[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4453]


[Federal Register: February 28, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-341]


Detroit Edison Co., (Fermi 2); Exemption

I

    Detroit Edison Company (the licensee) is the holder of Facility 
Operating License No. NPF-43 which authorizes operation of the Fermi 2 
Nuclear Plant at steady-state reactor power levels not in excess of 
3430 megawatts thermal. The Fermi 2 facility is a boiling water reactor 
located at the licensee's site in Monroe County, Michigan. The license 
provides, among other things, that it is subject to all rules, 
regulations, and Orders of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the 
Commission) now or hereafter in effect.

II

    Paragraph III.A.6.(b) of Appendix J to 10 CFR part 50 requires, in 
part, that if two consecutive periodic Type A tests fail to meet the 
applicable acceptable criteria in III.A.5.(b), a Type A test shall be 
performed at each refueling shutdown or approximately every 18 months, 
whichever occurs first, until two consecutive Type A tests meet the 
acceptance criteria, after which the normal inspection interval 
specified in III.D may be resumed.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), the NRC may grant exemptions from the 
requirements of the regulations (1) which are authorized by law, will 
not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and are 
consistent with the common defense and security; and (2) where special 
circumstances are present.

III

    By letter dated May 24, 1993, the licensee requested a one-time 
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J, 
III.A.6.(b) identified above, which were in effect due to ``As-Found'' 
Type A failure in 1989 and 1992. The licensee has verified that Type C 
leakage rates were the reason for the ``As-Found'' failures.
    The two ``As-Found'' Type A failures were caused by the addition of 
Type C penalties. The licensee indicated that to date all containment 
deficiencies have been identified during Type C testing and; therefore, 
it is proposed that Type C testing be relied upon in lieu of the 
increased frequency Type A test. Fermi 2 has established stringent LLRT 
[local leak rate test] administrative leak rate acceptance criteria on 
a per valve basis, based on ASME Code guidance, individual valve test 
maintenance history, design, function, and service. Test acceptance 
criteria range from 0.20 scfh [standard cubic feet per hour] to 15.00 
scfh. This ensures valve leak tight integrity is maintained from Type A 
test to Type A test. The licensee indicated that if valves are repaired 
when they exceed their individual administrative acceptance criteria, 
and corrective modifications or replacement are implemented, the 
overall containment integrity will be assured with future integrated 
leak rate tests (ILRTs) meeting their ``As-Found'' acceptance criteria. 
The licensee indicated that the implementation of the proposed 
Corrective Action Plan and continued Type C leakage testing provide 
reasonable assurance that the underlying purpose of Appendix J is being 
met. For details concerning the licensee's corrective actions for the 
previous Type C valve leakage, see the staff's Safety Evaluation dated 
February 22, 1994.
    Information Notice (IN) No. 85-71, ``Containment Integrated Leak 
Rate Tests,'' states that if Type B and C local leakage rates 
constitute an identified contributor to the failure of the ``As-Found'' 
Type A test, the licensee may submit a Corrective Action Plan with an 
alternate leakage test program proposal as an exemption request. If the 
submittal is approved and an exemption granted, the licensee may 
implement the corrective action and alternate leakage rate test program 
in lieu of the required increase in Type A test frequency incurred 
after the failure of two successive Type A tests.

IV

    Accordingly, the Commission concluded that the licensee's 
Corrective Action Plan and proposed alternative test schedule are 
acceptable and that a Type A test during refueling outage four (RFO 4) 
is not necessary. The licensee has identified the problem penetrations 
that caused previous Type A failures in 1989 and 1992, and has 
implemented corrective actions to address these problems. There is 
reasonable assurance that the containment leakage-limiting function 
will be maintained. The normal Type A test schedule in Section III.D of 
Appendix J (three tests in 10 years) will require the next Type A test 
to be performed during RFO 5.
    The special circumstances for granting this exemption pursuant to 
10 CFR 50.12 have also been identified. As stated in part in 10 CFR 
50.12(a)(2)(ii), special circumstances are present when application of 
the regulation in the particular circumstances is not necessary to 
achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. The purpose of Section 
III.A.6.(b) of Appendix J is to establish an increased testing 
frequency for Type A tests, where previous testing has demonstrated 
unsatisfactory performance, in order to provide increased assurance 
that previous problems have been corrected. After two consecutive tests 
at the increased testing frequency pass, the normal testing frequency 
of Section III.D. may be resumed. By verifying that previous Type A 
test failures were due to Type C leakage and by implementing a 
Corrective Action Plan to effectively correct previous Type C failure, 
the licensee has provided additional assurance that containment 
integrity will be maintained. Consequently, the Commission concludes 
that the special circumstances of 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) exist in that 
application of the regulation in these particular circumstances is not 
necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.

V

    Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 
50.12, this exemption as described in Section III above is authorized 
by law, will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, 
and is consistent with the common defense and security. The Commission 
further determines that special circumstances as provided in 10 CFR 
50.12(a)(2)(ii) are present justifying the exemption.
    Therefore, the Commission hereby grants a one-time exemption as 
described in Section III above from the requirement in 10 CFR part 50, 
Appendix J, III.A.6.(b) to perform Type A containment ILRTs at an 
increased test frequency.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the 
granting of this exemption will have no significant impact on the 
environment (59 FR 6977).
    This exemption is effective upon issuance.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 22nd day of February 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jack W. Roe,
Director, Division of Reactor Projects--III/IV/V, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-4453 Filed 2-25-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M