ML20210R395
| ML20210R395 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210R390 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8605160394 | |
| Download: ML20210R395 (2) | |
Text
.
f *Eug t
g
'o,,
ONITED STATES g
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
[
WASHINCTON, D. C. 20655
/
- ...+
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.117 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-50 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
- PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY
- GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION THREE MILE. ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 30.1 DOCKET N0. 50-289 INTRODUCTIO_N By letter dated January 3,1986, as supplemented January 31, 1986, GPU Nuclear Corporation (GPU or the licer.see) requested an amendment to the Technical Speci-fications (T3s) appended to Facility Operating License No. OPR-50 for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1 (TMI_-1). The proposed amendment would change the TS reporting requirements on primary coolant iodine spikes from a Specici Report to providing more detail in the Annual Report.
It also deletes
'the requirement to immediately shut down the plant if Dose Equivalent I-131 exceeds a specified limit for more than'800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> in a 12-month period.
EVALUATION Generic Letter No. 85-19 issued September 27, 1985, provided the NRC staff's position for reporting requirements on primary coolant iodine spikes.
In this generic letter, the NRC staff determined that the reporting requirements for iodine spiking can be reduced from a short-term report (Special Report or Licensee Event Report) to an item which is to be included'in the Annual Report.
The information to be included in the Annual Report is similar to that pre-viously required in the Licensee Event Report but hai been changed to more clearly designate the results to be included from the specific activity analysis and to delete the information regarding fuel burnup by core region.
The NRC staff also determined that the existing requirements to shut down a plant if coolant iodine activity limits are exceeded for 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> in a 12-month period can be eliminated.
The quality of nuclear fuel has been greatly improved over the'past decade with the result that normal coolant iodine activity (i.e., in the absence of iodine spiking) is well below the. limit.
Appropriate actioris would be initiated long before accumulating 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> of operation above the iodine activity limit.
Inaddition,10CFR50.72(b)
(1)(ii) requires the NRC to be immediately notified of fuel cladding failures that exceed expected values or that are caused by unexpected factors. There-fore, this TS limit is no longer considered necessary on the basis that I
proper fuel management by licensees and existing reporting requirements should preclude ever. approaching the limit.
8605160394 e60506 PDR ADOCK 0500 9
P l
=. -. -.. _ -
\\
i 2-I Licensees are expected to continue to monitor iodine activity in the primary coolant and take responsible actions to maintain it at a reasonably low level.
By letter dated January 3,1986, as supplemented by letter dated January 31, 1986, the licensee responded to Generic Letter 85-19 and proposed changes to I
the TMI-1 TSs. These changes are consistent with the sample TSs provided in Generic Letter 85-19. These changes are acceptable because proper fuel management by GPU and existing reporting requirements should preclude the plant from operating anywhere near 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> in a 12-month period with coolant iodine activity limits exceeded. Therefore, this change simply deletes an i
unnecessary TS requirement and changes a reporting requirement from a Special l
Report to including more detailed data in the Annual Report.
l ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility I.
'and a change in reporting requirements We have determined that the amendment l
component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in l
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 eli
- j criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) gibilityand (10).
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.
CONCLUSION i
We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will n~ot be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
May 6,1986 Principal Contributors:
J. Thoma e
Y
.-r
_,,,.,-._,_____s
.____w.,
_.__.,,_,,m.-,.._-.,,,,_.r_.,_._
_,,.,,.,_., _ - _,. -,, _. -, ~,.....,,,_
m,
-