GNRO-2008/00014, License Amendment Request, Application to Technical Specification Changes Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process - TSTF-475 Control Rod Notch Testing
| ML081830499 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/2008 |
| From: | Krupa M Entergy Operations |
| To: | Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| GNRO-2008/00014, TSTF-475 | |
| Download: ML081830499 (20) | |
Text
-::::::-Entergy GNRQ-2008l00014 June 30, 2008 U.S. Nudear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 756 Port Gibson, MS 39150 Tel 601 437 2800
SUBJECT:
License Amendment Request, Application for Technical Specification Changes Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process (CLlIP) - TSTF-475 Control Rod Notch Testing Grand Gulf Nudear Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-416 License No. NPF-29
REFERENCE:
Federal Register Notice 72 FR 63935, published November 13,2007
Dear Sir or Madam:
In accordance with the provisions of 10CFR50.90 Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy) is submitting a request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for Grand Gulf Nudear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS). The proposed amendment would: (1) revise the TS surveillance requirement (SR) frequency in TS 3.1.3, "Control Rod OPERABILITY",
(2) darify the requirement to fully insert all insertable control rods for the limiting condition for operation (LCO) in TS 3.3.1.2, required Action E.2, "Source Range Monitoring Instrumentation," and (3) revise Example 1.4--3 in Section 1.4 "Frequency" to clarify the applicability of the 1.25 surveillance test interval extension. provides a description of the proposed change, the requested confirmation of applicability, and plant-specific verifications. Attachment 2 provides the existing TS pages marked up to show the proposed change. Attachment 3 provides the associated TS Bases changes. The proposed change includes one new commitment as summarized in Attachment 4.
The proposed change has been evaluated in accordance with 10CFR50.91(a)(1) using criteria in 10CFR50.92(c) and it has been determined that this change involves no significant hazards consideration. The bases for these determinations are included in the attached submittal.
Entergy requests approval of the proposed as soon as practical. Once approved, the amendment will be implemented within 60 days of receipt of the approval letter.
Although this request is neither exigent nor emergency, your prompt review is requested.
GNRO-2008/00014 Page 2 If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Michael Larson, 601-437-6685.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June 30, 2008.
Sincerely, be,~.~upa~~
Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance MAKlMJL Attachments:
cc:
1.
Analysis of Proposed Technical Specification Change 2.
Proposed Technical Specification Changes (markup) 3.
Technical Specification Bases Changes (markup) - For Information Only.
4.
List of Regulatory Commitments NRC Senior Resident Inspector Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Port Gibson, MS 39150 Mr. Brian W. Amy, MD, MHA, MPH Mississippi Department of Health P. O. Box 1700 Jackson, MS 39215-1700 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATIN: Mr. Elmo E. Collins (w/2) 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-4005 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Mr. Jack N. Donohew, NRR/DORL (w/2)
ATTN: ADDRESSEE ONLY ATIN: U. S. Postal Delivery Address Only Mail Stop OWFN/O-8G14 Washington, DC 20555-0001 GNRO-2008/00014 Analysis of Proposed Technical Specification Change to GNRO-2008/00014 Page 1 of 2 1.0 Description This letter is a request to amend Operating License NPF-29 for Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS).
The proposed amendment would: (1) revise the TS surveillance requirement (SR 3.1.3.2) frequency in TS 3.1.3, "Control Rod OPERABILITY", (2) clarify the requirement to fully insert all insertable control rods for the limiting condition for operation (LCO) in TS 3.3.1.2, Required Action E.2, "Source Range Monitoring Instrumentation", and (3) revise Example 1A-3 in Section 1A "Frequency" to clarify the applicability of the 1.25 surveillance test interval extension.
The changes are consistent with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved IndustrylTechnical Specification Task Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-475, Revision 1.
The Federal Register notice published on November 13, 2007 announced the availability of this Technical Specification (TS) improvement through the consolidated line item improvement process (CLlIP).
2.0 Assessment
- 2. 1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation Entergy has reviewed the safety evaluation dated November 13, 2007 as part of the CLlIP.
This review included a review of the NRC staffs evaluation, as well as the supporting information provided to support TSTF--475, Revision 1.
Entergy has concluded that the justifications presented in the TSTF proposal and the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS) and justify this amendment for the incorporation of the changes to the GGNS TS.
