ML20215A914
| ML20215A914 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215A888 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-60870, TAC-60871, TAC-60872, NUDOCS 8612110445 | |
| Download: ML20215A914 (2) | |
Text
_
+
m as i
8 4't UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
(
WASHINGTON,0. C. 20555 c,
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.131 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-33 AMENDMENT NO.127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-52 AMENDMENT N0.102 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-68 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKETS NOS. 50-259, 50-260 AND 50-296
1.0 INTRODUCTION
l By letter dated February 24, 1986, (TVA BFNP TS 218), the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee or TVA) requested amendments to Facility t.
Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68 for the Browns Ferry NuclearPlant(BFN). The applications by TVA were in response to a request by the NRC staff on April 30, 1984, to revise the Technical Specifications (TS) of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2, and 3 to include not only the primary system but, also the balance of ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 equivalent systems in the requiren.ent to maintain
[
structural integrity through inservice inspection.
I The amendments would replace the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.6.G of BFN Units 1, 2 and 3 technical specifications, to expand applicability to include not only the primary coolant boundary but, also the balance of ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 equivalent systems.
2.0 EVALUATION The regulatins for inservice inspection (10 CFR 50.55a(g)) were changed on February 7:7. 1976, to require that facility inservice inspection (ISI) programs be periodically updated to later editions of the ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI.
In order to eliminate conflicts between ISI requirements in the TS and those specified by regulations, 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(ii) requires that TS be changed to reference 10 CFR 50.55a rather than contain details of specific ISI program. The surveillance requirement for ISI has already been revised to include this reference by BFN amendment numbers 98, 92, and 65. Revising the LCO as described here will' provide additional clarification and broaden the requirements of LC0 3.6 G to be similar to Standard Technical Specifications (STS).
8612110445 861204 PDR ADOCK 05000259 p
+
f j'
., 3.0
SUMMARY
The staff bas reviewed the licensee's submittal dated February 24, 1986.
Based on our review we find that the proposed amendments are in accordance with the guidance provided by the staff in its April 30, 1984 letter, as well as the Section 3.4.8 of the Standard Technical Specifications for BWRs (NUREG-0123, Rev. 3, Dec. 1980). Therefore, we find the proposed proposed changes acceptable.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S The amendments change 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 staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there I
should be no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a i
proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 551.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 951.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment l
need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
i
5.0 CONCLUSION
i We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1)
I 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 Commission's regula-t tions, 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.
Principal Contributor:
H. F. Conrad Dated: December 4,1986 l
1