ML20070M070

Application for Amend to License NPF-29,deleting Table 4.4.6.1.3-1 Re Schedule for Withdrawal of Reactor Vessel Matl Specimens from Tech Specs.Amend Also Deletes Portion of Surveillance Requirement 4.4.6.1.4

ML20070M070
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	03/15/1991
From:	Cottle W ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML20070M071	List: ML20070M070
References
GL-91-01, GL-91-1, GNRO-91-00047, GNRO-91-47, NUDOCS 9103210047
Download: ML20070M070 (6)

Text

p L[. g

-:: - Entergy f7 T"**"'

Operations

= =;n!"

4

- ~ - -

-M W, T. Cott4 mm-kk+L94Al wit 7 % ts March 15, 1991 i

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Station P1-13',

Washington, D.C.

20555 Attention:

Document Control Desk

Subject:

Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Unit 1 6

Docket No.' 50-416 License No. NPW 29 Implementation of OL 91-01: Removal of the Schedule for the Withdrawal of Peactor Vessel tiatarial-Specimens i

(PCOL-91/05)

Reference:

NRC Letter dated January 4, 1991, Removal of the Schedule or the Withdrawal of Reactor Vessel Matarjal Specimens from Technical Spec.ifications (Generic Letter ill-01).

GNRO-91/00047 Gentlement

-Entergy Operations, Inc, la submittlag by this letter a proposed amendment-to the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (OGNS) Operatlug License os

, requested in the reference letter.

The proposed amendment would delete the Surveillance Specimen Withdrawal Schedula, Table 4.4,6.1.3-1, from Lthe? Technical SpecificatLons. Also, the portion of Surveillance Requirement 4.4.6.1.4' relating to.the reactor vessel e terial i

' surveillance withdrawal achedule would be removed'from the Technical

' Specifications and reloc.ated to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.

~The proposed chaages are considered to be administrative in nature since the program for surveillance of reactor vessel asterial will continue to

.be~ governed by 10CFR Part 50, Aopendix U.

In accordance with the-provielons of 10CFRSO.4, the signed original:of the requested amendment is er. closed. ~Attachmeng 2 provides the technical justification and discussion to support the requested amendment.

~This amendment has been reviewed and accepted by the P]snt Safety Review Committee and'the Safety Review Committee.

G9103062/SNLICFLR - 1

.4 n

-9103210047 910315

// g g;f a

iD DR ADOCK0500g6

/[f

i March 15, 1991

-GNRO-91/00047 Page 2 of 3 I

tesed on the guidelines presented in 100FR50.92, Entergy Oper r; ions has concluded that this proposed amendment involves no 91gnificant hazards consideratiens.

The proposed changes to the TS axe consistent with and conform to the

.guidanca in GL 91-01.

Therefore, Eutergy Operations is reqJeSting expeditious review by the GGNS NRC Project Manager on this subelttal in accordance with GL 91 01, tours truly, ePW WTC/JS/mte attaci.montsa 1.

Affirmation per 10CFR50.30 l

2.

GGNS PCOL-91/05 l

cci Mr. D. C. liintz (w/a)

Mr. J. Mathis (w/a)

Mr. R. B. McGehee (w/a) l-Mr. H. S. Reynolils (w/.1) f1r.11. L. Thomas (w/o)

Mr. F. W. Titus (w/a) 9 Mr. Stewart D. Ebnnttr (w/a)

Regional Administrator

=

6 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta St.,

N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30 23 I

Hr. L. L. Kintner, Project Manager (w/a')

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop 11D21 Washington, D.C.

20555 Dr. Alton B. Cobb (w/a)

State Health Officer State 9 card of !!ealth P-.0.. Box 1700 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 G9103062/SNLICFLR - 2

BEFORE Tile UNIT.D.1TA' 3 3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e,m z

/- / - n k'

LICENSE NO. NPF-29 p-

,.-Fi i S

DOCKET NO. 50-416 IN Tile MATTER OF MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGitT COMPANY and SYSTEtt ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.

a'.id SOUTil MISSISSIPPI ELECTRIC POWER ASSOrr4 }qN and ENTERnY OPERAYtONU, INC.

\\'

MFMiM1D'i I, W. T. fottle, being duly worn, atne tN.t I am Vire Presideut -

Operations G3NS of Entergy Operations, Inc.; that on behcif of Entergy Operations, Inc., System Ene'cgy Resources, Inc., and South Misc 1ssippi Electric Power-Ass'ociation I am atithorized by Entergy Operations, Inc. to i

nign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, this application

- for ascMnont of the Operating License of the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station; that I signei'this apolicC lon as Vice President, Operations GGNS of Entergy Ope:stin s, Inc.; and that the statements made and the matters set tarth therain are t. rue and correct to the best of my knowledga, inforsation and belief.-

c a::$

F-~~' h W. T. Cottle ST E OF MISSISSIYP1 COUNT'f OP CLAIl10F#3 SUBSCNIGED AND WORN 10 beforg pe, a Notary Public in and for the County

,j-Aud State abave named, this

\\O day of O._,_, 1991.-

s.

