ML20116K103
| ML20116K103 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20116K093 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9211170017 | |
| Download: ML20116K103 (2) | |
Text
I
..%'g UNITED STATES
!~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g j
W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
\\...*/
SAFELY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.165 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-50 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT N0. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-289 1.0 INTP,00VCT10N By letter dated August 24, 1992, GPU Nuclear Corporation (the licensee) submitted a request for a change to the Three '<ile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications. The requested changes would revise Technical Specification Section 3.3.4 to delete the current requirements to demonstrate, by testing, that a redundant emergency core cooling system /
component is operable prior to initiating maintenance on the other system / component.
These operability verifications would be accomplished by administrative checks of appropriate plant records (e.g., appropriate surveillance records, temporary modification logs, equipment tagging records, operat'ng logs, and shift turnover logs).
2.0 EVALUATION The requirement to demonstrate the operability, by testing, of a redundant system / component when an emergency core cooling system / component is removed from service for maintenance is a typical requirement that was included in technical specifications when Three Mile Island Unit I was granted its operating license.
However, based on further operating experience, the NRC stat f subsequently dropped'such testing requirements. -Testing of redundant systems / components is not required-in the NRC's Standard Technical Specifications nor in recently issued technical specifications. Deletion of such testing requirements was implemented by the NRC staff since the'added operability assurance provided by such testing is not sufficient to justify the loss of safety function during tne test, provided the periodic surveillance testing is current and that there are no known reasons to suggest that the redundant system / component is inoperable.
The periodic surveillance tests and the proposed verifications that the redundant systems / components are operable are sufficient to demonstrate the operability of the redundant system / component.
Therefore, the proposed changes to delete demonstration of operability by testing of redundant system / components are acceptable.
9211170017 921109 DR ADOCK 0500 9
ji 1
s 2-
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
l In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4 i
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
I 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 j
Part 20.
The NRC 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 off site,- and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previcusly issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no j
public comment on such finding (57 FR 47139). Accordingly, the 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 d
environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of j
the amendment.
5.0 g)). 11LQH i
~
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above,.
that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the l
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 j
defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Francis Young 4
Date: November 9, 1992 i
4 v
I i-i w
.w--
c.,..,-.,,
.-. r-
,m..
g,,~
m.w
,,,y,
.m-
<,w
,-wm,,
m.y9.,-,,,e,q
.,