ML18026B004
| ML18026B004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18026B003 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8405210536 | |
| Download: ML18026B004 (3) | |
Text
~p.a Aegg
~o O
i'c g s" Y/
4O qO
++*++
t UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.
98 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-33 AMENDMENT NO.
92 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-52 AMENDMENT NO.
65 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-68 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-259, 50-260 AND 50-296 1.0 Introduction=
By letters dated July 29, 1977 (TVA BFNP TS 89) as supplemented April 24, 1979 and July 20, 1979 for unit 3 and November 17, 1981 (TVA BFNP TS 169) for units 1 and 2, the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee or TVA) requested amendments to Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-33, DPR-52 and DPR-68 for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.
The applications by TVA were in response to a request by the NRC staff on September 15, 1976 to apply for amendments to the Technical Specifications to resolve any conflicts between the inservice inspection requirements contained in the facility Technical Specifications and those required by 10 CFR 50.55a.
The requirement for this clarification is contained in 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(ii).
The proposed amendments would change the Technical Specifications to implement the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) pertaining to inservice inspection to provide assurance that the structural integrity of systems and components important to safety are maintained.
The proposed amendments would add surveillance requirements to provide for inservice inspection of safety-related components, in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and applicable addenda as required by 10 CFR 50.55a(g),
except where specific written relief has been granted by the NRC.
2.0 Evaluation The regulations for inservice inspection (10 CFR 50.55a(g))
were changed on February 27, 1976 to require that facility inservice inspection
( ISI) programs be periodically updated to later editions of the ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI.
In order to eliminate conflicts between ISI requirements in the Technical Specifications and those specified by Regulation, 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(ii) requires that Technical Specifications be changed to reference the Regulations (10 CFR 50.55a) rather than contain details of a specific ISI program.
The staff provided guidance for such Technical Specification changes in an enclosure to a l'etter dated September 15, 1976.
Similar language is contained in current revisions of BWR Standard Technical Specifications (NUREG-0123).
840M1053b 840430 PDR ADOCK 05000259 P
The staff has reviewed the licensee's submittals dated July 29, 1977 as supplemented April 24, 1979 and July 20, 1979 for unit 3, and November 17, 1981 for units 1 and 2.
The proposed amendments (including the changes to unit 3 discussed below) are identical to the guidance provided by the staff in its September 15, 1976 letter, as well as the Section 16.0 of the Standard Review Plan.
Therefore, we find the proposed changes acceptable.
To achieve consistency with its submittal on units 1 and 2 and the staff guidance stated
- above, the licensee agreed in a telecon of March 22, 1984 to a change to pace 196 of the unit 3 submittal.
This change to the unit 3 submittal did not affect the Federal Re ister notice of this item issued on November 22, 1983, because theeceange to t e submittal brought the amendment reauest in exact conformance with the description of the action in the Federal
~Re ister notice.
3.0 Environmental Considerations We have determined that these amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that these amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental
- impact, and pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
Robert A. Hermann Dated:
April 30, 1984
~
v~" '