ML20079D305
| ML20079D305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 06/25/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079D304 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9107050158 | |
| Download: ML20079D305 (3) | |
Text
,'
lpe anos o
f[$
UNITED STATES
! j ', g# I e
12 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
(
WASHINGioN. o C. 20b66 1
SAFETY EVAttlATION BY THE Offirr 0F NUCLEAR REACTOR FEGULAT10tl RELATED TO AMit:0 MENT NOS. 51 AND 15 TO r?CIL!TY OPERATING LICENSE iTS. NPF 39 AND HPF-85 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY L1 HEP.1CK GENERAT!!'G STATION. UNITS 1 AND ?
DOCLET NOS. 50-35? At:D 50-353 i
t
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated April 30, 1991, the Philadelphia Electric Company (pECO or the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would l
revise TS Section 4.7.4 and the associated Pases to incorporate the recommendations on snubber visual inspection frequencies contained in Generic Letter (GL) 90-09, " Alternative Requirements for Snubber Visual Insper*/.un Intervals and Corrective Actions" dated December 11, 1990.
Specifically, the revisions would remove the snubber visual examination schedule in thi existing TSs and replace it with a refueling outage based visual examination st..cdule as listed in Table 1 of GL 90-09.
2.0 EVALUATION j
i The snubber visual examination schedule in the existing Technical Specifications is based on the permissible number of inoperable snubbers found c'uring the visual examination.
Because.the existing snubber visual examinatior.. schedule is based only on the absolute nunber of inoperable snubbers found during the visual examinations irrespective of the total population of snubbers, i
licensee's with a large snubber population find 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 visual examination schedule. The new visual examination j
schedule specifies the permissible number of inoperable snubbers for various snubber populations. The basic examination interval is the normal fuel cycle l
up to 24 months. This interval may be extended to as long as twice the fuel cycle or reduced to as small as two-thirds of the fuel cycle depending on the
' nunber of unacceptable snubbers found during the visual examination. The examination interval may vary by 125 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 snubbers (s) to operable status within-72 hours or declare the attached system inoperable and a
9107050158 910625 PDR ADOCK 05000352 P
s
.. follow the appropriate action statement for that system.
This LCO will remain in the TS; however, the permissible number of inoperable snubbers (s) and the subsequent visual examination interval will now be determined in accordance with the new visual examination schedule (Table 1 of Generic Letter 90-09 dated Decerber 11,in corrective actions may htye to be performed depend 1990).
As noted in the guidance for this line item TS improvement, certa the number of inoperable snubbers found.
All requirements, for corrective actions and evaluations associated with the use of the visual examination schedule and stated in the footnotes 1 through 7 (Table 1 of Generic Letter 90-09), shall be included in the TS.
The licensee hat, provided changes to Specification 4.7.4 that are consistent with the guidance prn"ided in Generic Letter 90-09 for the replacement of the snubber visual examination schedule with Table 1 (including footnotes 1 through 7) of the Generic Letter 90-09.
On the basis of its review of this r:atter, the staff finds that the proposed changes to the TS for Limerick Units 1 and 2 are acceptable.
3.0 1TATECONSULTATION i
in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments chance a requirement witn respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to surveillance requirements. The I;RC 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 amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.?2(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.?2(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 L
e 4
I'
'o 3
the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's reguletions, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J. Rafan Date:
June 25, 1991 i
l l
\\
-