2.2 Optional Changes and Variations Entergy is not proposing any variations or deviations from the applicable TS changes described in the modified TSTF-475, Revision 1 and the NRC staffs model safety evaluation dated November 13, 2007 other than administrative differences associated with the plant specific TS format or numbering.
3.0 Regulatory Analysis
- 3. 1 No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination Entergy has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination (NSHCD) published in the Federal Register as part of the CLlIP. Entergy has concluded that the proposed NSHCD presented in the Federal Register notice is applicable to GGNS and is hereby incorporated by reference to satisfy the requirements of 10CFR50.91 (a).
to GNRO-2008/00014 Page 2 of2 3.2 Verification and Commitments As discussed in the notice of availability published in the Federal Register on November 13, 2007 for this TS improvement, Entergy verified the applicability of TSTF-475 to GGNS, and will establish TS Bases consistent with those proposed in TSTF-475, Revision 1.
These changes are based on TSTF change traveler TSTF-475 Revision 1 that proposes revisions to the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) by: (1) revising the frequency of SR 3.1.3.2, notch testing of fully withdrawn control rod, from "7 days after the control rod is withdrawn and THERMAL POWER is greater than the LPSP of RPCS" to "31 days after the control rod is withdrawn and THERMAL POWER is greater than the LPSP of the RPCS", (2) adding the word "fully" to LCO 3.3.1.2 Required Action E.2 to clarify the requirement to fully insert all insertable control rods in core cells containing one or more fuel assemblies when the associated SRM instrument is inoperable, and (3) revising Example 1.4--3 in Section 1.4 "Frequency" to clarify that the 1.25 surveillance test interval extension in SR 3.0.2 is applicable to time periods discussed in NOTES in the "SURVEILLANCE" column in addition to the time periods in the "FREQUENCY" column.
4.0 Environmental Evaluation Entergy has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in the model safety evaluation dated November 13, 2007 as part of the CUIP. Entergy has concluded that the staffs findings presented in that evaluation are applicable to GGNS and the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this application.
GNRO-2008/00014 Proposed Technical Specification Changes (markup)
1.4 Frequency EXAMPLES Frequency 1.4 EXAMPLE 1.4-2 (continued)
"Thereafter" indicates future performances must be established per SR 3.0.2, but only after a specified condition is first met (i.e., the "once" performance in this example).
If reactor power decreases to < 25% RTP, the measurement of both intervals stops.
New intervals start upon reactor power reaching 25% RTP.
EXAMPLE 1.4-3 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS SURVEILLANCE
~----NOTE--------~---------
Not required to be performed until 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> after ~ 25% RTP.
Perform channel adjustment.
FREQUENCY 7 days The interval continues whether or not the unit operation is
< 25% RTP between performances.
As the Note modifies the required performance of the Surveillance, it is construed to be part of the "specified Frequency."
Should the 7 day interval be exceeded while operation is < 25% RTP, this Note allows 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> after power reaches ~ 25% RTP to perform the Surveillance.
The Surveillance is still considered to be within the "specified Frequency."
Therefore, if the Surveillance were not performed within the 7 day interval (plus the extension allowed by SR 3.0.2), but operation was < 25% RTP, it would not constitute a failure of the SR or failure to meet the LCO.
Also, no violation of Sh 3.,0.4 occurs when changing MODES, even with the 7 day Frequency not met, provided operation does not exceed 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> with power ~ 25% RTP.
PIV1~ i11e:
~ffiJ>iot0 Mlo~
GRAND GULF 1.0-27 Amendment No. 120
I Frequency 1.4
- 1. 4 Frequency EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 1.4-3 (continued)
EXAMPLE 1.4-4 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS Once the unit reaches 25% RTP, 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> would be allowed for completing the Surveillance.
If the Surveillance were not performed within this 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> interva, there would then be a failure to perform a Surveillance Wl 1n the specified Frequency, and the provisions of SR 3.0.
would apply.
(pJ I1> ~ -ex}e~/o~ qlJ~
~
- ~ 3. o. ';<'J SURVEILLANCE FREQUENCY
NOTE------------------
Only reqUired to be met in MODE 1.
Verify leakage rates are within limits.
24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Example 1.4-4 specifies that the requirements of this Surveillance do not have to be met until the unit is in MODE 1.
The interval measurement for the Frequency of this Surveillance continues at all times, as described in Example 1.4-1.
