ML040720668
| ML040720668 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 03/09/2004 |
| From: | Kalyanam N NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD4 |
| To: | Venable J Entergy Operations |
| Kalyanam N,NRR/DLPM,415-1480 | |
| References | |
| TAC MC1594 | |
| Download: ML040720668 (11) | |
Text
March 9, 2004 Mr. Joseph E. Venable Vice President Operations Entergy Operations, Inc.
17265 River Road Killona, LA 70066-0751
SUBJECT:
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE: ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR HYDROGEN RECOMBINERS AND HYDROGEN MONITORS (TAC NO. MC1594)
Dear Mr. Venable:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 192 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-38 for the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3. The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated December 19, 2003.
The amendment revises the TSs by eliminating the requirements associated with hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen analyzers. The changes support implementation of a revision to 10 CFR 50.44, Standards for Combustible Gas Control System in Light-Water-Cooled Power Reactors. A notice of availability for this TS improvement using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on September 25, 2003 (68 FR 55416).
A copy of our related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. The Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
N. Kalyanam, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate IV Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-382
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 192 to NPF-38
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page
March 9, 2004 Mr. Joseph E. Venable Vice President Operations Entergy Operations, Inc.
17265 River Road Killona, LA 70066-0751
SUBJECT:
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE: ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR HYDROGEN RECOMBINERS AND HYDROGEN MONITORS (TAC NO. MC1594)
Dear Mr. Venable:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 192 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-38 for the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3. The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated December 19, 2003.
The amendment revises the TSs by eliminating the requirements associated with hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen analyzers. The changes support implementation of a revision to 10 CFR 50.44, Standards for Combustible Gas Control System in Light-Water-Cooled Power Reactors. A notice of availability for this TS improvement using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on September 25, 2003 (68 FR 55416).
A copy of our related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. The Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
N. Kalyanam, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate IV Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-382
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 192 to NPF-38
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC RidsNrrPMNKalyanam RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter PDIV-1 Reading RidsNrrPMWReckley GHill (2)
RidsNrrDlpmPdiv (HBerkow) RidsNrrLADJohnson DRIP/RORP/TSS RidsNrrDlpmPdivLpdiv1 (RGramm) RidsOgcRp RidsRgn4MailCenter (AHowell)
Accession No.:ML040720668 OFFICE PDIV-1/PM PDIV-1/LA PDIV-1/LPM OGC PDIV-1/SC NAME NKalyanam DJohnson WReckley CMarco RGramm DATE 2/23/04 2/23/04 2/3/04 3/1/04 3/5/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-382 WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 192 License No. NPF-38
- 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A. The application for amendment by Entergy Operations, Inc. (EOI) dated December 19, 2003, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commissions 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 Commissions 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 Commissions 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. NPF-38 is hereby amended to read as follows:
- 2. Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 192, and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, are hereby incorporated in the license. EOI shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
- 3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days from the date of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA/
Robert A. Gramm, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate IV Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: March 9, 2004
ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 192 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-38 DOCKET NO. 50-382 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 Insert Page VII Page VII Page XII Page XII Page 3/4 6-21 Page 3/4 6-21 Page 3/4 6-34 ----
Page 3/4 6-35 ----
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 192 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-38 ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated December 19, 2003, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3). The proposed changes would delete the TS requirements associated with hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen monitors.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) has revised 10 CFR 50.44, Standards for Combustible Gas Control System in Light-Water-Cooled Power Reactors. The amended standards eliminated the requirements for hydrogen recombiners and relaxed the requirements for hydrogen and oxygen monitoring. In letters dated December 17, 2002, and May 12, 2003, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) proposed to remove requirements for hydrogen recombiners and hydrogen and oxygen monitors from the standard TSs (STS) (NUREGs 1430 - 1434) on behalf of the industry to incorporate the amended standards. This proposed change is designated TSTF-447.
The NRC staff prepared this model safety evaluation (SE) for the elimination of requirements regarding containment hydrogen recombiners and the removal of requirements from the TSs for containment hydrogen and oxygen monitors and solicited public comment (67 FR 50374, published August 2, 2002) in accordance with the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process (CLIIP). The use of the CLIIP in this matter is intended to help the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to remove the hydrogen recombiner and hydrogen and oxygen monitor requirements from the TSs. Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which this model applies were informed (68 FR 55416, September 25, 2003) that they could request amendments conforming to the model, and, in such requests, should confirm the applicability of the SE to their reactors and provide the requested plant-specific verifications and commitments.
2.0 BACKGROUND
Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power Reactors, was issued on March 20, 2000.
