ML063450312

Issuance of License Amendments 251 and 233 Steam Generator Tube Integrity Technical Specifications Based on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Document TSTF-449, Steam Generator Tube Integrity.

ML063450312
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	02/13/2007
From:	Boska J NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-1
To:	Kansler M Entergy Nuclear Operations
Boska J, NRR, 301-415-2901
References
TAC MD0084, TAC MD2178, TAC MD2179, TAC MD0083, FOIA/PA-2016-0148
Download: ML063450312 (16)

Text

February 13, 2007 Mr. Michael R. Kansler President Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601

SUBJECT:

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS RE: STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION BASED ON TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION TASK FORCE (TSTF) DOCUMENT TSTF-449, STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY (TAC NOS. MD0083, MD0084, MD2178, AND MD2179)

Dear Mr. Kansler:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 251 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-26 for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 and Amendment No. 233 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-64 for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3. The amendments consist of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated May 31, 2006, as supplemented by letter dated August 30, 2006.

The amendments revise the TSs associated with steam generator (SG) tube integrity consistent with Revision 4 to TSTF Standard Technical Specification Change Document TSTF-449, Steam Generator Tube Integrity. A notice of availability for this TS improvement using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2005 (70 FR 24126). As stated in your letter dated February 21, 2006, these amendments are also the modification of the SG portion of the TSs requested in NRC Generic Letter (GL) 2006-01, "Steam Generator Tube Integrity and Associated Technical Specifications." The NRC staff considers these amendments to be an acceptable and complete response to GL 2006-01.

This completes the NRC staffs efforts on TAC Nos. MD0083, MD0084, MD2178, and MD2179.

M. Kansler A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

/RA/

John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-247 and 50-286

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 251 to DPR-26

2. Amendment No. 233 to DPR-64

3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page

M. Kansler A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

/RA/

John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-247 and 50-286

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 251 to DPR-26

2. Amendment No. 233 to DPR-64

3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page Amendment No.: ML063450312 Package No.: ML063450333 *See safety evaluation dated September 28, 2006 OFFICE LPL1-1/PM LPL1-1/LA ITSB/BC DCI OGC LPL1-1/BC(A)

NAME JBoska SLittle TKobetz* KKarwoski DRoth DPickett DATE 1/31/07 1/31/07 9/28/06 2/02/07 2/08/07 2/13/07 Official Record Copy

DATED: February 13, 2007 AMENDMENT NO. 251 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-26 INDIAN POINT UNIT 2 AND AMENDMENT NO. 233 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-64 INDIAN POINT UNIT 3 PUBLIC LPL1-1 R/F RidsNrrDorlLpla RidsNrrDirsItsb RidsNrrPMJBoska RidsNrrLASLittle ECobey, RI GHill (4)

RidsOGCMailCenter RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter RidsNrrDirsItsb KKarwoski TWertz cc: Plant Mailing list

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 & 3 cc:

Mr. Gary J. Taylor Ms. Charlene D. Faison Chief Executive Officer Manager, Licensing Entergy Operations, Inc. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

1340 Echelon Parkway 440 Hamilton Avenue Jackson, MS 39213 White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. John T. Herron Mr. Michael J. Columb Senior Vice President and Director of Oversight Chief Operating Officer Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 440 Hamilton Avenue 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. James Comiotes Mr. Fred R. Dacimo Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance Site Vice President Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Indian Point Energy Center Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB 450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Mr. Patric Conroy Mr. Paul Rubin Manager, Licensing General Manager, Plant Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Indian Point Energy Center Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB 450 Broadway P. O. Box 249 P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Assistant General Counsel Mr. Oscar Limpias Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Vice President Engineering 440 Hamilton Avenue Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. White Plains, NY 10601 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. Peter R. Smith, President New York State Energy, Research, and Mr. Christopher Schwarz Development Authority Vice President, Operations Support 17 Columbia Circle Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Albany, NY 12203-6399 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. Paul Eddy New York State Department Mr. John F. McCann of Public Service Director, Licensing 3 Empire State Plaza Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Albany, NY 12223 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 & 3 cc:

Regional Administrator, Region I Mr. William T. Russell U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission PWR SRC Consultant 475 Allendale Road 400 Plantation Lane King of Prussia, PA 19406 Stevensville, MD 21666-3232 Senior Resident Inspectors Office Mr. Jim Riccio Indian Point 2 Greenpeace U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 702 H Street, NW P.O. Box 59 Suite 300 Buchanan, NY 10511 Washington, DC 20001 Senior Resident Inspectors Office Mr. Phillip Musegaas Indian Point 3 Riverkeeper, Inc.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 828 South Broadway P.O. Box 59 Tarrytown, NY 10591 Buchanan, NY 10511 Mr. Mark Jacobs Mr. Charles Donaldson, Esquire IPSEC Assistant Attorney General 46 Highland Drive New York Department of Law Garrison, NY 10524 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Mayor, Village of Buchanan 236 Tate Avenue Buchanan, NY 10511 Mr. Raymond L. Albanese Four County Coordinator 200 Bradhurst Avenue Unit 4 Westchester County Hawthorne, NY 10532 Mr. William DiProfio PWR SRC Consultant 139 Depot Road East Kingston, NH 03827 Mr. Garry Randolph PWR SRC Consultant 1750 Ben Franklin Drive, 7E Sarasota, FL 34236

