ML20148J861

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 98 to License DPR-54

ML20148J861
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	03/17/1988
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20148J816	List: ML20148J811 ML20148J846 ML20148J861
References
NUDOCS 8803300410
Download: ML20148J861 (3)

Text

e , -

u

/pa ato 'o,, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

["

gy

.,, g

.E WASHING TON, D. C, 20555

\, ...../

SAFETY EVALUATION 8Y THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 98 TO FACILITY OPERATIONS LICENSE OPR-54 RANCHO SEC0 NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET N0. 50-312

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letters dated June 30, 1987, and October 3, 1987, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District pioposed amendments to the Rancho Seco Technical Specifications. These amendmeras would (1) reduce the lower limits of detection for liquid effluents, (2) change requirements to match changes in the effluent systems, (3) clarify certain requirements, and (4) improve consistency with the Standard Technical Specifications. These proposed amendments were modified in certain details, but not fundamentally changed by letters dated December 23, 1987, and February 11, 1988.

2.0 EVALUATION The proposed amendment (P. A.155, Rev. 2) consists of chan Seco Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS)ges . to the Rancho The amendments were prompted by offsite environmental surveys and NRC inspections of the Rancho Seco liquid waste handling system. These actions indicated that the radioactivity in the offsite environment alung the Rancho Seco liquid effluent pathway exceeded the design dose limits as specified by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I. An evaluation of this problem concluded that deficient technical specifications were responsible, in part, for the offsite contamination problem. In response to this finding, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) submitted proposed changes to the RETS.

The proposed changes involve specifications associated with the liquid, gaseous, and solid radwaste systems. The changes are predominately an upgrade of the existing specifications to current regulatory criteria. For the Rancho Seco RETS, current regula+,ory criteria are published in NUREG-0472, i

"Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for PWRs." These standard l

RETS were evaluated by the NRC staff and deterTnined to be acceptable for the typical PWR. Rancho Seco does not have Standard Technical Specifications, but this amendment proposes numerous changes to improve consistency with the Standard; the following Sections are involved:

1.0 Definitions 3.15 Radioactive Liquid Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation 3.16 Radioactive Gaseous Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation 3.17.1 Liquid Effluent Concentrations 3.17.2 Liquid Effluent Dose eso3300410 080317 12 DR ADOCK 0500

• e 0 3.17.4 Liquid Effluent Radwaste Treatment 3.18.1 Gaseous Effluent Dose Rates 3.18.3 Dose - Iodine-131, Iodine-133, Tritium and Radioactive Materials in Particulate Form 3.18.4 Gaseous Radwaste Treatment 3.18.5 Gas Storage Tanks 3.22 Radiological Environmental Monitoring 3.23 Land Use Census 3.25 Fuel Cycle Dose Table 4.1-1 Instrument Surveillance Requirements Table 4.1-3 Minimum Sampling Frequency 4.19 Radioactive Liquid Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation 4.20 Radioactive Gaseous Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation 4.21.1 Concentration 4.21.2 Doses 4.21.4 Liquid Effluent Radwaste Treatment 4.22.2 Dose -- Noble Gas 4.22.3 Dose -- Iodine-131, Iodine-133 Tritium and Radioactive Particulates

. 22.4 Gaseous Radwaste Treatment 4.25 Solid Radioactive Waste 4.26 Radiological Environmental Monitoring 4.27 Land Use Census 5.1 Site 6.5 Review and Audit 6.8 Procedures 6.9 Reporting Requirements 6.15 Process Control Program 6.16 Major Changes to Radwaste Systems The Technical Specifications listed above are considered consistent with the intent of the Standard Technical Specifications and, therefore, are acceptable.

Where appropriate, site specific limits and restrictions were imposed. Site specific limits include more stringent or additional requirements, limitations, and surveillance to compensate for the fact that Rancho Seco is situated in arid surroundings without a large source of dilution for liquid effluents. Examples of this type of change is the additional conservatism added to tables 4.21.1 and 4.21.2. This change increases the required sensitivity for analyzing samples of liquid effluents to ensure that the radiological impact on the environment is well defined and evaluated prior to discharge. Other Technical Specifications made more restrictive are:

3.1.4 Reactor Coolant System Activity 3.17.3 Liquid Holdup Tanks 3.22 Radiological Environmental Monitoring 4.20 Radioactive Gaseious Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation 4.21.3 Liquid Holdup Tanks 4.22.1 Dose Rate

w

.g oe These proposed changes make the Technical Specifications more restrictive and, therefore, are acceptable.

Several of the proposed changes are editorial in nature and do not change the requirements, for example, in T.S. 4.20.1, the name of the release point is changed from "Radwaste Service Area" to "Auxiliary Building Grade Level."

Several of the specifications are renumbered for consistency; for example, T.S. 4.23 becomes T.S. 4.22.4. In other instances, such as T.S. 4.29, the changes simply clarify and correct existing errors. Such changes are to be found in almost all the T.S. and, because they do not change requirements, are acceptable.

On the basis of its review, the staff has further concluded that the proposed changes meet . the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36a and are consistent with the guidance provided in 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, NUREG-0472, and NuREG-0133.

Therefore, the proposed changes are acceptable.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment involves changes in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.

Accordingly, this amendment meets 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 this amendment.

4.0 CONTACT WITH STATE OFFICIAL The NRC staff has advised the Chief of the Radiological Health Branch, State Department of Health Service, State of California, of the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration. No coments were received.

5.0 CONCLUSION

We have concluded, based on 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 this amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or the"health and safety of the public.

\

l Principal Contributor: Charles A. Willis i l

Dated: March 17, 1988

\

l I