The CLIIP is intended to improve the efficiency of the NRC licensing processes. This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the STS in a manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on
proposed changes to the STS following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The NRC staff evaluates any comments received for a proposed change to the STS and either reconsiders the change or proceeds with announcing the availability of the change for proposed adoption by licensees. Those licensees opting to apply for the subject change to the TSs are responsible for reviewing the staffs evaluation, referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant-specific information. Each amendment application made in response to the notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
The Commissions regulatory requirements related to the content of TSs are set forth in 10 CFR 50.36, "Technical specifications." This regulation requires that the TSs include items in five specific categories. These categories include 1) safety limits, limiting safety system settings and limiting control settings, 2) limiting conditions for operation (LCO), 3) surveillance requirements,
- 4) design features, and 5) administrative controls. However, the regulation does not specify the particular TSs to be included in a plants license.
Additionally, 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) sets forth four criteria to be used in determining whether an LCO is required to be included in the TSs. These criteria are as follows:
- 1. Installed instrumentation that is used to detect, and indicate in the control room, a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
- 2. A process variable, design feature, or operating restriction that is an initial condition of a design-basis accident or transient analysis that assumes either the failure of or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
- 3. A structure, system, or component that is part of the primary success path and which functions or actuates to mitigate a design-basis accident or transient that either assumes the failure of or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
- 4. A structure, system or component which operating experience or probabilistic risk assessment has shown to be significant to public health and safety.
Existing LCOs and related surveillances included as TS requirements which satisfy any of the criteria stated above must be retained in the TSs. Those TS requirements which do not satisfy these criteria may be relocated to other licensee-controlled documents.
As part of the rulemaking that revised 10 CFR 50.44, the Commission retained requirements for ensuring a mixed atmosphere, inerting Mark I and II containments, and providing hydrogen control systems capable of accommodating an amount of hydrogen generated from a metal-water reaction involving 75 percent of the fuel cladding surrounding the active fuel region in Mark III and ice condenser containments. The Commission eliminated the design-basis loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) hydrogen release from 10 CFR 50.44 and consolidated the requirements for hydrogen and oxygen monitoring to 10 CFR 50.44, while relaxing safety classifications and licensee commitments to certain design and qualification criteria. The Commission also relocated without change the hydrogen control requirements in 10 CFR 50.34(f) to 10 CFR 50.44 and the high point vent requirements from 10 CFR 50.44 to 10 CFR 50.46a.
3.0 EVALUATION The ways in which the requirements and recommendations for combustible gas control were incorporated into the licensing bases of commercial nuclear power plants varied as a function of when plants were licensed. Plants that were operating at the time of the Three Mile Island (TMI),
Unit 2 accident are likely to have been the subject of confirmatory orders that imposed the combustible gas control functions described in NUREG-0737, Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements, as obligations. The issuance of plant specific amendments to adopt these changes, which would remove hydrogen recombiner and hydrogen monitoring controls from TSs, supersede the combustible gas control-specific requirements imposed by post-TMI confirmatory orders.
3.1 Hydrogen Recombiners The revised 10 CFR 50.44 no longer defines a design-basis LOCA hydrogen release, and eliminates requirements for hydrogen control systems to mitigate such a release. The installation of hydrogen recombiners and/or vent and purge systems required by 10 CFR 50.44(b)(3) was intended to address the limited quantity and rate of hydrogen generation that was postulated from a design-basis LOCA. The Commission has found that this hydrogen release is not risk-significant because the design-basis LOCA hydrogen release does not contribute to the conditional probability of a large release up to approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after the onset of core damage. In addition, these systems were ineffective at mitigating hydrogen releases from risk-significant beyond design-basis accidents. Therefore, the Commission eliminated the hydrogen release associated with a design-basis LOCA from 10 CFR 50.44 and the associated requirements that necessitated the need for the hydrogen recombiners and the backup hydrogen vent and purge systems. As a result, the staff finds that requirements related to hydrogen recombiners no longer meet any of the four criteria in 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) for retention in TSs and may be relocated to other licensee-controlled documents for all plants.
3.2 Hydrogen Monitoring Equipment Section 50.44(b)(1), the STS, and plant-specific TSs currently contain requirements for monitoring hydrogen. Licensees have also made commitments to design and qualification criteria for hydrogen monitors in Item II.F.1, Attachment 6 of NUREG-0737 and Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.97, Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident. The hydrogen monitors are required to assess the degree of core damage during a beyond design-basis accident and confirm that random or deliberate ignition has taken place. If an explosive mixture that could threaten containment integrity exists during a beyond design-basis accident, then other severe accident management strategies, such as purging and/or venting, would need to be considered. The hydrogen monitors are needed to implement these severe accident management strategies.
