ML17054B904
| ML17054B904 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/23/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17054B903 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8509300297 | |
| Download: ML17054B904 (4) | |
Text
~'S Rangy P0 Op
~i C
O
+~
90
+***+
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.
74 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-63 NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT NO.
1 DOCKET NO. 50-220
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated March 13, 1985, as supplemented and clarified by letter dated May 6, 1985, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC, the licensee) requested an amendment to Appendix A of Operating License No.
DPR-63 for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1.
The amendment request changes the Technical Specifications (TS) by deleting the list of required snubbers, providing surveillance requirements including frequency and acceptance
- criteria, and providing limiting conditions for operation (LCO) for the facility should snubbers be inoperable.
This change was proposed to incorporate the provisions for snubber Technical Specifications transmitted to all power reactor licensees by Generic Letter 84-13 dated May 3, 1984.
The above-stated application supersedes the licensee's previous submittals dated April 18, 1980, March 20, 1981 and October 5, 1983 regarding snubbers.
2.0 EVALUATION The four proposed changes are as follows:
a
~
Specification 3.6.4.a has been reworded to require that snubber operability be demonstrated during all operating conditions except cold shutdown.
The only system required by the Technical Specifications to be operable during cold shutdown is the core spray system.
If this system becomes inoperable due to inoperable
- snubbers, the shutdown cooling system would still be available to remove the decay heat.
The Technical Specification also requires the licensee to repair or replace the inoperable snubbers within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of the discovery.
Otherwise the supported system shall be declared inoperable.
The proposed change is a marked improvement over the previous version of the Technical Specifications.
b.
The surveillance requirements for mechanical snubbers have been added to the Technical Specifications.
Surveillance was not originally required for mechanical
- snubbers, yet recent records showed that mechanical snubbers are subjected to degradation and deterioration caused by service.
Letters from D.
G. Eisenhut to licensees dated November 20, 1980 and March 23, 1981 requested that mechanical snubbers be inspected and tested.
This proposed addition is 8509300297 85092$
I PDR ADOCK 05000220 p
IT I
also an improvement over the previous version of the Technical Specifications.
,. c.
A more definitive acceptance criterion is proposed for the functional testing of hydraulic snubbers.
Previously, hydraulic snubbers were functionally tested but without clear acceptance criterion.
The proposed addition will enhance the surveillance requirements in the Technical Specifications.
d.
The table of safety-related hydraulic snubbers is deleted.
This request follows the guidance of NRC Generic Letter 84-13 which permits the deletion of tables of safety-related snubbers from present Technical Specifications of all operating plants but does not change the bookkeeping requirements.
This deletion is acceptable.
The staff finds that the proposed revisions to the Limiting Conditions for Operation, the surveillance requirements and Bases for safety-related snubbers will result in a Technical Specification for Nine Mile Point, Unit No. I which is generally consistent with current Standard Technical Specifications and will enhance the Nine Mile Point, Unit No. I operating safety.
The staff therefore finds that the proposed revisions are acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillance requirements.
The 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibilitycriteria 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 this amendment.
- 4. 0 CONCLUSION We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
H.
Shaw Dated:
September 23, 1985
0
'I
~I
~'
k.