ML20134K872

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 84 to License DPR-36

ML20134K872
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	08/20/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20134K856	List: ML20134K854 ML20134K865 ML20134K872
References
NUDOCS 8508300480
Download: ML20134K872 (2)

Text

-_g - - -' =AI -- 4 -

~

v.a at % .

f $% ' UNITED STATES

$# ?i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g wAsmacrow. o. c. 20sss s.....-

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATING TO AMENDMENT NO. 84 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-36 MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-309 Introduction

~

By lette.rs dated Marc.h 5, June 11 and June 20, 1985, the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company (MYAPC) requested changes to the Technical Specifications of theMaineYankeeAtomicPowerStation(MYAPS)toprovideforamoreextensive inspection of steam generator tubes in areas where degradation is expected.

Normal random sampling inspection of tubes is to be provided in other areas

! of the steam generator. The Technical Specification changes also update the r eporting requirements for the inspection results found to be in Category C-3

~

of Table 4.10-2.

Discussion We have examined in detail the proposed Technical Specification changes.

Most of the changes were editorial in nature, i.e., removing duplicate words in sentences, changing characters to text, and spelling corrections. The other changes included a definition of " Critical Area" that was added to the l acceptance criteria. The exception to the requirements for declaring the l steam generator operable was redefined. The exception includes the requirements that (1) the critical area (s) be defined and bounded, (2) a 100%

tube random inspection of the critical steam generator area (s)(be tube inspection conducted, sample and 4.10-2) per new table (3) a standard be conducted on the rest of the tubes in the steam generator.

Evaluation We have evaluated the results of the previous steam generator inspections of 1982 and 1984 in order to determine any progression of tube degradation and the relevance of the limiting leak rate for operation as stated in Technical i Specifications 3.14.C.5. We find that the stated leak rate is adequate. We also find that the proposed inspection changes that require 100% tube inspection in " critical areas" and standard random steam generator tube inspection in the rest of the S.G. will increase the number of tubes inspected during the first sample inspection and will adequately monitor and l detect tube degradation in the steam generators. The increased number of tubes inspected will give greater assurance that the margin of safety is maintained in the steam generator. The changes in the prompt reporting 8508300400 e50820 PDR ADOCM 05000309 P PDR

-_. _ ._- . _ _ ._ ._~ . _ - _ ___ .._-.. _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _-

[' -

i l'!

I ~

requirements when tube inspection results are in Category C-3 of Table 4.10-2 are set forth in paragraph 50.72(b)(2) of 10 CFR 50. The editorial changes mentioned above were insignificant and did not alter the intent nor the requirements of the Technical Specifications.

We find that the proposed changes to the Technical Specifications of MYAPS do l

not involve a significant change in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a reduction in the margin of safety. Therefore, the proposed Technical Specification changes requested in the licensee's letters dated i March 5, June 11 and June 20, 1985 are acceptable.

Environmental Conclusion i

This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.

The staff has. determined that the amendment involves no significant increase i 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 I or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards

[ consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, i this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuantto10CFR51.22(b),noenvironmental

impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

Conclusion

! Based upon the above evaluation, we find that the proposed changes to the

! Technical Specifications of the MYAPS to be acceptable. We have concluded, i 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted

in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to i the health and safety of the public.

Date: August 20, 1985 i'

Principal Contributor:

P. Sears i

i l

i l

1

-. -..-,-.- -. _ . , . - . _ . . - - - -