ML20095G203
| ML20095G203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20095G187 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9204280446 | |
| Download: ML20095G203 (2) | |
Text
i l.
[pa ancg o
UNITED STATES E",e N NUCLhAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O
E W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
/1AFETYEVALVATIONBYTHEOFFICEOFNUC1EARREACTORREGULATION REL ATED TO AMENDMENT No. 73 TO FAClllTY OP_[ RATING LICENSE NO. NPF-38 ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STiT10N VNIT 3 m
QOg 1T NO. 50-392 1.0 INTRODUCT104 By application dated January 6,1992, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee),
submitted a request for changes to the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3) Technical Specifications (TS).
The changes would remove the snubber visual examination schedule in the existing TS and replar.e it with
~
the refueling-outage-based visual examination schedule from Table 1 of Jeneric Letter (GL) 30-09, dated December 11, 1990.
2.0 EVALUATION The snubber visual examination schedule in the existing Technical Specification i: based on the,armissible number of inoperable snubbers found during the visual examination.
Because this schedule is based only on the absolute number of inoperable snubbers found during the visual examinations irrespective of the total population of rnubbers, licensees sith a large snubber pcpulation find the schedule exc;ssively restrict m.
The purpose of the alternative visual examination schedule is to allow the licensee to perform isual examinations and take corrective actions during plant outages without reducing the confidence level provided by the existing schedule.
The new schedule specifies the permissible number of inoperable snubbers for various snubber populations.
The basic examination interval is she normal fuel cycle up to 24 months.
Depending on the number of unacceptable snubbers found during the visual examination, this interval may be extended to as long as twice the fuel cycle or reduced to as short as two-thirds of the fuel cycle.
The examination in M cal may vary by 24 percent to coincide with the actual outage.
Intheevent(hatoneormoresnubbersarefoudinoperableduringavisual examination, the Limiting Conditions for Opera ion (LCO) in the present TS require the licersee to restore the inoperable snubbers to operable status, or replace them, within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or to declare the attached system ineperable and follow the appropriate action staterent for that system.
This LC0 will remain 9204280446 920417 PDR ADOCK 05000382 P
'O.
in the TS. However, the permissible numbar of inoperable snubbers and the subsequent visual examination interval will now be determined in accordance with the new visual examination schedule (Table 1 of GL 90-09, dated December 11,1990). As roted in the guidance for this line item T5 improvement, certain corrective actions may have to be cerformed, depending on the number of inoperable snubbers fnund.
All requirements for corrective actions ano evaluations associated with the use of the visual ' examination schedule and stated in Footnotes 1 through 7 of Table 1 of GL 90-09 shall be incl >ded in the TS.
The licensee has prcposed changes to Specification 3.14 that are consistent with the guidance provided in GL 90-09 for the -replacement cf the snubber visual examin: tion schedule with Table 1 (including Footnotes 1 through 7) of GL 90-09. On the basis of its review,.the staff Finds that the proposed changes to the TS for Waterford 3 are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Louisiana State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIROWMENTAL CONSIDERATION e '
The a endment chang 9s a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility ccmponent located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changas in surveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has determined that.the amendment involves no significart 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 Concission has-previously issued a pro-po. sed finding that the amendet;t involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (57 FR 7811).
Accordingly, the acendment 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 issuanca of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or __to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
R. Twigg Date: April 17, 1992
__..m.
mm.___
___m_________
__.m.-_
m_.