ML20237L563
| ML20237L563 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237L509 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-85-19, TAC-64865, TAC-64866, NUDOCS 8709080459 | |
| Download: ML20237L563 (2) | |
Text
4*
- UNITED STATES 4
NUCLEAR REGULATARY COMMISSION
{
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0. 18 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-80 AND AMENDMENT NO. 17 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-82 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY l
DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT N05. 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-275 AND 50-323
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Generic Letter 85-19 (GL 85-19), issued September 27, 1985, provided guidance related to the action and reporting requirements for reactor coolant system specific activity. GL 85-19 contained model Technical Specifications as guidance. By amendment request dated October 29, 1986, Facific Gas and Electric Ccmpany (the licensee) submitted revised Technical Specifications (TS) in response to GL 85-19.
2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION In an effort to eliminate unnecessary Technical Specification requirements, the staff determined that the existing requirements to shut down a plant if reactor 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 Appropriate actions would be initiated long before accumulating (ii) the limit.
800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> above the iodine activity limit.
In addition, 10 CFR 50.72(b)(1) requires the NRC to be immediately notified of fuel cladding failures that exceed expected values or that are caused by unexpected factors.
Therefore, this Technical Specification limit is no longer considered necessary on the basis that proper fuel management by licensees and existing reporting requirements should preclude ever approaching the limit.
As part of our continuing program to delete unnecessary reporting requirements, the staff reviewed the reporting requirements related to primary coolant specific activity levels, specifically primary coolant iodine spikes. The staff detemined 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 included in the Annual Report provided in the model TS is similar to that previously required in the Licensee Event 8709000459 B70831 PDR ADOCK 0500 5
P
e
, i Report but has 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.
l The staff has reviewed the licensee's proposed changes regarding reactor
' coolant system specific activity. The changes to TS 3.4.8 are consistent with the model TS provided in GL 85-19 and are, therefore, acceptable.
The reporting requirement added to TS C.9.1.5 is identical to the model TS and is also acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
Portions of these' amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, such portions of the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Other portions of these amendments involve 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 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 published a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, these portions of the amendments meet the eligibilit criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 551.22(c)(y).
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.
~
4.0 CONCLUSION
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) :,uch activities will be conducted in compliance with the 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.
Principal Contributor:
C. Tramell Dated: August 31, 1987