ML20082H067
| ML20082H067 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 08/12/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082H064 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9108230014 | |
| Download: ML20082H067 (2) | |
Text
M
[$30tt0p\\'
UNITED $TATES l'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
f WASHINGTON. D C. 20f.55
%.. /
SAFETY EVALUATION DY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGUL ATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 81 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-29 ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.. ET AL.
GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-416
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 15, 1991, as revised May 24, 1991, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), submitted a request for changes to the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Unit 1, Technical Specifications (TS).- The res,uested chan{,es would-change the TS by deleting the schedule for withdrawal from the reactor of the reactor pressure vessel material surveillance specimens and reference to the schedule in a surveillance requirement.
2.0 EVALUATION The purpose of the reactor vessel material surveillance specimens is to monitor radiation-induced changes in reactor vessel materials properties.
The surveillance specimens are contained in capsules which are located inside the vessel and are periodically withdrawn for examination. -The withdrawal inter-vals shoulo be scheduhd %3d on American Society for Tesing Materials (ASTM)
Standard E 185 to allou the specimens to achieve sufficient radiation-induced 1
changes in the reactor vessel materials to Iermit prediction of radiation embittlement of the reactor vessel.
The requirement for the withdrawal schedule of the surveillance capsules is addressed in both Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50 and the TS.
To eliminate the redundant requirement, the staf f issued a Generic Letter 91-01 on January 4, 1991, to provide guidance on removal of the withdrawal schedule from the TS.
The staff believes-that the removal of the withdrawal' schedule from the TS will not result in any loss of regulatory control because changes to the
~
schedule are controlled by the requirements of Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50.
Section II.B.3 of Appendix H requires =that proposed changes to the schedule with a technical justification-be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for approval prior to implementation.
The proposed license amendment would delete TS Table 4;4.6.1.3-1, " Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program-Withdrawal Schedule" and change TS Surve illance Requirement.4.4.6.1.4 by deleting a reference to the-table..In its submittals,.the licensee has-committed to incorporate the schedule in 9108230014 910312 -.
PDR ADOCK 05000416 P
PDR-i
.m e
-2 TS Table 4.4.6.1.3-1 into the next revision of the Updated final Safety Analysis Report (Uf$AR) and to obtain NRC approval of any changes to the schedule prior to revision of the schedule in the UFSAR.
Based on its review of the subn..htals, the staff concludes that the proposed TS changes and comitments to maintain the NRC-approved version of the withdrawal schedule in the UfSAR are in accordance with Generic Letter 91-01 and Appendix H to 10 CFR part 50, and are therefore acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
in accordance with the Comission's regulations, the Mississippi State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no coments.
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 ln 10 CFR Part 20 and changes the surveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant $ncrease 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 occupa l
tional radiation exposure. The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves nc significant hazards consitieration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (56 FR 31433). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eli forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)gibility criteria for categorical exclusion set Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmer.tal 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 safet of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner,y(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:
J. Tsao, EMCB/NRR Date:' August 12, 1991 i
TW
- -