ML20247H902
| ML20247H902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247H885 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905310362 | |
| Download: ML20247H902 (3) | |
Text
- _ _-__ _ - ____ - -
,[p arag$g UNITED STATES y
6
.g-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%...../
1 ENCLOSURE a f
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.166 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-33 AMENDMENT NO.165 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-52 AMENDMENT NO.137 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-68 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKET N05. 50-259, 50-260 AND 50-296
1.0 INTRODUCTION
NRC Generic Letter 88-01,. dated January 25, 1988, provided licensees of boiling water reactors (BWR) NRC's position on intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) for BWR austenitic stainless steel piping. Early cases of IGSCC were observed.in relatively small diameter piping up until 1982 when cracking was identified in a recirculation system at one BWR plant. As a result, extensive inspection programs were conducted on BWR piping systems.
Substantial efforts in research and development of IGSCC have been sponsored by the BWR Owners' Group. The results of these efforts, along with other related work by vendors, consulting fims, and confirmatory research sponsored by NRC, have resulted in the staff's positions regarding the IGSCC problems.
The technical bases for these positions are detailed in NUREG-0313. Revision 2
" Technical Report on Material Selection and Process Guidelines for BWR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping," dated January 1988. The subject NUREG provides staff posit 19ns on materials, processes, inspection programs, technical specifications, -
and on primary coolant chemistry to minimize and control IGSCC.
Generic. Letter (GL) 88-01 required that all BWR licensees provide a response to the subject letter. By letter dated August 1,1988, the Tennessee Valley Authority ()TVA or the licensee) provided NRC with the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN Program responding to the IGSCC concern. In that letter, TVA comitted to amending the BFN Technical Specifications (TS)' prior to restart by incorporating the NRC proposed TS provided in GL 88-01.
The proposed amendment would add a statement in the BFN TS indicating that the Inservice Inspection Program conforms to the staff positions on schedule, methods, personnel and sample expansion as outlined in GL 88-01.
P
__ _ - _ _ _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _
'2 2.0 EVALUATION Generic Letter 88-01, amcng other things, included the following specific gLidance relative to changing TS.
"A change to the Technical Specifications to include a statement in the section on ISI that the Inservice Inspection Program for piping covered by the scope of this letter will be in conformance with the staff 1
positions on schedule, methods and personnel, and sample expansion l
included in this letter (see enclosed model BWR Standard Technical Specification).
It is recognized that the Inservice Inspection and TeJting sections may be removed from the Technical Specifications in the future in line with the Technical Specifications Improvement programs.
In this case, this requirement shall remain with the ISI section when it is included in an alternative document."
The licensee's proposed amendment request incorporates the provisions of the model Standard Technical Specifications which were included as Attachment B of GL 88-01.~. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed change to be acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments involve a change to a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to the surveillance requirements. 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 is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Consiission has previously issued a proposed finding that these 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 51.22(c)(9).. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement nor environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 C0NCLUSION The Comission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves
~
no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 5175) on February 1, 1989 and consulted with the State of Alabama. No public comments were received and the State of Alabama did t
not have any coments.
l m_
4 3
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) public (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the cornon defense and security nor to the health end safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
G. Gears Dated: May 19, 1989 l
l l
l l
I l
1 I
i
_