ML20086J888
| ML20086J888 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 01/11/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086J885 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8401250458 | |
| Download: ML20086J888 (2) | |
Text
- f*%s.
o UNITED STATES
!g t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 br
.,r.
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 65 TO FACILITY LICENSE N0. DPR-71 AND AMENDMENT NO. 91 TO FACILITY LICENSE N0. DPR-62 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324 1.0 Introduction
-By letter dated October 3,1983, the Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee) submitted proposed changes to the Technical Specifications appended to Facility Operatina License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1 and 2. The amendments proposed by the licensee would change the Technical Specifications to provide limited flexibility in scheduling containment leak testing surveillance consistent with planned outages. They do not result in-a long-term extension of the surveillance schedule because of the reauirements of Specification 4.0.2.b that limits the total maximum combined interval time for any 3 consecutive surveillance intervals not to exceed 3.25 times the specified surveillance interval.
2.0 Evaluation Brunswick Technical Specification (TS) 4.0.2, where applicable, permits the extension of a surveillance interval up to twenty five percent. However, Brunswick TS 4.6.1.2.h states that the provisions of Specification TS 4.0.2 are not applicable to the surveillance requirements of TS 4.6.1.2 con-cerning Type A, B, and C leak tests. The proposed change to the Brunswick Unit 1 and Brunswick Unit 2 TS would allow the provisions of Specification 4.0.2 to apply to the 18 month surveillance interval for the Type A Overall Integrated Containment Leak Rate Test (ILRT) and the leak testing of the main steam line isolation valves.
This allowance is consistent with the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50.
Appendix J of 10 CFR 50 states in Section III.A.6(b):
"(b) If two consecutive periodic T criteria in III.A.5(b)ype A tests fail to meet the applicable acceptance
. notwithstanding the periodic retest schedule of III.D, a Type A test shall be performed at each plant shutdown for refueling or approximately every 18 months, whichever occurs first, until.two consec-utive Type A tests meet the acceptance criteria in III.A.5.(b),.after which time the retest schedule specified in III.D. may be resumed."
e401250458 840111 PDR ADOCK 05000324 P
PDR L.
4 The proposed Technical Specifications would permit the extension of the 18 month surveillance interval referenced-above.
Furthermore, the staff noted that Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 reouires that this surveillance test be performed "...at each plant shutdown for refueling or approximately every 18 months, whichever occurs first,..."
We have therefore added this requirement to the Technical Specifications in Section 4.6.1.2.b. on page 3/4 6-3.
We have reviewed these changes as proposed by the licensee and find that these changes make the Brunswick Technical Specifications conform with the particular requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50. Therefore, the changes are acceptable.
3.0 Environmental Considerations 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 determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement,.
or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 Conclusions We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) public such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
D. Hoffman and M. Grotenhuis l
Dated:
January 11, 1984 l
l l
L