ML20076H736
| ML20076H736 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076H729 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-93-05, GL-93-5, NUDOCS 9410240145 | |
| Download: ML20076H736 (3) | |
Text
_
nnau ye
-t UNITED STATES 2
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-4001
\\
/
SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.172 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-16 GPV NUCLEAR CORPORATION AND JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION j
DOCKET NO. 50-219 i
i 1.0 JETRODUCTION By letter dated August 19, 1994, GPV Nuclear Corporation (GPVN/the licensee) requested an amendment which would modify the current Technical Specifications (TS) 4.2.0 and 4.2.E to incorporate line item TS improvements TS 4.1.3.1.2 and Tb 4.1.5 that were identified by the NRC staff as reported in NUREG-1366,
" Improvements to Technical Specification Surveillance Requirements" December 1992. The TS improvements were based on an NRC study of surveillance requirements and included information provided by licensee personnel that plan, manage and perform surveillances. The study included insights from qualitative risk assessment of surveillance requirements based on the standard technical specifications for Westinghouse plants and TS for the Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit 2.
The staff examined operational data from licensee event reports, the nuclear plant reliability data system and other sources to access the effect of TS surveillance requirements on plant operation. The staff evaluated the effect of longer surveillance intervals to reduce the possibility for plant transients, wear on equipment, personnel radiation exposure, and burden on personnel resources.
Finally the staff considered surveillance activities for which the safety benefits are small and relaxation is justified when compared to the effects of these activities on the safety of personnel and the plant. The NRC staff issued guidance on the proposed TS changes to all holders of operating licenses or construction permits for nuclear power reactors in Generic Letter (GL) 93-05, "Line-Item Technical Specifications Improvements to Reduce Surveillance Roquirements for Testing During Power Operation," dated September 27, 1993.
2.0 EVALVATION The licensee proposed modifications to the TS 4.2.D and 4.2.E.1 and the bases as discussed below:
9410240145 941019 PDR ADOCK 05000219 P
i i
I :
i TS 4.2.0 (Line Item Imorovement TS 4.1.3.1.2)
GPUN proposed to revise the Control Rod Drive (CRD) exercise requirement to be compatible with plant operating experience and GL 93-05 guidance. This TS changes the requirement to exercise all control rods daily in the event of i
continued operation with one immovable or two or more inoperable control rods.
Control rods would only be required to be exercised within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of i
the conditions of one immovable or two inoperable control rods and then be exercised weekly thereafter. GPUN has identified only one instance of required daily testing of the Oyster Creek CRD the last 7 years. This exercise testing occurred during 3 consecutive days while two control rods were declared inoperable for maintenance activities.
No other control rods were identified as being inoperable during exercise testing. TS 4.2.0 is changed to require control rod testing "within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />" as stated by GL 93-05 guidance. Also a typographical error, " collect," rather than " collet" was identified and corrected.
The existing TS 4.2 Bases was also changed to update and clarify the requirement to exercise the control rods so as to provide consistency with the proposed surveillance frequency.
i TS 4.2.E.1 (Line Item Imorovement TS 4.1.5)
GPUN proposed to revise the Standby Liquid Control pump operability requirements to be compatible with plant operating experience and GL 93-05 guidance. No instances of either pump failing its surveillance testing criteria in the last 5 years were identified. TS 4.2.E.1 is changed to require surveillance of pump operability from every " month" to every "3 l
months," consistent with GL 93-05 guidance and the ASME Code.
Based on the staff review, the staff has concluded that the proposed TS modifications are consistent with the guidelines provided in GL 93-05.
This guidance is based on the staff findings and recommendations stated in NUREG-3 1366.
In addition, the licensee states that the proposed TS changes are compatible with plant operation experience. The staff also concludes that the proposed TS changes do not adversely affect plant safety and will result in a net benefit to the safe operation of the facility and, therefore, are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to 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 dmendment involves no 4
- i i
1 i
i j l significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types,
,1 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 considerti;on, and there has been no s
public comment on such finding (59 FR 47168). 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:
A. Dromerick Date: October 19, 1994