(TEAL) b t:n G%

am N'otary Pqb}it].

Hy.e>muission expires:

\\,

w :9,m n,

• m O'1103062/SNLICFLR - 4

1

' to GNRO-91/00047 A.

SUBJECT:

1.

Nh-91/04 kemoval of the Schedule for the Withdrawal of Rer.ctor Yessel Hrt* rial Specimens 2.

Affected Technical Specificationni a.

Reactor Coolant System - Surveillence Requirement 4.4.6.1.4, Page 3/4 4-20 b.

Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program - Withdrawal Schedule Tabic 4.4.6.1.3-1. Page 3/4 4-22 1

B.

DISCUSSION 1.

On January 4,1991 the NRC issued Generic Letter (GL) 91-01

" Removal of the Schedule for the W2thdrawal of Reactor Vessel Haterial Specimens from Technical Spt: lfications." The purpose of GL 91-01 was to provide gridance to 11consees for the prepnration of a request for a license neendment to remove from the Technical Specifications (TS) the schedule for the withdrawal of reactor vessel material surveillance spacimens.

This TS change is requested because 10CIR Part 50, Appendix 11 governs the withdrawal schedule for material specimens and requires NRC approval prior to implementation.

llence, the schedule in thc TS duplicates controls aircady established by Appendix 11.

Removal of this information from the TS will climinate the unnecessary use of GGNS and NRC resources to process future license amendmentb.

2.

Consistent with the NRC guidance provided in GL 91-01, the following TS changes are proposed:

n.

Revise TS 4.4.6.1.4 to deletet... "in accordance with the schedule in Table 4.4.6.1.3-1".

b.

Delete Table 4.4.6.1.3-1 in its entirety.

3.

Attached ;o ;his proposed TS change are the affected TS pages marked up to reflect the above described changes.

C.

JUST:irit!.i!ON:

1.

Remm al frot the TS tne schedule for the withdrawal of reactor vessel material specimens will allow future adjustments to the withdrawal schedule to be made without submittal of a license amendment request.

2.

The schedule for the withdrawal of reactor vessel material specimens will be incorporated into the next revision of the GGNS Uf ated Final Safety Analysis Report (UPSAR) as delineated in d

Gb 91-01.

G9103062/SNhlCFLR - 5

Attochment a to GNRO-91/00047 3.

The TS surveillance requirement in maintained to require removal, examination, and determination of changen in material propertien pursuant to 10CFR Part 50, Appendix Hi therefore, the proposed change will not result in any lons of regulatory control.

4.

The proposed Itcense amendment to remove the nurveillance specimen withdrawal achedule is considered to be administrative in nature since the program for surveillance of reactor vennel material will still be governed by 10CTR Part 50, Appendix 11.

D.

NO SIGN 1rlCANT llAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS 1.

Entergy Operations, Inc. is proponing that TS Table 4.4.6.1.3 1 be deleted and Surveillanco Requiremont 4.4.6.1.4 be revised.

The p m,pocod thanges are connidorod administrativo in naturn sinca the progran, for surveillance of reactor vennel material will cootinue to ce governed by 10Crk Part 50. Appendix H.

2.

The Commisalon han provided standards for determining whether a no significant hazards consideration exiata an stated in 10CFR50.92(c). A proposed amendment to an operating license involves no significant. hazards if operation of the facility in accordance wit.h the proposed amendment would not:

(1) involvo a significant increano in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluntod i or (2) creat.o the ponni'ailty of a new or dif ferent kind of accident f rom any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involvo a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

3.

GGNS han evaluated the no algnificant. har.ards considerations in its requent for a licenso amendment.

In accordance with 100FR50.91(a), GGNS in providing the following a alynin of the proposed amendment against the three standards in 10CFR50.92:

a.

No significant increano in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated reaults from this change.

The proposed change doon not significantly increase the probability or consequencen of an accident previously evaluated becauno the reactor vensol material survoillanco program is not affected by this proponed e,hange.

Implementetion of the proposed chango will delete a licenso requirement ti at ja redundant to the Code of Fedoral Regulationn. Thus, this proponed TS is considered to be administrativo in nature.

Thin change would do; renuit in a significant increaso in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

09103062/SNI.lCPI,R - 6

, to GNRO-91/00047 s

b.

This change would not create the possibility of a new or dif ferent kind of accident from any previously analyr.ed.

The proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated because implementation of this -hange will not alter plant configuration or modes of operation.

Compliance with existing regulations will ensure continued confirience in reactor vessel material properties.

Therefore, the requested revisions will not create the possibility of a new or different accident ' rom any previously analyzed, c.

This change would not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

The proposed change will not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety because the evaluation of reactor vessel motorial embrittlement is not altered by this change.

Table 4.4.6.3-1 will be relocated to the UFSAR where the requirements of 10cFR part 50, Appendix 11 will still apply.

Therefore, the proponed change will not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

s 4.

Based on the above evaluation, Entergy Operations has concluded that operation in accordance with the proposed amendment involves no significant hazards considerations.

f I

l k

.09103062/SNLICFLR - 7