ML031270621

License Amendment, Correct an Error in the Numbering of a Function

ML031270621
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	06/03/2003
From:	Spaulding D NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD3
To:	Cayia A Nuclear Management Co
Spaulding D
References
TAC MB5357, TAC MB5358
Download: ML031270621 (11)

Text

June 3, 2003 Mr. Alfred J. Cayia Site Vice President Point Beach Nuclear Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC 6610 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241-9516

SUBJECT:

POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS RE: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 3.1.8, PHYSICS TESTS EXCEPTIONS - MODE 2" (TAC NOS. MB5357 AND MB5358)

Dear Mr. Cayia:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 208 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-24 and Amendment No. 213 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-27 for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, respectively. The amendments consist of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated June 11, 2002.

These amendments revise TS 3.1.8, "Physics Tests Exceptions - Mode 2," to correct an error in the numbering of a function. Specifically, the reference in Limiting Condition for Operation 3.1.8 to Function 17.d has been changed to Function 17.e.

A copy of our related safety evaluation is also enclosed. The Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Deirdre W. Spaulding, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate III Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 208 to DPR-24

2. Amendment No. 213 to DPR-27

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

ML031270621 *Provide SE input by Memo OFFICE PDIII-1/PM PDIII-1/LA EEIB/SC* OGC PDIII-1/SC NAME DSpaulding RBouling EMarinos RHoefling JStang for LRaghavan DATE 05/15/03 05/14/03 12/03/02 05/23/03 06/02/03 Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 cc:

Jonathan Rogoff, Esquire Ms. Sarah Jenkins General Counsel Electric Division Nuclear Management Company, LLC Public Service Commission of Wisconsin 700 First Street P.O. Box 7854 Hudson, WI 54016 Madison, WI 53707-7854 Mr. Richard R. Grigg Mr. Roy A. Anderson President and Chief Operating Officer Executive Vice President Wisconsin Electric Power Company Nuclear Management Company, LLC 231 West Michigan Street 700 First Street Milwaukee, WI 53201 Hudson, WI 54016 Manager, Regulatory Affairs Nuclear Asset Manager Point Beach Nuclear Plant Wisconsin Electric Power Company Nuclear Management Company, LLC 231 West Michigan Street 6610 Nuclear Road Milwaukee, WI 53201 Two Rivers, WI 54241 Mano K. Nazar Mr. Ken Duveneck Senior Vice President Town Chairman Nuclear Management Company, LLC Town of Two Creeks Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant 13017 State Highway 42 1717 Wakonade Drive East Mishicot, WI 54228 Welch, MN 55089 Chairman John Paul Cowan Public Service Commission Chief Nuclear Officer of Wisconsin Nuclear Management Company, LLC P.O. Box 7854 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Madison, WI 53707-7854 Covert, MI 49043 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, IL 60532-4351 Resident Inspectors Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6612 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, WI 54241 March 2003

NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NO. 50-266 POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 208 License No. DPR-24

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

A. The application for amendment by Nuclear Management Company, LLC (the licensee), dated June 11, 2002, 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 3.B of Facility Operating License No. DPR-24 is hereby amended to read as follows:

B. Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 208, are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with Technical Specifications.

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 45 days of the date of issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/RA by John Stang for/

L. Raghavan, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate III Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of issuance: June 3, 2003

NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NO. 50-301 POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 2 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 213 License No. DPR-27

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

A. The application for amendment by Nuclear Management Company, LLC (the licensee), dated June 11, 2002, 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 3.B of Facility Operating License No. DPR-27 is hereby amended to read as follows:

B. Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 213, are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with Technical Specifications.

3. This license amendment is effective as of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 45 days of the date of issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/RA by John Stang for/

L. Raghavan, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate III Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of issuance: June 3, 2003

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 208 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-24 AND LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 213 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-27 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 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 3.1.8-1 3.1.8-1 B 3.1.8-5 B 3.1.8-5

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 208 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-24 AND AMENDMENT NO. 213 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-27 NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By application dated June 11, 2002, the Nuclear Management Company, LLC (the licensee) requested a change to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (PBNP). The amendments would revise TS 3.1.8, "Physics Tests Exceptions -

Mode 2," to correct an error in the numbering of a function. Specifically, the reference in Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.1.8 to Function 17.d would be changed to Function 17.e. The existing error inappropriately makes the TS more restrictive than intended.

