ML20064L128
| ML20064L128 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Brunswick |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1982 |
| From: | Houston R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20064E577 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-389 NUDOCS 8203080197 | |
| Download: ML20064L128 (2) | |
Text
- 4 gra n osiATES
~
NUCLE AR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION i. X, a a w w. m u o c :o w s i>J... <
g y
FEB 11 1982 Docket Nos. 50-324/325 MEMORANDUM FOR:
T. M. Novak, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors, DL FROM:
R. W. Houston, Assistant Director for Radiation Protection, DSI
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR BRUNSWICK STATION (TAC #47536)
On January 15, 1982, Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L) requested a change
~
to the Appendix B Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) in licenses DPR-71 and 62 for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2.
Specification 2.5.2.b(1) defines the " calculational method for detennining the average release rate of noble gases from the site during any 12 consecutive months".
Specification 2.6.2.b(2) contains similar language and pertains to I-131 and radioactive materials in particulate fonn.
In the event an annual limit is exceeded during any 12 consecutive months, the licensee must identify the causes of the release rates, define and initiate a program of action to reduce the release rates to design objective levels and report these actions to the Commission within 30 days from the end of the calendar quarter during which the releases occurred. The proposed change is to replace the "any 12 consecutive months" with "any calendar year".
The model Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) for BWR's, NUREG-0473, contain several action statements which require the ' licensee, in the event a quarterly effluent limit is exceeded, to take action "to reduce the releases... during the remainder of the calendar quarter and during the subsequent three calendar quarters, so that the cumulative dose" does not exceed the annual limit. The staff met with a number of representatives of nuclear utilities under the auspices of the Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. on November 10, 1981, to discuss the implementation of the RETS at operating reactors.
Comments were made by several representatives to the effect that the above wording created an unnecessarily cumbersome record keeping and reporting requirement and suggested that a calendar year approach would be a more valid interpretation of the annual objectives in 10 CFR 50, Appendix 1.
Af ter considering these comments, the staf f concluded that the present arding provided little or no increased protection of the public and that tne suggested change should be accepted.
Consequently, on November 20, 1931, se provided such guidance to our contractors who are responsible for resolving dif ferences between the OR licensee's technical specifications and the model RETS.
By memorandum from W. P. Gammill, dated January 25, 1982, similar guidance was provided to the ETSB Staf f for their use in implementing the RETS for plants undergoing OL review.
m AW 30F
'9
~
T.11. Iloval.
-?-
EL 11 Sg, Although the wordinn in the Grunsuict. technical specifications differs from that in the rodel P.ETS, the "12 con,ecutive ranth" requirerent poses the sare record kecptng problen as did the nodel RETS.
In light of the earlier decision on the r>odel RETS, we consider the procosed technical specification change to' be reasonable and consistent with present policy. Thus, we conclude that replacing the phrase "12 consecutive conths" with the phrase " calendar year" in Brunswick Specification 2.5.2.b is acceptable.
It s'culd be noted that Prunswick-2 is continuing to encounter proble"s with higher than nomal gaseous ef fluent releases. These problens were sa carized in the Safety Evaluation which accompanied License Arendnent No. 37, dated June 3, 1981.
This arendr.ent addressed the licensee's schedule for installing new augnented of f-gas systens for Brunswick, linit Hos.1 and 2.
Fission pro-duct leakage fron the fuel has now increased to the point that the radioactive noble gas release rate is approachinq twice the annual linit. The proposed change will provida the licensee sone short-tem relief since the transition will occur early in the calendar year.
However, there will be no lon.,-tem relief since the annual release rate limits are unchanged. Refueling, now scheduled for flay 1982, is expected to reduce releases to nomal levels.
Ilowever, depending upon fuel perfomance durinn the renainder of this cycle and following refueling, additional action nay be required this calendar year.
Od;in$5 si;::cf fy R. Wayae I::vst:n R. llayne Houston, Assistant Director for Radiation Protection Division of Systens Integration cc:
R. !!attson D. Eisenhut W. Gannill F. Congel J. Van Vliet R. Bangart C. Willis J. Boegli DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File 50-324 Docket File 50-325 ETSB Rading File ETSB Docket File RWitou s ton CSPaul
. b
/WA omen!.DSI:R : 'TSB l DSIIRP:ETSB
' DSI RPrETSBl, DSI:RP l
,[
c~cel JS.B.g.e.gt :di l,.,cWi.1,11 s.,
WP'Pdni1,1, l,,,.fQ{ih@kqn, l,,
,l,
- l. 02/.12/82... l. 02/lTJ82..
.02/. 5/82..
.02/ l.5./82.. !.
.[.
.l.
con y! _
1
__ _. i
_ i w, m os.a r.ncu em OFFICIAL RECORD COPY t-....
3
Y
,,[
k UNITL D STATES
, y n,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON D. C. 20555
.: p t
%,,,,, /.
January 13, 1982 MEBORANDUM FGR: File 81-17 FROM:
Mark E. Resner, Investigator e.
Office of Inspector and Auditor
SUBJECT:
POSSIBLE WIIJEUL VIOIATION OF REPORTING REQUIREMENIS During a telephone conversation with Carl Alderson, Region II, on January 12, 1982, I requested that he forward a copy of the IE investigative report on this matter. He agreed to do so.
f n lO '
[I }/
i h>E
/
< ()
. _ _