ENTERGY NUCLEAR INDIAN POINT 2, LLC ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

DOCKET NO. 50-247 INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 2 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 251 License No. DPR-26

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) dated May 31, 2006, as supplemented on August 30, 2006, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. DPR-26 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 251 are hereby incorporated in the license. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of its issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/RA/

Douglas V. Pickett, Acting Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: February 13, 2007

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 251 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-26 DOCKET NO. 50-247 Replace the following page of the License with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Page Insert Page 3 3 Replace the following pages of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Pages Insert Pages i i ii ii iii iii iv iv 1.1-3 1.1-3 3.4.13-1 3.4.13-1 3.4.13-2 3.4.13-2

---

3.4.17-1

---

3.4.17-2 5.5-6 5.5-6 5.5-7 5.5-7 5.5-8 5.5-8 5.5-16 ---

5.5-17 ---

5.6-4 5.6-4 5.6-5 5.6-5

ENTERGY NUCLEAR INDIAN POINT 3, LLC ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

DOCKET NO. 50-286 INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 3 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 233 License No. DPR-64

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee) dated May 31, 2006, as supplemented on August 30, 2006, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. DPR-64 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 233, are hereby incorporated in the license. ENO shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of its issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/RA/

Douglas V. Pickett, Acting Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: February 13, 2007

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 233 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-64 DOCKET NO. 50-286 Replace the following page of the License with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Page Insert Page 3 3 Replace the following pages of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove Pages Insert Pages i i ii ii iii iii iv iv v ---

1.1-4 1.1-4 3.4.13-1 3.4.13-1 3.4.13-2 3.4.13-2

---

3.4.17-1

---

3.4.17-2 5.0-13 5.0-13 5.0-14 5.0-14 5.0-15 5.0-15 5.0-16 ---

5.0-17 ---

5.0-18 ---

5.0-19 ---

5.0-36 5.0-36

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 251 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-64 AND AMENDMENT NO. 233 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-26 ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-247 AND 50-286

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By application dated May 31, 2006 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML061590405), as supplemented by letter dated August 30, 2006 (ADAMS Accession No. ML062560048), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee), requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (IP2 and IP3). The supplement dated August 30, 2006, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffs original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.

The proposed changes would revise the existing steam generator (SG) tube surveillance program. The changes are modeled after TS Task Force (TSTF) document TSTF-449, Revision 4, Steam Generator Tube Integrity, and the model safety evaluation prepared by the NRC that was published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10298) under the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). The scope of the application includes changes to the definition of leakage, changes to the primary-to-secondary leakage requirements, changes to the SG tube surveillance program (SG tube integrity), and changes to the SG reporting requirements.

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

The background, description, and applicability of the proposed changes associated with the SG tube integrity issue and the applicable regulatory requirements were included in the NRC staffs model safety evaluation (SE) published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10298). The Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Technical Specification; Improvement To Modify Requirements Regarding Steam Generator Tube Integrity; Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process, was published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2005 (70 FR 24126), which made the model SE available for licensees to reference.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

In its May 31, 2006, application, and August 30, 2006, supplement, the licensee proposed changes to the TSs that are modeled after TSTF Standard Technical Specification Change Document, TSTF-449, Steam Generator Tube Integrity. There were minor differences between TSTF-449 and the licensee's application. These included differences in the facility licensing basis (than that discussed in TSTF-449) and differences in TS numbering, since the licensee has a different TS numbering scheme than that assumed in TSTF-449.

With respect to the differences in the facility licensing basis, the differences did not invalidate the technical evaluation on TSTF-449; rather they resulted in the licensee having to slightly deviate from some of the modifications discussed in TSTF-449. For example, in the Bases section for SG Tube Integrity, TSTF-449 indicated that the accident analysis for a steam generator tube rupture assumed the contaminated secondary fluid was only briefly released to the atmosphere via safety valves and the majority is discharged to the main condenser. Since the licensee has a different licensing basis than the one described in the standard TSs (i.e.,

TSTF-449), they modified the TSTF-449 wording to reflect their existing licensing Bases.

Another example is that the licensee has significantly more detail concerning their accident analyses in the Bases section on operational leakage than that assumed in TSTF-449. As a result, some of the changes to the Bases section in TSTF-449 were not applicable. Since these differences were minor in nature, they were consistent with the plant's licensing basis (the level of detail incorporated into the TS Bases), or they were consistent with the intent of TSTF-449, the NRC staff determined they were acceptable.