However, the Note constitutes an "otherwise stated" exception to the Applicability of this Surveillance.
Therefore, if the Surveillance were not performed within the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (plus the extension allowed by SR 3.0.2) interval, but the unit was not in MODE 1, there would be no failure of the SR nor failure to meet the LCO.
Therefore, no violation of SR 3.0.4 occurs when changing MODES, even with the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Frequency exceeded, provided the MODE change was not made into MODE 1.
Prior to entering MODE 1 (assuming again that the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Frequency were not met), SR 3.0.4 would require satisfying the SR.
GRANO GULF 1.0-28 Amendment No. 120
Cont r01 Rod 0PERA8ILITY 3.1.3 ACTIONS CONDITION REQUIRED ACTION COMPLETION TIME A.
(continued)
A.3 Perform &R 3.1:~7~
24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> from
~R 3.1.3.3 for discovery of each withdrawn Condition A OPERABLE control rod.
concurrent with THERMAL POWER greater than the low power setpoint CLPSP) of the Rod Pattern Control AND System (RPCS)
A.4 Perform SR 3.1.1.1.
72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> 8.
Two or more withdrawn control rods stuck.
8.1 8e in MODE 3.
12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> C.
One or more control rods inoperable for reasons other than Condition A or 8.
C.1
NOTE---------
Inoperable control rods may be bypassed in RACS in accordance with SR 3.3.2.1.9, if required, to allow insertion of inoperable control rod and continued operation.
Fully insert inoperable control rod.
3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> C.2 Disarm the associated 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> CRD.
(continued)
GRAND GULF 3.1-8 Amendment No. +rB, 142
Control Rod OPERABILITY 3.1.3 ACTIONS (continued)
CONDITION REQUIRED ACTION COMPLETION TIME D.
NOTE---------
0.1 Restore compliance 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> Not applicable when with BPWS.
THERMAL POWER
> 10% RTP.
OR 0.2 Restore control rod 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> Two or more inoperable to OPERABLE status.
control rods not in compliance with banked position withdrawal sequence (BPWS) and not separated by two or more OPERABLE control rods.
E.
Required Action and E.l Be in MODE 3.
12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> associated Completion Time of Condition A, C or 0 not met.
OR Nine or more control rods inoperable.
Determine the position of each control rod.
24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (continued)
FREQUENCY SURVEILLANCE SR 3.1.3.1 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS GRANO GULF 3.1-9 Amendment No. 120
Control Rod OPERABILITY 3.1.3 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS (continued I
SURVEILLANCE SR 3.1. 3.2 FREQUENCY SR 3.1.3.3 Insert each 'aFtjall~hdrawn control rod at least one notch.
SR 3.1.3.4 Verify each control rod scram time from fully withdrawn to notch position 13 is s 7 seconds.
31 days In accordance with SR 3.1.4.1, SR 3.1.4.2, SR 3.1.4.3, and SR 3.1.4.4 (continued)
GRAND GULF 3.1-10 Amendment No. 120
SRM Instrumentation 3.3.1.2 ACTIONS (continued)
CONDITION REQUIRED ACTION COMPLETION TIME D.
One or more required 0.1 rully insert all 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> SRMs inoperable in insertable control MODE 3 or 4.
rods.
AND 0.2 Place reactor mode 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> switch in the shutdown position.
E.
One or more required E.1 Suspend CORE Irmlediately SRMs inoperable in ALTERATIONS except MODE 5.
for control rod insertion.
~
AND
/"
/
E.2 Initiate action to~
IlJIIlediately insert all insertable control rods in core cells containing one or more fuel assemblies.
GRAND GULF 3.3-10 Amendment No. 120 GNRO-2008/00014 Technical Specification Bases Changes (markup)
BASES ACTIONS Control Rod OPERABILITY B 3.1.3 A.1, A.2. A.3. and A.4 (continued) control rod can be isolated from scram by isolating the hydraulic control unit from scram and normal drive and withdraw pressure, yet still maintain cooling water to the CRD.
Monitoring of the insertion capability for each withdrawn control rod must also be performed within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> from discovery of Condition A concurrent with THERMAL POWER greater than the low power setpoint (LPSP) ol.the rod pattern controller (RPC).
SR 3.1.~.2 i~~.1.3.3 perfortD periodic tests of the control rod insertion capability of
~
withdrawn control rods.
