ML20234B820

SER on Util 830414,851023 & 860227 Responses to Generic Ltr 82-33 Re post-accident Monitoring Instrumentation Meeting Requirements of Reg Guide 1.97 as Applied to Emergency Response Facility

ML20234B820
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	09/14/1987
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20234B806	List: ML20234B803 ML20234B820 ML20238B221
References
RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097 GL-82-33, NUDOCS 8709210087
Download: ML20234B820 (2)

Text

'

ENCLOSURE 1 p **cm iy.,\'c

E UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS!ON W ASHING TON, D. C. 20555 h.N

% $' l

\,,,,,/

SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY SHOREFAtl NUCLEAR POWER STATICN, UN!1 NO. 1 00CJET h0. 50-322 CONFORMANCE TO REGULATORY GUIDE 1.97 i

i

1.0 INTRODUCTION

l

)

l The Long Island Lighting Company was requested by Generic Letter 82-33 to provide o report to the NRC describing how the post-accident monitoring instru-mentation meets the guidelines of Regulatory Guide (R.C.) 1.97 as applied to I emergency response f acilities. The licensee responded to Section 6.2 of the generic letter on April 14, 1983. Additional information was provided by j letters dated October 23, 1985, and February 27, 1986.

I A detailed review and technical evaluation of the licensee's submittals was performed by EG&G Idaho, Inc., under contract to the NRC, with general super-vision by the NRC staff. This work was reported by EG&G in the Technical Evaluation Report (TER), "Conformance to Regulatory Guide 1.97, Shoreham Nucleer Power Station, Unit No. 1 " dated March 1986 (attached). We have revieweo this report and concur with the conclusion that the licensee either conforms to, or is justified in devioting from, the guidance of R.G.1.97 for each post-accident monitoring variable, except for the variable neutron flux.

2.0 EVALUATION Subsequent to the issuance of the generic letter, the NRC held regional meet-ings in February and March 1983 to answer licensee and applicant questions and concerns regarding the NRC policy on R.G. 1.97. At these meetings, it was neted that the NRC review would only address exceptions taken to the guidance 2

kDO F

-?-

of R.G. 1.97. Further where licensees or applicants explicitly stafe that instrument systems conform to the provisions of the renulatory guide, it was noted that no furtk r staff review would be necessary. Therefore, the review l performed and reported by EG&G only addresses exceptions to the guidance of 1 Regulatory Guide 1.97. This safety evaluation addresses the licensee's submittals based on the review policy described in the NRC regional meetings I and the conclusions of the review as reported by EG&G.

We have reviewed the evaluation performed by our consultant contained in the enclosed TER and concur with its bases and findings. The licensee either conforms to, or has provided an acceptable justification for any deviations from the guidance of R.G.1.97 for each post-accident monitoring variable except for the variable neutron flux.

Regulatory Guide 1.97 recommends Category 1 instrumentation for this variable. ,

The licensee has identified that the instrumentation being provided for this l variable deviates from the recommendations of the "egulatory guide in that the l detectors are not environmentally qualified and that non-Class 1E power is ,

used. l The licensee has committed to study the requirements for neutron flux j instrumentation by letter dated October 23, 1985. l The staff has reviewed the licensee's position and finds the existing instrumentation acceptable for interim operation. 10 CFR 50.49 requires that all R.G.1.97, Category 1 and 2 instruments located in a harsh environ..ent be ,

included in the environmental qualification program. The 4horeham license was l conditioned to install or upgrade instrumentation consistent with the guidance l of R.G.1.97, Rev. 2, prior to start up following the first refueling outage i except as agree 6 to by the NRC. Therefore, the licensee is required to install or upgrade their neutron flux instrumentation to conform to R.G.1.97 i and 10 CFR 50.49 prior to start up following the first refueling outage, l 3.0 C_0NCLUSION Based on the stuff's review of the enclosed Technical Evaluation Report and the licensee's submittals, we find that the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1., design is acceptable with respect to conformance to R.G.1.97, Revision ?, except for the neutron flux instrumentation.

The staff also finds acceptable the existing neutron flux instruments. tion for interim operation. Prior to start up following the first refueling outage, the licensee is required by License Conditinn Attachment 1, Item 3 to install or upgrade the neutren flux instrumentation to conform to R.G. 1.97, Rev. 2, and 10 CFR 50.49.

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _