ML20064H561
| ML20064H561 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron, Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20064H550 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-90-09, GL-90-9, NUDOCS 9403180062 | |
| Download: ML20064H561 (3) | |
Text
..
, /"[%.,
/5, UNITED STATES
[ [lkc. i }
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- {
WASHINGTON. D C 20M6 C001 j
%...../
SAFETY EVAltjAl10N BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION BE. LATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 60 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-37, AMENDHENT N0. 60 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-66, AMENDMENT NO. 49 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-72, AND AMENDMENT NO. 48 TO FAClllTY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-77 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY BYRON STATION. UNIT N05. 1 AND 2 BRAIDWOOD STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 D.QCKET NOS._SlN 50-454. STN 50-455. STN 50-456 AND STN 50-457
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated August 27, 1993, as supplemented February 21, 1994, Commonwealth Edison Company (Ceco or the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, and Braidwcod Station, Units 1 and 2.
It proposed to remove the snubber visual examination schedule in the existing Technical Specifications and replace it with a refueling outage based visual examination schedule, Table 1 of the Generic Letter (GL) 90-09 dated December 11, 1990, to all holders of operating itcenses or construction permits for nuclear power reactors. Additional information was provided by letter dated February 21, 1994, which did not change the original no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The snubber visual examination schedule in the existing TS is based on the permissible number of inoperable snubbers found during the visual examination.
Because the existing snubber visual examination schedule is. based only on the absolute number of inoperable snubbers found during the visual examinations irrespective of the total population of snubbers, licensees with a large snubber population have found the visual examination schedule excessively restrictive.
The purpose of the alternative visual examination schedule is to allow the licensee to perform visual examinations and corrective actions during plant outages without reduction of the confidence level provided by the existing vuual 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 up to 24 months.
This interval may be extended to as long as twice the fuel cycle, or reduced to as smt11 as two-thirds of the fuel cycle depending on the number of unacceptable snubbers found during the visual examination.
The examination interval may vary by 125 percent to coincide with the actual outage.
9403180062 940311 PDR ADOCK 05000454 P
. In the event one or more snubbers are found to be 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 LC0 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. As noted in the guidance for this line item TS improvement, certain corrective actions may have to be performed depending on the number of inoperable snubbers found. All requirements, for corrective action and evaluations associated with the use of visual examination schedule and stated in footnotes 1 thru 7, (Table 1 of GL 90-09) shall be included in the TS.
The licensee has proposed changes to the TS that are consistent with the guidance provided in GL 90-09 for the replacement of the snubber visual examination schedule with Table 1 (including footnotes 1 thru 7) of GL 90-09.
On the basis of its review of this matter, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
Currently, TS 4.7.8.e provides three options for selection of sample size for snubber functional testing. The licensee has elected to use only the one that requires an initial 10% of the total number of each type of snubber.
For all snubbers that do not meet the acceptance criteria, an additional 10% will be tested until no more failures are found or until all snubbers of that type have been functionally tested.
Because the staff considers any of the three methods to be adequate for functional testing, the staff finds removal of two of the options from the TS to be acceptable.
The licensee also proposed the removal of an obsolete footnote related to TS 4.7.8.e for Byron.
The footnote required that the visual inspection of inaccessible snubbers be completed by January 24, 1990. The licensee stated that the inspection was performed and that the footnote is no longer needed.
The staff finds removal of the footnote to be acceptable.
3.0 SJATE CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ERVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION 2
The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments-involve 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
r
- ... 9 amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 4935). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sl.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 amendments.
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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J. Rajan Date:
March 11, 1994
' 1
-,+r
,~~..,__...~.---,.,,_-.--m
-r.
.- -.