ML20077D758
| ML20077D758 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20077D756 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9106050059 | |
| Download: ML20077D758 (2) | |
Text
.
g 6' *%g
,[$
UNITED STATES i(h,) fM'i 3
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
%... j' wAssiNatoN.o.c m u SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFTICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.140 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-46 NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT COOPER NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-298
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 11, 1991, Nebraska Public Power District (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Cooper Nuclear Station Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes would change the surveillance frequency for the residual heat removal (RHR) logic system functional test from once/6 months to onc4/18 months in order to avoid undesirable plant configura-tions during power operation.
l 2.0 EVALUATION The existing Cooper TS required logic system functional testing of the RHR system is performed every six months and involves placing both trains in a configuration which precludes rapid restoration of the design function if needed to respond to a design basis event.
In order to prevent rendering both trains of RHR inoperable simultaneously during power operation, the licensee prososed to change the required surveillance interval to eighteen months 50 that t1e testing would be performed only during plant shutdown conditions.
The change is required because the licensee's review of the surveillance procedures could not identify a practical procedural change to prevent disabling both trains during power operation.
The logic system functional tests and the simulated automatic actuation test (TS 4.5. A.3) which is performed once per operating cycle are comparable to the system functional tests that the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) require for the Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) at least once per eighteen months.
The staff agrees that testing which renders the ECCS function of both RHR trains inoperable during power operation is undesirable.
In fact, such testing would not be allowed by the Technical Specifications of most plants, i
Based on its review, the staff agrees with the licensee that the surveillance interval for the RHR logic system functional testing should be changed to eighteen munths. Testing for individual RHR system components will continue to be performed on monthly and quarterly frequencies and. when combined with the integrated tests performed each cycle, provide a high degree of confidence in the reliable performance of the system.
In addition, this change would be consistent with STS and surveillance activities. prevent the periodic loss of both RHR trains due to Therefore, the staff finds the licensee's proposed TS change is acceptable.
[f[$bO$ $
[
P 1
~ -
f r
f.'.'
F i
j !
3.0 $ TATE CONSULAT10N in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Hebraska State official was notifiedlof the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no connent.
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 and changes in surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the. amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no-significant change in-the tyo's, of Ony effluents that may be released offsite, ar.d.that.there is no significant increase in individual ur cumulative occupational radiation esposure.
Th,i Connission has previously issued a pro-posed finding that the amendment involves no sdgnificant hazards consideration and there hos been no public comment on sur' t.nding (56 FR 15643).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility) criteria for categoricalexclus no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in cor.nection 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 anendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal' Contributor: ' W.'Reckley Date: 'May-22, 1991
^t e
i g
i i
l I
,__..m...._____..
...m
, -_. _ _... ~. - _.,. _ _ _ - _., _,. _. -..... - _... _ _
- -