ML20097H370
| ML20097H370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20097H367 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9206260154 | |
| Download: ML20097H370 (2) | |
Text
---
.[sanea\\
u 3"s UNITED STATES n
3 < CM
.E NUCLEAR DEGULATORY COMMISSION i
[
WASHINoTON, D.C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.it.S TO FACILITY OPERATING LIC GSE NO. DPR-20 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PAllSADES PLANT d
DOCKET NO. 50-255 1.0 JNTRODUCTION By letter dated June 13, 1991, Consumers Power Compay (the licensee) requested amendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to Facility Operating License No. DPR-20 for the Palisades Plant.
The proposed amendment revises Technical Specification, Sections 4.16.la and 4.16.lb in response to Generic Letter 90-09, " Alternate Requirements For Snubber Visual Inspection Intervals and Corrective Actions," which provided an alternate schedule for visual inspections for snubbers.
The sections were revised per the guidance provided in Generic Letter 90-09, 2.0 fVALUAT!0N The current TS schedule for snubber visual inspection is based on the number of inoperable snubbers found during the previous visual inspection.
Because the current schedule is based only on the number of inoperable snubbers found during the prev'ous visual inspection, irrespective of the size of the snubber population, licensees having a large number of snubbers find that the visual inspection schedule is excessively restrictive.
Some licensees have spent a sig7ificant arount of resources and have subjected plant personnel to unnecessary radiological exposure to comply with the visual examination l
reguirements.
I To alleviate this situation, the staff developed an alternate schedule for visual inspection in Generic Letter 90-09 that maintains the same confidence i
level as the existing schedule and generally will allow the snubber visual inspections and corrective actions to be performed during plant outages, in additien, the implementation of the proposed alternative schedule will allow for less frequent snubber inspections, provided the results of ongoing inspections are favorable. The alternate inspection schedule is based on the number of unacceptable snubbers found during the previous inspection, the total snubber category size, and the previous inspection interval.
l l
Because this line-item TS improvement will reduce future occupational radiation exposure and is highly cost-effective, the alternate inspection schedule is consistent with the Commision's policy statement on TS irrprovements.
l l
7206260154 920612 PDR ADOCK 05000255 P
fu
(-
Licensee's request dated June 13, 1991, did not address a provision of the generic letter that stated the first inspection fnterval determined using this criteria shall be based upon the previous inspection interval as established by-the program in effect at the time of this amendment.
Discussions with licensee's licensing staff on February 14, 1992, confirmed that the first inspection interval wil'. be based upon the inspection interval in effect at the time of this amendment.
The proposed changes to the Palisades TS are being implemented in response to GL 90-09 and are consistent with the guidance in GL 90-09.
WE, therefore, find the changes to TS Sections 4.16.la and 4.16.lb acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with ui Commission's regulations, the Michigan State Official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State Official had no comments.
4,0 INVIRDNMElGAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20-and a change in a surveillance requirement.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 occJpational radiation exposure.
Tha Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant h:zards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (56 FR 41578).
Accordingly, this amendment 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 this amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff.br 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 amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J. Heller Date:
June 12,1992
. - - -.