Reactor physics tests are performed to measure the fundamental nuclear characteristics of the reactor core and related instrumentation. LCO 3.1.8 permits relaxations of existing LCOs to allow certain physics tests to be performed in Mode 2 (Startup, # 5-percent rated thermal power).

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

Per 10 CFR 50.90, a change to the TSs must be filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which fully describes the requested change. The change to the TSs was submitted as a license amendment and was reviewed by the NRC staff in accordance with NUREG-0800, "Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants (SRP)," which provides guidance for the review of license amendments.

The license amendment request was made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90, Application for amendment of license or construction permit, to correct a typographical error in the PBNP TSs.

By PBNP License Amendment Nos. 201 and 206 dated August 8, 2001, the NRC staff approved the conversion of the PBNP custom TSs (CTS) to improved TSs (ITS) based on NUREG-1431, "Standard Technical Specifications [STS], Westinghouse Plants." The ITS were also based on the criteria in the Final Commission Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors, dated July 22, 1993, which was subsequently codified by changes to 10 CFR 50.36, Technical Specifications. In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission established its regulatory requirements related to the content of TSs.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees regulatory and technical analyses in support of its proposed license amendment. The detailed evaluation below will support the conclusion 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 amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

In its June 11, 2002, application, the licensee indicated that during the conversion process from the PBNP CTS to ITS, it was proposed that LCO 3.1.8 specify that the number of required channels for the Reactor Trip System Interlock Power Range Neutron Flux P-10 (hereinafter referrred to as P-10 interlock) be reduced to three required channels. At that time, the P-10 interlock was identified as 17.d as seen in the FUNCTION column of Table 3.3.1-1 (hereinafter referred to as Function 17.d in Table 3.3.1). This proposed allowance was consistent with the STS and approved as documented in PBNP License Amendment Nos. 201 and 206 dated August 8, 2001.

The licensee indicated that in its response to a request for additional information (RAI) dated November 17, 2000, a previously deleted function, which was Function 17.b in Table 3.3.1-1, was reinstated, and Functions 17.b, 17.c, and 17.d, were renumbered as 17.c, 17.d, and 17.e. This renumbering changed the P-10 interlock in Table 3.3.1-1 from Function 17.d to Function 17.e. However, the corresponding reference to the P-10 interlock in LCO 3.1.8 did not get renumbered. Consequently, LCO 3.1.8 incorrectly references Function 17.d (which corresponds to the P-9 interlock) in Table 3.3.1-1, and thus does not correctly reference Function 17.e (which corresponds to the P-10 interlock).

LCO 3.1.8 is only applicable in Mode 2 (Startup, # 5-percent rated thermal power). As found in Table 3.3.1-1, Function 17.d requires the P-9 interlock to be operable in Mode 1 (Power Operation, > 5-percent rated thermal power), whereas Function 17.e requires the P-10 interlock to be operable in both Modes 1 and 2. As currently written, LCO 3.1.8 would allow the required number of channels of the P-9 interlock to be reduced to three required channels during the performance of physics tests in Mode 2. This is overly restrictive because the P-9 interlock is not normally required to be operable in Mode 2. The proposed change would allow the required number of channels of the P-10 interlock to be reduced to three required channels during the performance of physics tests in Mode 2. The proposed change would remove the unintended restrictive condition and would bring LCO 3.1.8 into agreement with the STS.

The licensees proposed TS change is consistent with the changes approved in PBNP License Amendment Nos. 201 and 206 for the ITS conversion, and is consistent with the STS.

Therefore, the NRC staff finds the proposed change acceptable.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATION

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

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

These amendments change 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 or change a surveillance requirement. The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the types of any effluent that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously published a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (67 FR 56325). Accordingly, these 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 or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.

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 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: B. Marcus Date: June 3, 2003