With the elimination of the design-basis LOCA hydrogen release, hydrogen monitors are no longer required to mitigate design-basis accidents and, therefore, the hydrogen monitors do not meet the definition of a safety-related component as defined in 10 CFR 50.2. RG 1.97 recommends classifying the hydrogen monitors as Category 1. RG 1.97 Category 1, is intended for key variables that most directly indicate the accomplishment of a safety function for design-basis accident events and, therefore, are items usually addressed within the TSs. As part of the rulemaking to revise 10 CFR 50.44, the Commission found that the hydrogen monitors no longer
meet the definition of Category 1 in RG 1.97. The Commission concluded that Category 3, as defined in RG 1.97, is an appropriate categorization for the hydrogen monitors because the monitors are required to diagnose the course of beyond design-basis accidents. Hydrogen monitoring is not the primary means of indicating a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary. Section 4 of Attachment 2 to SECY-00-0198, Status Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 (Option 3) and Recommendations on Risk-Informed Changes to 10 CFR 50.44 (Combustible Gas Control), found that the hydrogen monitors were not risk-significant. Therefore, the staff finds that hydrogen monitoring equipment requirements no longer meet any of the four criteria in 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) for retention in the TSs and, therefore, may be relocated to other licensee-controlled documents.
However, because the monitors are required to diagnose the course of beyond design-basis accidents, the licensee has verified that it has, and makes a regulatory commitment to maintain, a hydrogen monitoring system capable of diagnosing beyond design-basis accidents.
4.0 VERIFICATION AND COMMITMENT As requested by the staff in the notice of availability for this TS improvement, the licensee has addressed the following plant-specific verification and commitment.
4.1 Each licensee should verify that it has, and make a regulatory commitment to maintain, a hydrogen monitoring system capable of diagnosing beyond design-basis accidents.
The licensee has verified that it has a hydrogen monitoring system capable of diagnosing beyond design-basis accidents. The licensee has committed to maintain the hydrogen monitors within its Technical Requirements Manual. The licensee will implement this commitment within 120 days of amendment issuance.
The NRC staff finds that reasonable controls for the implementation and for subsequent evaluation of proposed changes pertaining to the above regulatory commitment is provided by the licensees administrative processes, including its commitment management program. Should the licensee choose to incorporate a regulatory commitment into the emergency plan, final safety analysis report, or other document with established regulatory controls, the associated regulations would define the appropriate change-control and reporting requirements. The staff has determined that the commitment does not warrant the creation of regulatory requirements which would require prior NRC approval of subsequent changes. The NRC staff has agreed that NEI 99-04, Revision 0, Guidelines for Managing NRC Commitment Changes, provides reasonable guidance for the control of regulatory commitments made to the NRC staff. (See Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-17, "Managing Regulatory Commitments Made by Power Reactor Licensees to the NRC Staff,"
dated September 21, 2000.) The commitment should be controlled in accordance with the industry guidance or comparable criteria employed by a specific licensee. The staff may choose to verify the implementation and maintenance of this commitment in a future inspection or audit.
5.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commissions regulations, the Louisiana State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. 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 (69 FR 2741, dated January 20, 2004). 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.
7.0 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 Commissions regulations, and (3) 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: W. Reckley N. Kalyanam Date: March 9, 2004
Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 cc:
Mr. Michael E. Henry, State Liaison Officer Regional Administrator, Region IV Department of Environmental Quality U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Permits Division 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 P.O. Box 4313 Arlington, TX 76011 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70821-4313 Parish President Council Vice President, Operations Support St. Charles Parish Entergy Operations, Inc. P. O. Box 302 P. O. Box 31995 Hahnville, LA 70057 Jackson, MS 39286-1995 Executive Vice President Director & Chief Operating Officer Nuclear Safety Assurance Entergy Operations, Inc.
Entergy Operations, Inc. P. O. Box 31995 17265 River Road Jackson, MS 39286-1995 Killona, LA 70066-0751 Chairman Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway Louisiana Public Services Commission P. O. Box 651 P. O. Box 91154 Jackson, MS 39205 Baton Rouge, LA 70825-1697 General Manager Plant Operations Waterford 3 SES Entergy Operations, Inc.
17265 River Road Killona, LA 70066-0751 Licensing Manager Entergy Operations, Inc.
17265 River Road Killona, LA 70066-0751 Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-3502 Resident Inspector/Waterford NPS P. O. Box 822 Killona, LA 70066-0751 July 2003