ML20133J494
| ML20133J494 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 01/14/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133J487 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9701210039 | |
| Download: ML20133J494 (2) | |
Text
.
oou g
p-4 UNITED STATES a
j j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
't WASHINGTON. D.C. 2066fM1001
%.. j SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.179 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-6 ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE. UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-368
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 By letter dated November 24, 1996, as supplemented by letter dated December 2, 1996 (request for exigent processing), Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 (ANO-2)
Technical Specifications (TSs).
The requested changes would add small break loss-of-coolant accident methodology CENPD-137, Supplement 1-P and its approval letter as a reference to Section 6.9.5.1.
Calculations using this code which was approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) increase the steam generator tube plugging limit to 30% with an associated 10%
reduction in reactor coolant system (RCS) flow. This amendment also corrects a typographical error in Technical Specification 6.9.5.1.8, and Technical Specifications 6.9.5.1.10 through 6.9.5.1.14 are numbered for these changes.
On December 9,1996, the licensee verified that the number of plugged tubes would not exceed their current 10% limit established by the old code.
This determination removed the basis for considering this request as exigent.
Since the potential does exist for the plugging to exceed the 10% in the future, the technical specification amendment request is therefore, a valid request on a normal schedule. Nothing contained in the December 2, 1996, request for exigent processing altered the staff's initial proposed no safety hazard condition determination; therefore, renoticing was not warranted.
2.0 EVALUATION This change adds e ceferences small break loss-of-coolant accident calculational method by Combustion Engineering. The code, CENPD-137, Supplement 1-P, was previously approved and that approval was conveyed to the licensee on September 27, 1977, by K. Kniel (NRC).
Calculations using the approved code include parameters for small break loss-of-coolant accidents assuming 30% plugged tubes per steam generator.
Since that code was previously evaluated and approved, invoking that code for the small break loss-of-coolant accident is acceptable by the NRC.
In addition, such analysis using the approved code and assuming 30% steam generator tube plugging with its associated flow reduction demonstrate conformance with 10 CFR 50.46(b) 4 9701210039 970114 PDR ADOCK 05000368 P
' requirements. Therefore, 30% tube plugging value and/or its associated RCS flow are acceptable for inclusion in the ANO-2 TSs. Other changes are administrative and pose no impact on any operational aspects of the plant.
3.0 STATE 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.
4.0 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 l
Part 20. The NRC staff determined that the amendment does not increase the amounts or changes the types of any offsite effluent, and that there is no increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Comission previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involved no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (61 FR 64173). 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 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 safety 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:
K. Salehi Date:
January 14, 1997