ML20128A561

Safety Evaluation Supporting Util Conformance to Rev 2 to Reg Guide 1.97

ML20128A561
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	05/14/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20128A538	List: ML20128A561 ML20128A574
References
RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097 GL-82-33, NUDOCS 8505240260
Download: ML20128A561 (2)

Text

' /-

/pomy\.

UNITED STATES .

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.c  :) wasmworow. o.c.aous

~s...../

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION CONFORMANCE TO REGULATORY GUIDE 1.97, REV. 2

. BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325/324 Introduction and Sunnary ~

Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L) was requested by Generic Letter No.

82-22 to provide a report to the NRC describing how the post-accident monitoring instrumentation meets Regulatory Guide 1.97 as applied to emergency response facilities. The licensee responded to the generic letter by letter dated April 15, 1983. A review of the instrumentation provided for Regulatory Guide 1.97 was submitted on September- 30, 1983 and revised on February 1 and May 8,1984. Additional information was provided by letter dated January 22, 1985.

A detailed review and technical evaluation of the licensee's submittals

.was performed by EG&G, Idaho,'Inc., under contract to the NRC, with general supervision by the NRC staff. This work is reported by EG&G in its Technical Evaluation Report (TER), "Conformance to Regulatory Guide 1.97, i

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos.1 & 2," dated March 1985

, (attached). .We have reviewed this report and concur with the conclusion 3 that the licensee either conforms to, or is justified in deviating from,

-the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.97 for each post-accident monitoring vuiable.

Evaluation Criteria Subsequent to the issuance of the generic letter, the NRC held regional l meetings in February and March 1983, to answer licensee and applicant l questions and concerns regarding the NRC policy on Regulatory Guide 1.97.

l At these meetings, it was noted that the NRC review would only address L- exceptions taken to the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.97. Further, where t

licensees or applicants explicitly state that instrument systems conform to the provisions of the guide, it was noted that no further staff review would be necessary. Therefore, the review performed and reported by EG&G

only addresses exceptions to Regulatory Guide 1.97. This Safety Evaluation i- addresses the licensee's submittals based on the review policy described in the NRC regional meetings and the conclusions of the review as reported by

EG&G.

j' Evaluation  !

i We have reviewed the evaluation performed by our consultant contained in l the attached TER and concur with its bases and findings. The licensee i

PDR

• + en r1P ~T -Y

n_

either conforms to, or has provided an acceptable justification for deviations from the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.97 for each post-accident monitoring variable. TER Item 3.3.12, Accident Sampling, has been reviewed and approved sin Safety Evaluations dated October 29, 1983 and May 2, 1984 which found all eleven of the criterion in TM1 Item II. B.3 acceptable.

Conclusion Based on the staff's review of the attached Technical Evaluation Report, and the licensee's submittals, we find that the Brunswick Steam Elertric Plant, Units 1 and 2, design is acceptable with respect to conformance to Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev. 2.

Principal Contributor: J. Joyce, M. Grotenhuis Dated: May 14, 1985

)

i i