ML20137G655
| ML20137G655 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 12/27/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137G654 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8601210139 | |
| Download: ML20137G655 (3) | |
Text
.
p gf3 Kf0g*
8 ['
- "g UNITED STATES o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
h WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 o,
~!
g
/
1AFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATION REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 2 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-38 LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY l
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated August 1,1985, Louisiana Power and Light Company (licensee),
requested an emergency change to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating Licensee NPF-38) for the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3.
The proposed change would revise Technical Specificatinn 3/4.7.8 by changing the first inservice inspection period for inaccessible snubbers from four months to two months post-power operation.
i j
2.0 DISCUSSION Technical Specification 4.7.8 delineates the surveillance requirements for hydraulic and mechanical snubbers.
In particular, item (b) allows for independent inspection of accessible and inaccessible snubbers, and requires
~,
that the first inservice visual inspection of each type of snubber shall be performed after four months but within 10 months of comencing " POWER OPERATION" and shall include all hydraulic and mechanical snubbers. The purpose of this required inspection is to identify inoperable snubbers caused by thermal shakedowns in systems during testing and startups after a reasonable "settledown" period of power operation.
Waterford 3 power operation commer ed on March 18, 1985, placing the beginning of the initial snubber inservice visual inspection period at July 18, 1985.
However, in order to take advantage of an unscheduled outage, Louisiana Power and Light Company (LP8L) performed an inservice visual inspection of inaccessible hydraulic and mechanical snubbers during mid-June, 1985, i.e., - approximately three months after commencing power operation.
The requested Technical Specification change would alter the beginning of the first inservice visual inspection period from four months to two months post-power operation for inaccessible snubbers only. Technical Specification 4.7.8.b would be footnoted to reflect the change. With this change, LP8L will be allowed to take credit for the June,1985 visual inspection of inaccessible snubbers.
8601210139 851227 PDR ADOCK 05000382 p
. 3.0 EVALUATION The proposed change allows LP&L to take credit for a visual inspection of inaccessible snubbers conducted approximately three months after commencina power operation rather than the four months required by the existing Technical Specification.
The time period from initial power operation to the beginning of the visual inspection period is intended to ensure exposure of the snubbers to representative plant conditions.
The operating history of Waterford 3 over the initial three-month period covers several heat-ups and cool-downs along with numerous plant trips, both planned and inadvertent. This three-month history constitutes a representative exposure to plant conditions for validation of the initial snubber inspection and validation of snubber operability.
An additional month's delay of the initial inspection to mid-July provides little additional exposure (one heat-up and several inadvertent trips) due to outages experienced during that time.
Additionally, the proposed change is in conformance with ANSI /ASME Standard OM4-1982, " Dynamic Restraints Examination and Performance Testing".
Section 3.2.3, Inservice Examination Frequency, states:
"The initial inservice examination of all snubbers shall be initiated after at least 2 months of power operation and shall be completed prior to 12 calendar months after initial criticality."
The proposed change deals only with a scheduling interval and introduces no new systems, procedures or modes of operation.
As discussed above, the inaccessible snubbers received a representative exposure to plant conditions prior to the initial inspection, ensuring an adequate basis for operability determination.
Subsequent inaccessible snubber inspections will be scheduled in accordance with the existing Technical Specification formula for inspection frequency.
Three out of a total of 210 snubbers inspected by the Waterford 3 plant were identified as having deficiencies during the inspection performed after three months of power operation. The staff has reviewed the inspection results, including l
types of failures and the corrective actions taken and concludes that the intended purpose of the inspection has been accomplished. Therefore, the staff concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable.
4.0 CONTACT WITH STATE OFFICIAL The NRC staff has advised the Administrator, Nuclear Energy Division, Department i
of Environmental Quality, State of Louisiana of the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration.
No comments were received.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves changes in the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or
. commulative occupation radiation exposure. The Commission has oreviously issued proposed findings that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such findinas. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec. 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.
6.0 CONCLUSION
Based upon our evaluation of the proposed chances to the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications, we have concluded that:
there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
We, therefore, conclude that the proposed changes are acceptable, and are hereby incorporated into the Waterford 3 Technical Specification.
Dated: DEC 2 71985
T
-6 DEC 2 71985 4
ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT N0. 2 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NP. NPF-38 FOR WATERFORD 3 DISTRIBUTION
-Docket File-50-382.,
NRC PDR Local PDR PBD7 Reading FMiraglia JLee JWilson Attorney, OELD LHarmon EJordan BGrimes l
JPartlow TBarnhart(4)
WJones WRegan ACRS (10)
OPA RDiggs, LFMB i
4 O
h 1
a
,------,,-,r-,
.e
-,-.n