ML20114E374
| ML20114E374 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1996 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20114E371 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-01.163, RTR-REGGD-1.163 NUDOCS 9606250224 | |
| Download: ML20114E374 (3) | |
Text
__
pa nt%
p*-
4 UNITED STATES
]
4 g
,g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2006H001 g
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 51 AND 37 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-87 AND NPF-89 TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-445 AND 50-446
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated March 12, 1996 (TXX-96008), Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric /the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89) for the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2.
The proposed changes would revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to i
reflect the approval for the licensee to use of the new Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program as required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Option B for CPSES, Units 1 and 2.
Implementation of the new performance based leakage rate testing program will be based on the guidance provided by Regulatory Guide 1.163, September 1995.
2.0 BACKGROUND
Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J provides assurance that the primary containment, including those systems and components which penetrate the primary containment, do not exceed the allowable leakage rate values specified in the TSs and Bases.
The allowable leakage rate is determined so that the i
leakage assumed in the safety analyses is not exceeded.
On February 4,1992, the NRC published a notice in the Federal Reaister (57 FR 4166) discussing a planned initiative to begin eliminating requirements marginal to safety which impose a significant regulatory burden. Appendix J,
" Primary Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors" to 10 CFR Part 50, was considered for this initiative and the staff undertook a study of possible changes to this regulation. The study examined the previous performance history of domestic containments and examined the effect on risk of a revision to the requirements of Appendix J.
The results of this study are reported in NUREG-1493, " Performance-Based Leak-Test Program".
Based on the results of this study, the staff developed a performance based approach to containment leakage rate testing. On September 12, 1995, the NRC approved issuance of this revision to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, which was subsequently published in the Federal Reaister on September 26, 1995, and became effective on October 26, 1995. The revision added Option B
" Performance-Based Requirements" to Appendix J to allow licensees to g62gggy $8 5
P
. voluntarily replace the prescriptive testing requirements of Appendix J with testing requirements based on both overall and individual component leakage rate performance.
Regulatory Guide 1.163, " Performance-Based Containment Leak Test Program," was developed as a method acceptable to the staff for implementing Dption B.
This Regulatory Guide states that the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) document NEI 94-01,." Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J" provides methods acceptable to the staff for
)
complying with Option B with four exceptions, which are described therein.
1 Option B requires that the Regulatory Guide or other implementation document used by a licensee to develop a performance based leakage rate testing program must be included, by general reference, in the plant TSs. The licensee has referenced Regulatory Guide 1.163 in the CPSES TSs.
1 Regulatory Guide 1.163 specifies an extension in Type A test frequency to at least one test in 10 years based upon two consecutive successful tests.
Type B tests may be extended up to a maximum of 10 years based upon completion of two consecutive successful tests and Type C tests may be extended up to 5 years based on two consecutive successful tests.
By letter dated October 20, 1995, NEI proposed TSs for implementing Option B.
After some discussion, the staff and NEI agreed on a set of model TSs which were transmitted to NEI in a letter dated November 2,1995. These TSs are to l
serve as a model for licensees to develop plant specific TSs in preparing amendment requests to implement Option B.
For a licensee to determine the performance of each component factors that are indicative of or affect performance such as an administrative leakage limit must be established. The administrative limit is selected to be indicative of the potential onset of component degradation. Although these limits are subject to NRC inspection to ensure that they are selected in a reasonable manner, they are not TSs requirements.
Failure to meet an administrative limit requires the licensee to return to the minimum value of the test interval.
Option B requires that the licensee maintain records to show that the criteria for Type A, B and C tests have been met.
In addition, the licensee must maintain comparisons of the performance of the overall containment system and the individual components to show that the test intervals are adequate. These records are subject to NRC inspection.
3.0 EVALUATION The licensee's March 12, 1996, letter to the NRC proposes to establish a
" Primary Containment Leakage Rate Program" and proposes to add this program to the TSs. The program references Regulatory Guide 1.163, " Performance-Based Containment Leak Test Program" dated September, 1995 which gecifies methods
i
- 1 f.
l acceptable to the staff for complying with Option B.
This requires a change to TS 3/4.6.1.1, " Containment Integrity," 3/4.6.1.2, " Containment Leakage,"
3/4.6.1.3, " Containment Air Locks," and 3/4.6.1.6, " Containment Structural j
Integrity" and the addition of Specification 6.8.3g, " Containment Leakage Rate
)
Testing Program," to implement the new performance based leakage rate testing program as permitted by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, rather than paraphrasing the requirements of the existing regulation.
i Option B permits a licensee to choo' e Type A; or Type B and C; or Type A, B, s
and C; testing to be done on a performance basis.
The licensee has elected to perform Type A, B, and C testing on a performance basis.
The staff finds that the TSs changes proposed by the licensee meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Option B and, are consistent with j
the model TSs included in the staff's November 2,1995, letter to NEI and are therefore acceptable.
i
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
L In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Texas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a 4
facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has dett mined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released a
offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a
)
proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant huards I
consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (61 FR 15999). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amandments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
I The Commission has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
j Principal Contributor:
T. Polich 1
Date: June 13, 1996
,