ML14183A269
| ML14183A269 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 09/06/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14183A268 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9409120274 | |
| Download: ML14183A269 (2) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.150 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-23 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated October 14, 1993, Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee) submitted a request for a change to the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, (HBR) Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested change would revise TS 4.2.2 to remove the schedule for withdrawal of reactor vessel material surveillance specimens. Guidance on the proposed TS change was provided by Generic Letter (GL) 91-01, "Removal of the Schedule for the Withdrawal of Reactor Vessel Material Specimens from Technical Specifications," issued on January 4, 1991.
2.0 EVALUATION As stated in Generic Letter 91-01, a program for reactor vessel material surveillance ensures the availability of data to update the inservice operating temperature and pressure limits. This program will assist in fulfilling the requirements of Appendix H to 10 CFR, Part 50, to prevent brittle fracture of the reactor vessel.
The surveillance requirements associated with these limits specify the withdrawal schedule for the reactor vessel material specimens.
Section II.B.3 of Appendix H to 10 CFR, Part 50, requires the submittal of a proposed withdrawal schedule with a technical justification as specified in 10 CFR 50.4 and approval by the NRC before implementation. The surveillance capsule withdrawal schedule for HBR was designed to meet ASTM E 185-66, applicable at the time the reactor vessel was purchased and approved when the plant was licensed for full power operation on May 20, 1970. If a licensee proposes schedule changes that are not consistent with ASTM E 185-79 or -82, the changes would likely be deemed to involve an unreviewed safety question under the current regulatory framework and would require NRC approval by a license amendment prior to implementation, as provided by 10 CFR 50.59(c).
The licensee stated in the submittal of October 14, 1993, that the surveillance schedule will be placed in the HBR Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
Inclusion of the withdrawal schedule in the USFAR will provide a readily available reference for NRC inspectors and other staff.
In addition, the licensee proposes a revision to TS 4.2.2 to indicate that the specimens must be removed and examined to determine changes in their material properties, as required by Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50.
9409120274 940906 PDR ADOCK 05000261 P
The removal of the schedule from the TS will not result in any loss of regulatory control because changes to this schedule are controlled by the requirements of Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50. The amendment involves no addition, deletion, or change to any plant hardware or equipment.
The NRC staff finds that the proposed change to TS 4.2.2 is consistent with the guidance provided in GL 91-01 with respect to the removal of the schedule for the withdrawal of reactor vessel specimens from the TS. The change is, likewise, consistent with the regulations, and is, therefore, acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the State of South Carolina official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a surveillance requirement. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 59745). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(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 amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: B. L. Mozafari Date:
September 6, 1994