ML20115D368
| ML20115D368 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 07/11/1996 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20115D359 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-01.163, RTR-REGGD-1.163 NUDOCS 9607150132 | |
| Download: ML20115D368 (4) | |
Text
._
,pa arog jg. <Y UNITED STATES j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555-0001
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS.184 AND 166 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-1J1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On September 12, 1995, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved issuance of a revision to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, " Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors" which was subsequently published in the Federal Reaister on September 26, 1995, and became effective on October 26, 1995.
The NRC added Option B " Performance-Based Requirements" to allow licensees to voluntarily replace the prescriptive testing requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, with testing requirements based on both overall leakage rate performance and the performance of individual components.
By application dated April 22, 1996, as supplemented June 12, 1996, the Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed changes would permit implementation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Option B, for the Type A containment integrated leak rate tests.
The TS contain a reference to Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.163, " Performance-Based i
Containment Leak-Test Program," dated September 1995 which specifies a method acceptable to the NRC for complying with Appendix J, Option B.
The June 12, 1996, letter provided clarifying information that did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination ncr the original Federal Reaister notice.
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 specified in the TSs and Bases. The allowable leakage rate is determined so that the leakage assumed in the safety analyses is not exceeded.
9607150132 960711 DR ADOCK 050002 2
. 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 of 10 CFR Part 50 was considered for this initiative and the staff undertook a study of possible changes to this re'gulation. 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 crntainment 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 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, was developed as a method acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing Option B.
This regulatory guide states that the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidance document NEI 94-01, " Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J" provides methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with Option B with four exceptions which are described therein.
Option B requires that the RG 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 TS. The licensee has referenced RG 1.163 in the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2 TSs.
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 interval 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 to implement Option B.
After some discussion, the staff and NEI agreed on final TSs which were attached to a letter from C. Grimes (NRC) to D. Modeen (NEI) dated November 2,
.1995. These TSs are to 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 assure that they are selected in a reasonable manner, they are not TS 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 April 22, and June 12, 1996, letters to the NRC propose to incorporate a reference to RG 1.163 directly into the TSs.
RG 1.163 specifies a method acceptable to the NRC for complying with Option B.
This requires a change to existing TSs 4.6.1.2 and 4.6.1.6.
TS 4.6.1.2 has been modified to require that the Type A containment leakage rate tests shall be demonstrated in accordance with Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50, Option B, as modified by approved exemptions, using the niethods and provisions of RG 1.163.
In addition, Type B and C tests and air lock tests shall be demonstrated in accordance with Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50, Option A.
TS 4.6.1.6 has been modified to require two additional inspections of containment surfaces at approximately equal intervals during shutdowns between Type A tests, if Type A tests are performed at 10-year intervals.
The TS changes propost by the licensee are in compliance with the requirements of Option B and consistent with the guidance of RG 1.163 and the model TSs of the November 2,1995, letter and, therefore, acceptable to the staff.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
1
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR l
Part 20 and change surveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has determined i
that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released 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 hazards
1 4-consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (61 FR 20856). 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 amendments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
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 bc conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common d Fense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
I cipal Contributors:
L. Olshan J. Pulsipher Date:
July 11, 1996 s
_____