ML20114F401
| ML20114F401 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/05/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20114F396 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9210130091 | |
| Download: ML20114F401 (2) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[ga n%
o UNITED STATES l
'g NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
n
,A y
W ASWNG TON, D. C. 205%
{.
9, a
%...../
SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF N ELEAR REACTOR REGULATION FELATED TO AMENDMENT N0. 57 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-42
@LLLIEEK NUCLEAR OPERATlhG CORPORATION WOLF CREEK GENERATING SlATION DOCKET NO. 50-4H 1.0 INTRODUCTIM By application dated June 11, 1992, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to f acility Operating License No. NFf-42) for the Wolf Creek Generating Station.
The proposed changes would remove Technical Specification (TS) Table 4.4.5 providing the schedule for reactor vessel material specimca withdrawal.
Guidance on the proposed TS change was provided by Generic letter 91-01,
" Removal of the Schedule fnr the Withdr1wal of Reactor lessel Material Speciraens from Technical Specifications," dated January 4,1991, 2.0 EVALVATION Technical Specification 3/4.4.9, " Pressure / Temperature Limits," contains a limiting condition for operation for the reactor coolant system (RCS) that limits the rate of change in temperature and pressure to values consistent with the fracture toughness requirements of the American Society of Hechanical Engineers (ASME) Code and Appendix G to Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50).
Changes in the values of these limits are necessary because the fracture toughness properties of f erritic me.terials in the reactor vessci change as a function of the reactor operating time (neutron fluence).
For this reason, the TS include a surveillance requitement, TS 4.4.9.1.2, to require the removal and examination of the irradiated specimens of reactor vessel material.
The licensee examines the specimens to determine the changes in material proparties in accordance with the requirements of Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50.
Table 4.4.5 identifies the material specimens and specifies the schedule for removal of each specimen.
The removal of the schedule for withdrewing material specimens from the TS will eliminate the necessity of a license amendment to make changes to this schedule. However, Section 1.B.3 of Appeno'ix H to 10 CFR Part 50 requires the submitte of a proposed withdrawal schedule for material specimens to the U.S.
Nucler Regulatory Commission (NRC) and apprcval by the NRC before implemen-tation.
Hece, adequate regulatory controls exist to control changes to this schedule without the necessity of subjecting 5t to the license amendment process by including it in TS.
The licensee nas provided a commitment to M0130091921005 I
p ADOCK 05000482 PDR
l include this schedule in the next revision of the updated safety analysis report (USAR).
In addition, the licensee will include any subsequent NRC-approved revisions to this schedule in an update of the USAR. The inclusion of the withdrawal schedule in the USAR provides a source for this information that is readily available as a reference for NRC inspectors and other staff use.
Finally, the surveillance requirements for removing material specimens and the bases section for this specification remain unchanged except for the removal of the reference to Table 4.4-5.
The licensee has proposed a change to TS 4.4.9.2 that is consistent with the guidance provided in Generic Letter 91-01 for the removal of Table 4.4-5 from the TS.
The NRC has reviewed this matter and finds that the proposed changes to the TS for Wolf Creek Generating Station are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Comission's regulations, the Kansas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment u nges a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The NRC staf f 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 occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (57 FR 34592).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sl.22(c)(9).
Pursui.nt 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 Comission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safaty of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Thomas G. Dunning, NRR/0TSB William D. Reckley, NRR/PDIV-2 Date: October 5, 1992
._