Testing each withdrawn control rod ensures that a generic problem does not exist.
This Completion Time allows for an exception to the normal "time zero" for beginning the allowed outage time "clock."
The Required Action A.2 Completion Time only begins upon discovery of Condition A concurrent with THERMAL POWER greater than the actual LPSP of the RPC, since the notch insertions may not be compatible with the requirements of rod pattern control (LCO 3.1.6) and the RPC (LCO 3.3.2.1, "Control Rod Block Instrumentation").
The allowed Completion Time of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> from discovery of Condition A concurrent with THERMAL POWER greater than the LPSP of the RPC provides a reasonable time to test the control
- rods, considering the potential for a need to reduce power to perform the tests.
To allow continued operation with a withdrawn control rod stuck, an evaluation of adequate SDM is also required within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
Should a DBA or transient require a shutdown, to preserve the single failure criterion an additional control rod would have to be assumed to have failed to insert when required.
Therefore, the original SDM demonstration may not be valid.
The SoM must therefore be evaluated (by measurement or analysis) with the stuck control rod at its stuck position and the highest worth OPERABLE control rod assumed to be fully withdrawn.
The a-I lowed Completion Time of )2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> to veriTY SDM is adequate, considering that with a single control rod stuck in a withdrawn position, the remaining OPERABLE control rods (continued)
GRAND GULF B 3.1-15 LoC 99050
Control Rod OPERABILITY 8 3.1.3 BASES (continued)
SR 3.1.3.1 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS The positio~
- ~
~u~:.
~Dnt.ul rod must bE j:t~~~in~~,
~~
ensure adequate information on control rod position is available to the operator for determining control rod OPERABILITY and controlling rod patterns.
Control rod position may be determined by the use of OPERABLE position indicators, by moving control rods to a position with an OPERABLE indicator, or by the use of other appropriate methods.
The 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Frequency of this SR is based on operating experience related to expected changes in control rod position and the availability of control rod position
~-~
~
~!!indicat;ons in the control room.
(continued)
GRAND GULF B 3.1-18 Revision No. 0 Control Rod OPERABILITY 8 3.1.3 BASES (continued)
SR 3.1.3.1 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS The positio~
- ~
~u~:.
~Dnt.ul rod must bE j:t~~~in~~,
~~
ensure adequate information on control rod position is available to the operator for determining control rod OPERABILITY and controlling rod patterns.
Control rod position may be determined by the use of OPERABLE position indicators, by moving control rods to a position with an OPERABLE indicator, or by the use of other appropriate methods.
The 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Frequency of this SR is based on operating experience related to expected changes in control rod position and the availability of control rod position
~-~
~
~!!indicat;ons in the control room.
(continued)
GRAND GULF B 3.1-18 Revision No. 0
BASES SURVEILLANCE h~~U i~;::~;::'NTS Control Rod OPERABILITY B 3.1.3 SR 3.1.3.4 Verifying the scram time for each control rod to notch position 13 is
~ 7 seconds provides reasonable assurance that the control rod will insert when required during a DBA or transient, thereby completing its shutdown function.
This SR is performed in conjunction with the control rod scram time testing of SR 3.1.4.1, SR 3.1.4.2, SR 3.1.4.3 t and Sit 3.1.4.j.
The LOGIC SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TEST in LCO 3.3.1.1 t "Reactor Protection System (RPS)
Instrumentation,~
and the functional testing of SOV vent and drain valves in lCO 3.1.8, "Scram Discharge Volume (SDV)
Vent and Drain Valves," overlap this Surveillance to provide complete testing of the assumed safety function.
The associated Frequencies are acceptable, considering the more frequent testing performed to demonstrate other aspects of control rod OPERABILITY and operating experience, which shows scram times do not significantly change over an operating cycle.
SR 3.1.3.5 Coupling verification is performed to ensure the control rod is connected to the CROM and will perform its intended function when necessary.
The Surveillance reqUires verifying that a control'rod does not go to the withdrawn overtravel position when it is fully withdrawn.
The overtravel position feature.provides a positive check on the coupling integrity, since only an uncoupled CRD can reach the overtravel position.
In addition, during this Surveillance any indicated response of the nuclear instrumentation while withdrawing the control rod is observed as a backup to the withdrawn overtravel position indication.
