ML20206L455

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 142 & 134 to Licenses NPF-2 & NPF-8,respectively

ML20206L455
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	05/10/1999
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20206L451	List: ML20206L445 ML20206L455
References
NUDOCS 9905140030
Download: ML20206L455 (2)

Text

p ara 4

umso smes a

a NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'f WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555 0001

/

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.142 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-2 AND AMENDMENT NO.134TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-8 SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY. INC.. ET AL.

JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 1

DOCKET NOS. 50-348 AND 50-364

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated April 2,1999, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC), et al.,

submitted an amendment request to modify the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested changes would revise TS 3/4.4.9, " Specific Activity," to increase both the maximum instantaneous and the 48-hour values of dose equivalent ' 'l (iodine-131) in the reactor coolant. SNC proposed to increase these values because of the determination of a decrease in the allowable primary to-secondary leakage associated with a main steamline break (MSLB) accident. This decrease was from a previously approved value of 23.8 gallons per minute (gpm) for Unit 1 and Unit 2 to a value of 11.8 gpm for both.-

2.0 BACKGROUND

in Amendment Nos.132 and 124 to the Unit 1 and 2 TSs, respectively, the 48-hour specific activity level of dose equivalent ' 'I was changed to 0.15 micro-curies / gram (uCi/g) from the previously approved value of 0.3 Ci/g. In addition, Table 4.4-4 was changed to require sampling of '8'l, '3 1, and '351 every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> when the specific activity level of primary coolant exceeds 0.15 Ci/g. Figure 3.4-1 was changed to limit the maximum instantaneous activity level of dose equivalent ' 'I at rated thermal power levels of 80% or greater to 9 uCi/g. This was a decrease from the previous value of 18 Ci/g. The Bases section of the TS was also

- changed to reflect the new value of 0.15 Cl/g.

In a letter dated April 2,1999, SNC submitted an amendment request that proposed to modify TS 3/4.4.9, " Specific Activity," for both Units 1 and 2. In this letter, SNC proposed to increase the 48-hour TS value of dose equivalent ' 'l from 0.15 Cl/g to 0.3 Ci/g and the maximum instantaneous value in the 80%-100% power range from 9 Ci/g to 18 Ci/g. The maximum instantaneous values for power levels less than 80% would also be increased in Figure 3/4-1.

Associated with these increases in allowable values of dose equivalent ' 'l in primary coolant was a proposed decrease in the allowable primary-to-secondary leakage rate to 11.8 gpm.

9905140030 990510 PDR ADOCK 05000348 P

PDR i

, Radioloolcal Conseauences 4

The proposed increase in the 48-hour TECHNICAL SPECIFICATI.ON value of dose equivalent

' il in primary coolant from 0.15 Ci/g to 0.3 Ci/g and the proposed increase in the maximum

. Instantaneous value for dose equivalent '8'l from 9 Cl/g to 18 Ci/g in concert with the decrease in MSLB accident induced leakage from 23.8 gpm to 11.8 gpm would result in relatively little change to the quantities of radioactivity released in the event of a MSLB.

- Consequently, the staff concluded that there would be little if any change in doses from those presented in the power uprate amendments, Amendment _No.137.for Unit 1 and Amendment No.-129 for. Unit 2. Therefore, the staff did not recalculate the doses for this amendment request and concluded that the previously calculated doses from the power uprate -

amendment are still relevant. Therefore, the proposed change to allow a reduced total primary.

l to-secondary leakage rate of 11.8 gpm for an MSLB and an increase in the TS allowable values

-for the maximum instantaneous dose equivalent ' 'I and the 48-hour value for dose equivalent

' 'l is acceptable.

3.0 STATE CONSULTATION

in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the State of Alabama official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.

4.0 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 Part 20 and change surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined 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 consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (64 FR 17201, dated April 8,1999). 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.

5.0 CONCLUSION

j The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is I

reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public wdl not be endangered by I

operation'in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the i

Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

j Principal Contributor: J. Zimmerman J. Hayes i

Date:

May 10, 1999 I

i t