ML17331A914
| ML17331A914 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17331A913 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-84-13, GL-90-02, GL-90-2, NUDOCS 9308020018 | |
| Download: ML17331A914 (4) | |
Text
~
~ REGS+
4 P0 Cy
~i 0O I
p Ol e
O
+0
~O
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.
TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-58 AND AMENDMENT NO.
TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-74 INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY DONALD C.
COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT NOS.
1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS.
50-315 AND 50-316
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By letter dated May 1,
- 1992, as supplemented June 18,
- 1993, Indiana Michigan Power Company (licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
Two related TS changes were requested.
One request proposed modifying the snubber visual examination schedule TS with a refueling outage based visual examination schedule.
This request was based on guidance provided in Generic Letter (GL) 90-09, "Alterna-tive Requirements for Snubber Visual Inspection Intervals and Corrective Actions," dated December ll, 1990.
The other request proposed removing the snubber component lists in accordance with the guidance provided in GL 84-13, "Technical Specification for Snubbers,"
dated May 3, 1984.
The June 18, 1993 letter provided updated TS pages that did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 Alternate Snubber Ins ection Schedule The snubber visual examination schedule currently provided in the TS is based on the permissible number of inoperable snubbers found during the previous visual examination.
Because the existing snubber visual examination schedule is based only on the absolute number of inoperable snubbers found during the previous visual examination, irrespective of the total population of snubbers, licensees with a large snubber population find the visual examination schedule excessively restrictive.
The purpose of the alternative visual examination schedule proposed in GL 90-09 is to allow the licensees to perform visual examinations and corrective actions during plant outages without reducing the confidence level provided by the existing visual examination schedule.
The new visual examination schedule specifies the permissible number of inoperable snubbers for various snubber populations.
The basic examination interval is the normal fuel cycle, which may be as long as 24 months.
This interval may be extended to twice the fuel cycle or reduced to two-thirds of the fuel cycle 9308020018 930709 PDR ADDCK 05000315 PDR P
depending on the number of unacceptable snubbers found during the visual examination.
The examination interval may be extended or reduced by 25 percent to coincide with the actual outage.
In the event one or more snubbers are found inoperable during a visual examination, the Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO) in the present TS require the licensee to restore or replace the inoperable snubber(s) to operable status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or declare the attached system inoperable and follow the appropriate action statement for that system.
This LCO will remain in the TS; however, the permissible number of inoperable snubber(s) and the subsequent visual examination interval will now be determined in accordance with the new visual examination schedule (Table 4.7-2 of GL 90-09).
As noted in the guidance for this TS line item improvement, certain corrective actions may have to be performed depending on which snubbers are inoperable.
All requirements for corrective actions and evaluations associated with the use of the revised visual examination schedule as stated in Table 4.7-2 of GL 90-09, footnotes 1 through 7, are included in the licensee's proposed TS.
The licensee has proposed changes to the TS that are consistept with the guidance provided in GL 90-09 for replacing the snubber visual examination schedule.
On the basis of its review of this matter, the staff finds that the proposed changes to the TS for D.
C.
Cook Units 1 and 2 are acceptable.
2.2 Removal of Snubber Com onent Lists The existing TS lists 94 and 102 safety-related snubbers for units 1
and 2, respectively.
In GL 84-13, the staff concluded that such listings within the TS are not necessary, provided that the TS specify which snubbers are required to be operable.
GL 84-13 also states that the removal of the component lists from the TS shall not alter the existing TS requirements nor change the components to which they apply.
The component lists shall be incorporated into plant procedures that are subject to the change control provisions for plant procedures specified in the administrative controls section of the TS.
The licensee has proposed changes to TS that are consistent with the guidance provided in GL 84-13 for removing the list of snubbers from the existing TS.
On the basis of its review of this matter, the staff finds that the proposed changes to the TS for D.C.
Cook Units 1 and 2 are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Michigan State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change the requirements with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and change the surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no
v 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 amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 12261).
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
On the basis of the considerations discussed
- above, the staff concludes 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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J.
- Rajan, EMEB/DET S.
Lee W. Dean Dated:
Xly 9, 1993
f~
,\\
4 a