrementhl benefits for the 2004-2009 time period during which continued operation of Oyster Creek would reduce consumer rates in comparison to the
. combined-cycle alternative.
5.0 DETERMINATION GPUN--has determined that the proposed change to the Facility Operating License for OCNGS it .alves no signif * 't hazcrds consideration as defined by NRC in 10 !FR 50.92.
- 1. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed-T amendment would not involve a significant increase in the
' probability of. occurrence or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. - The proposed revision-to the Facility-Operating License does not affect the ' safety analysis and does not involve any physical changes to the plant, nor any changes in the format or restraiats on plant operations, and only contemplates- a change to the expiration date of the- current
-license. Therefore, this change is unrelated to the possibility of increasing the - consequences of previously analyzed accidents. -This change will not increase the probability of previously analyzed accident because the plant is designed and constructed for '40 years of operation.
.g.
Ja -.- r'- ,,,, , , , - - - - ~ , , . - - , - - , , - - , - , - . , v- -
, . .~ -
~ w . . , . - ... .. . . ,..- . . . . ~ ,.
' _ 'flg
. aa' t
-2. Operation : of _ the facility - in ' accordance with t he ' proposed.
amendment would not create 1 the possibility of a new or .
different kind'of accident from any previously evaluated! 'The proposed _ revision to;the Facility Operating' License.does not-affect the safety analysis and does not involve any physical changes - to : the plant, nor any . changes in. _ the format or. .
restraints on plant operations,= and only contemplates a change to.the_ expiration date of the current license. The plant is- ;
designed and constructed for 40 _ years _of operation. ~
Therefore, th._is change ~ has no effect on the possibility of ,
creating: af new ^ or- different kind of accident from any.
- I previously-evaluated.
- 3. _0peration of the facility in accordance with the proposed-amendment would not involve' a significant = reduction 'in --a-
- margin. of safety. The proposed revision to- the - Facility Operating License does not involve any physical changes to the plant, nor-any changes in the format or restraints on plant.
. operations, and only contemplates a chamje to= the expiration date of the current license. The saf ety analyses described in the FSAR are based on a 40-year opercting life. There fore, the-overall margin of safety for the plant.is maintained.
--The commisrinn has provided guidelines portaining tolthe application of the three standards by listing' specific examples .in 48 FR 14870.-
The proposed amendment is considered to be in t' e same category as -
example (i) of amendments that are considered not_likely to involve signtficant hazards considerations in that.the proposed change is-purely an administrative change to allow operation for he design life of the plant and does not involve any physical changes to the
- plant or restraints on plant operations. The proposed change
. beari_ng upon. duration ~of operations is within the range permissible by the Commission's regulations, specifically.10 CFR 50.51. Thus, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment
=
- involves no significant hazards _ considerations.
6.0 IMPLEMENTAY10N I t ._ i s requested that this license amendment become ef fective _ upon issuance.-
Y
. . 6 6- '
F. The licensee shall have ami maintain financial protection of such type and in such amounts as the Commtssion shall require in accordance wich Section 170 of the Atomte Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to cover public liability claims.
3.
This license is effective as of the date of issuance and shall expire at midnight on April 9, 2009.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
Appendices A and B -
Technical Specifications Date of Issuance:
9
.