ML20091L335
| ML20091L335 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 05/23/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20091L333 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8406080021 | |
| Download: ML20091L335 (2) | |
Text
,
po Rio
+
o UNITED STATES
!\\
l' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
,/.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%,.s 4 /
+....
SAFETY ~7ALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NOS. 57 AND 39 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-4 AND NPF-7 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNITS NO. 1 AND NO. 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-338 AND 50-339
==
Introduction:==
By letter dated September 16, 1983, the Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) requested an amendment in the form of changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) to Facility Operating Licenses No. NPF-4 and No. NPF-7 l
for. the North Anna Power Station, Units No. I and No. 2 (NA-182), respectively.
The proposed changes would revise TS 3/4.7.4, 3/4.7.12 and 3/4.7.13. TS 3/4.7.4 would be revised to terminate the requirements to measure the turbidity and suspended solids in the outflow from the drain system under the service water pumphouse. TS 3/4.7.12 would be revised to decrease the freauency of settle-ment monitoring to once per 6 months at the service water pumphouse. TS 3/4.7.13 would be revised to decrease the frequency of monitoring for the i
piezometers and provide a consistent uniform 6 month monitoring frequency for all groundwater levels and flow measurenents. The proposed changes would also remove the requirement to provide a 5 year surveillance sumary report.
Discussion:
In accordance with the NA-1&2 TS, the Service Water Reservoir Impoundment and Pumphouse at NA-182 has been monitored with regard to settlement, ground-water levels and rate of groundwater flow since November 1977. The licensee reouested a change to the allowable settlement value in June 1978 which resulted in a public hearing by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board (ASLAB) in June 1979.
Following the ASLAB hearing, Amendment No. 12 to the NA-1 Facility Operating License NPF-4 was issued on June 28, 1979 which re-quired that the frequency of some =sr.itoring, especially in the vicinity of the NA-182 pumphouse, be increa3ed to at least once per 31 days. Amendment No.12 further reoufred that a summary report at the end of a five year surveillance' period be submitted to the NRC. This report was submitted by the licensee on February 24, 1983 and was in accordance with the require-cent of TS 3/4.7.13.
l 3
8406080021 840523 PDR ADOCK 05000338 m
P' PDR e -
4 y-
+t
-e*
"me
. Evaluation:
Our review of the licensee's five year sumary report follows:
1.
Settlements of the pumphouse, wingwalls, pipe expansion joint enclosure and alignment-settlement markers are small and acceptable.
In addition, the rates of settlement have decreased with time (3/4.7.12).
2.
Settlement of the service water lines is continuing and could attain 75 percent of the allowable values within the presently specified 40 year lifetime of the plant (3/4.7.12).
3.
Spray piping supports have experienced acceptable settlement over the past five years (3/4.7.12).
4.
Groundwater levels and flow rates as measured by the piezometers, hori-zontal-drains and weir walls are stable (3/4.7.13).
5.
The laboratory tests for the quality of the outflow have shown no detectable turbidity or suspended solids (3/4.7.4).
Based on the above, we conclude that these trends show sufficient stability and acceptable movement to allow discontinuing some phases of monitoring and reducing the frequency of others. Therefore, the licensee's proposed changes for the NA-182 TS are acceptable.
Environmental Consideration:
We have determined that the amendments are administrative in nature and 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 951.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
==
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 Comission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: May 23, 1984 Principal Contributors:
J. T. Chen L. B. Engle