The verification is required to be performed anytime a control rod is withdrawn to the "full out" (continued)
GRAND GULF B 3.1-19 Revi sian No. 1
BASES SURVEILLANCE REQUIR.EMENTS Control Rod OPERABILITY B 3.1.3 SR 3.1.3.5 (continued) position (notch posltion 48) or prior to declaring the control rod OPERABLE after work on the control rod or CRD System that could affect coupling.
This includes control rods inserted one notch and then returned to the
- fulL-~~~~
position during the performance of
~~T
~
Frequency is acceptable, considering the low pro abil that a control rod will become uncoupled when it is not being moved and operating experience related to uncoupling events.
REFERENCES 1.
10 CFR 50, Appendix A, GOC 26, GOC 27, GOC 28, and GOt 29.
2.
UFSAR, Section 4.3.2.5.5.
3.
UFSAR, Section 4.6.1.1.2.5.3.
4.
UFSAR, Section 5.2.2.2.3.
5.
UFSAR, Section 15.4.1.
6.
UFSAR, Section 15.4.9.
7.
NEDO-21231, "Banked Position Withdrawal Sequence,"
Section 7.2, January 1977.
8.
NEDE-24011-P-A, "General Elec~ric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel (GESTAR 11).-
9.
AECM-90/0146, Proposed Amendment to the Operating License (PCOl-90/0J, Revision 1), dated August IS, 1990.
10.
HAEC-90/02aS, Issuance of Amendment No. 73 to Facility Operating License No. NPF Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Regarding Fuel Cycle 5 Reload (TAC No. 76992), dated November 15, 1990.
GRAND GULF B 3.1-20 Revision No.2
BASES ACTIONS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS SRM Instrumentation B 3.3.1.2 0.1 and D.2 (continued) mode switch is locked in the shutdown position to prevent inadvertent cantral rM withdrawa1s.
The i 11 ~";1ed Complet: -n Time of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> is sufficient to accomplish the Required Action, and takes into account the low probability of an event requiring the SRM occurring during this time.
E.1 and E.2 With one or more required SRMs inoperable in MODE 5, the capability to detect local reactivity changes in the core during refueling is degraded.
CORE ALTERATIONS must.be immediately suspended, and action.ust be i...diately itilted to insert all insenable control rods in core cells can a ning one or.are fuel assemblies.
Suspending CORE ALTERATIONS prevents the two lOst ptobable causes of reactivity changes, fuel loading and control rod withdrawal, fro. occurring.
Inserting all insertable control rods ensures that the reactor will be at its minimum reactivity, given that fuel is present in the core.
Suspension of CORE ALTERATIONS shall not preclude completion of the movement of
- a. co~onent to a safe, conservative position.
Action (once required to be initiated) to insert control rods must conti nue unti1 a11 i nsertab1e rods-in core cells containing one or more fuel assemblies are inserted.
The SRs for each SAM Applicable MODE or other specified condition are found in the SRs col~ of Table 3.3.1.2-1.
S8 3.3.1.2.1 and S8 3.3.1.2.3 Perfo~nce of the CHANNEL CHECK ensures that a gross failure of instrumentation has not occurred.
A CHANNEL CHECK' is normally a comparison of the para.eter indicated on one channel to the Sale para-eter indicated en other si.ilar channels.
Itls based on the assUllption
~hat lnstrUllent channels IOnitoring the Sale para.eter should read approxi~tely the Slle value.
Significant deviations between the instrUMent 'channels could be an indication of excessive instrwnent drift in one of the channels or sa.ethlng even MOre serious.
ACHANNEL CHECK will detect (continued)
GRAND GULF B 3.3-35 Revision No. 1 GNRO-2008/00014 List of Regulatory Commitments to GNRO-2008/00014 Page 1 of 1 List of Regulatory Commitments The following table identifies those actions committed to by Entergy in this document. Any other statements in this submittal are provided for information purposes and are not considered regulatory commitments.
TYPE (Check one)
SCHEDULED ONE*
CONTINUING COMPLETION COMMITMENT TIME COMPLIANCE DATE (If ACTION Required)
Entergy verifies applicability of T8TF-475 to Grand X
Within 60 Gulf and will establish T8 Bases consistent with days of those shown in T8TF--475, Revision 1, "Control Rod receipt of the Notch Testing Frequency and 8RM Insert Control amendment Rod Action" as shown in Attachment 3.