ML20092J101
| ML20092J101 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1995 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092J092 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9509210328 | |
| Download: ML20092J101 (2) | |
Text
_
i
'.. - (W k
UNITED STATES p
.g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. 30666-0001 l
)
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO' AMENDMENT NO. 162 TO i
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-6 i
ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
s l
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE. UNIT NO. 2 l:
DOCKET NO. 50-368
- 1.0 INIBORCIIDE
~By application dated March 17, 1995, Entergy Operations, Inc., (the licensee) requested.an amendment to the Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2-(ANO-2), operating L
license. The proposed amendment would revise the facility Technical Specifications (TSs) relating to the frequency of containment post-entry visual inspection requirements. The objective of the proposed amendment is to reduce personnel exposure to radiation and heat stress by reducing the number of containment entries.
]
- 2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION For plant operation with T 2300*F, the current ANO-2 TSs Surveillance F
Requirements for the Emerg,ency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) require that a visual inspection be performed of affected containment areas at the completion of each containment entry when containment. integrity is established. The purpose of the-visual inspection is to verify that no loose debris such as rags, trash, clothing, etc., that could be transported to the containment floor and clog the containment. recirculation sump screens in the event of an 4
accident, has been left behind in the work areas. A clogged recirculation 3
sump strainer could render the affected ECCS system inoperable.
~
.The licensee wishes to revise.the _ inspection frequency to require the visual inspections:
(a) at least once daily if the containment has been entered that day, and (b) during a final entry prior to resealing the containment. This is consistent with NUREG-1366, " Improvements to Technical Specifications i
- Surveillance Requirements," (1992). As described in NUREG-1366, the staff i -
found that once/ daily and final-entry inspections would:
(1) reduce personnel exposure, and (2) maintain a high degree of assurance that the sump strainer 2
is free. The change involves keeping a record of areas visited during
. multiple: entries as an aid in' performing the daily and final inspections. The NUREG-1366 recommendations:were approved by Generic Letter (GL) 93-05 of
, l September 27, 1993.-
4-
!L 95092'10328 950915 "
t PDR ADOCK 05000368
.p P DR_.-
i.-
i The revised TS wording 3roposed by the licensee is consistent with the intent i
of.GL 93-05; however, tie proposed wording is not verbatim with that recommended by the Generic Letter. The licensee's proposed wording explicitly i
states that a daily inspection is required only if the containment has been entered that day. That there is no need for the daily inspection if the containment has not been entered is only implicit in the Generic Letter guidance, since the GL guidance requires that only affected areas be inspected.
i 1
3.0 TECHNICAL CONCLUSION
]
The proposed amendment is acceptable based on consistency with the guidance of GL 93-05.
4.0 ETATE CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Arkansas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments,
5.0 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 surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no j
significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released l
offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a pr posed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (60 FR 37089). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR i
j 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be j
prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
f
]
6.0 CONCLUSION
'j The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations e scussed 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 i
i defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
l Principal Contributor:
W. Long 1
p Date: September 15, 1992 l
w m-
-m-m w-
,m-
---m wv v