ML20206P088
| ML20206P088 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 05/12/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206P079 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9905180142 | |
| Download: ML20206P088 (4) | |
Text
r p3 8f 00
[
k UNITED STATES y
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 205 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-16 GPU NUCLEAR. INC. AND ERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
. OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50 219
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 10,1998, GPU Nuclear, Inc., (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested changes would remove the restriction on the sale or lease of property within the exclusion area and replace the restriction with a requirement to retain complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of activities including the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within the minimum exclusion distance. A TS Bases page for the proposed change is included. Also included are clanfications and administrative changes which: (1) revise TS definition 1.38 to become " site boundary" from the current term " exclusion area" to be consistent with the 10 CFR 20.1003 definition for site boundary and the 10 CFR 100.3 definition of exclusion area, (2) revise the TS definition from exclusion area to site boundary in TS 6.8.4(a)(9), and (3) revise and update the TS Table of Contents for Section 1 Definitions.
2.0 EVALUATION Oyster Creek TS 5.1.A. currently reads as follows:
The reactor (center line) is located 1,358 feet west of the east boundary of New Jersey State Highway Route 9 which is the minimum exclusion distance as
- defined in 10CFR100.3. No part of the property which is closer to the reactor (center line) than 1,358 feet shall be sold or leased.
The licensee's amendment request proposes to change TS 5.1.A. to read as follows:
The reactor (center line) is located 1,358 feet west of the east boundary of New Jersey State Highway Route 9 which is the minimum exclusion distance as defined in 10 CFR 100.3. The licensee will at all times retain the complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of all activities through ohhg9 AD PDR
o i
8.
ownership, easement, contract and/or other legal instruments on property which is closer to the reactor (center line) than 1,358 feet. This includes the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Reaulations. Part 100.3 defines exclusion area as " that area surrounding the reactor, in which the reactor licensee has the authority to determine all activities including exclusion or removal of personnel and property from the area..." Later in the section,10 CFR 100.3 addresses attemate uses of portions of an exclusion area:
" Residence within the exclusion area shall normally be prohibited. In any event, residents shall be subject to ready removalin case of necessity. Activities unrelated to operation of the reactor may be permitted in an exclusion area under appropriate limitations, provided that no significant hazards to the public health and safety will result."
In Standard Review Plan (SRP) 2.1.2 " Exclusion Area Authority and Control," the question of activities unrelated to plant operation within the exclusion area is addressed as follows:
Activities unrelated to plant operation within the exclusion area are acceptable provided:
(a)
Such activities, including accidents associated with such activities, represent no hazard to the plant or have been shown to be accommodated as part of the plant design basis..
(b)
The applicant is aware of such activities and has made appropriate arrangements to evacuate persons engaged in such activities, in the event of an accident, and i
(c)
There is reasonable assurance that persons engaged in such activities can be evacuated without receiving radiation doses in excess of the guideline values given in 10 CFR Part 100.
In the safety evaluation accompanying the proposed change request the licensee states that the safety function for the exclusion area consists of maintaining 10 CFR 100 radiologicallimits for the exclusion area, including evacuation when necessary, and ensuring any activities, now or in the future, in the exclusion area do not negatively affect nuclear safety, safe plant operation or violate current plant design or licensing bases. The licensee's evaluation further states that to ensure compliance with Part 100 limits and to maintain control of all current and future activities in the exclusion area, the licensee would either maintain ownership or, for property released from licensee ownership, include, as part of any property agreement, requirements which retain the complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient licensee control through easement, contract, and/or other legal instruments. This would include the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
The evaluation went on to provide sample contract provisions that would be incorporated into any future property agreement in the exclusion area.
The staff concurs with the licensee's conclusions concerning the ability to maintain control over portions of the site which may be sold or leased to outside interests. SRP 2.1.2 " Exclusion Area Authority and Control," quoted above, gives conditions for approving activities unrelated to plant operation within the exclusion area. The actions describ9d by the licensee to ensure compliance with Part 100 limits and to maintain control of current and future acMvities in the exclusion area satisfy the conditions specified in SRP 2.1.2. Additionally, any property transactions would require safety evaluations and 50.59 reviews to determine whether the proposed activity might have the potential to adversely affect nuclear safety or safe plant operation. These evaluations would be subject to NRC inspection and/or review.
The applicat on also proposes a change to TS Definition 1.38, Exclusion Area, which currently reads as follows:
(
EXCLUSION AREA is defined in 10 CFR part 100.3(2). As used in these j
technical specification, the Exclusion Area boundary is the perimeter line around the OCNGS beyond which the land is neither owned, leased, nor otherwise j
subject to control by GPU (ref. ODCM Figure 1-1). The area outside the Exclusion Area is termed OFFSITE or UNRESTRICTED AREA.
The proposed revision will change TS Definition 1.38 to define SITE BOUNDARY as follows:
The SITE BOUNDARY is the perimeter line around the OCNGS beyond which the land is neither owned, leased, nor otherwise subject to control by GPU (ref.
ODCM). The area outside the SITE BOUNDARY is termed OFFSITE or UNRESTRICTED AREA.
The Oyster Creek site is relatively large, with the site boundary extending more than a mile to the west beyond the 1358 foot minimum exclusion area. The current TS 1.38 definition of Exclusion Area could cause confusion between the terms " site boundary" and " minimum exclusion area." The proposed revision is consistent with the 10 CFR 20.1003 definition which states: " Site Boundary means that line beyond which the land or property is not owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by the licensee." The staff concurs with the proposed change to TS Definition 1.38.
The licensee changed from the term " exclusion area" to " site boundary" in TS 6.8.4(a)(9) to conform to the definition change in TS definition 1.38. The staff concurs with this proposed change. Likewise the licensee updated the Table of Contents to reflect this revision. The staff concurs with this administrative change.
The licensee included a new Bases page 5.102. which defines the exclusion area, in terms of a minimum exclusion distance from the centerline of the reactor, and states what provision the licensee considers necessary for property contreet agreements. The licensee further states that property transactions in the exclusion area require a specific safety evaluation and review
_ pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59. The Bases pages are not subject to NRC review and approval but are included with the issuance of this amendment to maintain the TS authority file current.
1 4-
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had two questions regarding this amendment which were received in a letter dated January 11,1999. The staff has reviewed the
' State's letter and is preparing a response which will be transmitted shortly. The State's questions do not warrant modifying or withholding the license amendment.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted. area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC 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 the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (63 FR 66595). Accordingly, the 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 the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the consideration ~s 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.
Principal Contributor: M. Davis Date:
May 12,1999 J
l i r f
-r
.