Similarly, since the differences in numbering of the TSs is administrative in nature and did not affect the technical adequacy of the submittal, the NRC staff determined they were acceptable.

The remainder of the application was consistent with, or more limiting than, TSTF-449 with one exception, as discussed below. In TSTF-449, the limit on normal operating primary-to-secondary leakage rate through any one SG was less than the leakage used in the safety analysis. However, for IP2, the normal operating primary-to-secondary leakage limit (150 gallons-per-day (gpd) per SG) is identical to the accident-induced primary-to-secondary leakage limit for design-basis accidents (DBAs) other than an SG tube rupture. Even though the normal operating primary-to-secondary leakage limit and the accident-induced leakage limit have a different technical basis, it is not uncommon that the two limits are the same (note, the normal operating primary-to-secondary leakage limit cannot be greater than the accident-induced leakage limit). The normal operating primary-to-secondary leakage limit is intended to limit the frequency of SG tube ruptures (i.e., it is an early indicator of a potential loss of the structural integrity of an SG tube); whereas the accident-induced leakage limit ensures that the dose consequences associated with this leakage are acceptable. The NRC staff evaluated the acceptability of this difference in leakage limits between TSTF-449 and the licensees submittal.

During a DBA, the leak rate may increase above what was present during normal operation.

Therefore, it may be necessary to ensure that the operational leak rate is kept below its limit in order to meet the accident limit. An increase in leakage during a DBA can be a result of either:

(1) the higher differential pressure between the primary coolant system and the secondary system associated with a DBA thus causing the leak rate from flaws that leak during normal operation to leak at higher rates; or (2) the higher stress loadings associated with a DBA causing a flaw that was not leaking during normal operation to leak during the DBA.

The licensee indicated that they would administratively limit the amount of primary-to-secondary leakage to 75 gpd. This administrative limit is intended to provide margin between the operating and accident induced leakage limit consistent with TSTF-449. The NRC staff notes that although there may be margin between these limits, the staffs approval of TSTF-449 (and this amendment) was not intended to ensure that satisfying the operating leakage limit would result in the accident induced leakage limit being met. Rather, the NRC staff reviewed the adequacy of the proposed TS criteria for operational and accident-induced leakage based on the technical basis associated with each limit. Namely, that the operating leakage limit is effective at limiting the frequency of tube ruptures and the accident induced leakage limit is consistent with the plants design and licensing basis. Since the TS criteria on operational leakage at IP2 is consistent with TSTF-449 and the accident-induced leakage limit is consistent with the licensees accident analysis, the NRC staff finds the licensees proposed TS criteria on these values acceptable.

The proposed TS changes establish a programmatic, largely performance-based regulatory framework for ensuring SG tube integrity is maintained. The NRC staff finds that it addresses key shortcomings of the current framework by ensuring that SG programs are focused on accomplishing the overall objective of maintaining tube integrity. It incorporates performance criteria for evaluating tube integrity that the NRC staff finds consistent with the structural margins and the degree of leak tightness assumed in the current plant licensing basis. The NRC staff finds that maintaining these performance criteria provides reasonable assurance that the SGs can be operated safely without increase in risk.

The revised TSs will contain limited specific details concerning how the SG Program is to achieve the required objective of maintaining tube integrity; the intent being that the licensee will have the flexibility to determine the specific strategy for meeting this objective. The NRC staff finds that the revised TSs include sufficient regulatory constraints on the establishment and implementation of the SG Program such as to provide reasonable assurance that tube integrity will be maintained.

Failure to meet the performance criteria will be reportable pursuant to the requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73. The NRC reactor oversight process provides a process by which the NRC staff can verify that the licensee has identified any SG Program deficiencies that may have contributed to such an occurrence and that appropriate corrective actions have been implemented.

The licensee also requested changes to the table of contents to the TSs. These changes are administrative in nature and did not affect the technical adequacy of the submittal, therefore the NRC staff determined they were acceptable.

The NRC staff finds that the TS changes proposed by the licensee in its May 31, 2006, application and August 30, 2006, supplement conform to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36 and establish a TS framework that will provide reasonable assurance that SG tube integrity is maintained without undue risk to public health and safety.

The licensee included in its application the revised TS Bases to be implemented with the TS change. The NRC staff finds that the TS Bases Control Program is the appropriate process for updating the affected TS Bases pages and has, therefore, not included the affected Bases pages with this amendment.

In summary, the NRC staff determined that the model SE is applicable to this review (with the exceptions as discussed above) and finds the proposed changes acceptable.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New York State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendment changes 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 NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (71 FR 43531). Accordingly, the amendment meets 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 or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

6.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has concluded, 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

7.0 REFERENCES

A complete list of references used to complete this review can be found in the NRCs model SE published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10298) and made available May 6, 2005 (70 FR 24126).

Principal Contributor: Trent L. Wertz Date: February 13, 2007