ML16188A029

Issuance of Amendment Nos. 224 and 158 Reactivity Anomalies

ML16188A029
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	09/15/2016
From:	Mozafari B Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Bryan Hanson Exelon Nuclear, Nine Mile Point
Mozafari B, NRR/DORL/LPL1-1, 415-2020
References
CAC MF7496, CAC MF7497
Download: ML16188A029 (20)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 Mr. Bryan C. Hanson President and Chief Nuclear Officer Exelon Nuclear Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555 September 15, 2016

SUBJECT:

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS RE: REACTIVITY ANOMALIES (CAC NOS. MF7496 AND MF7497)

Dear Mr. Hanson:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 224 to Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-63 and Amendment No. 158 to Renewed Facility Operating License No.

NPF-69 for the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (NMP1) and Unit 2 (NMP2), respectively.

The amendments consist of changes to the Technical Specifications in response to your application dated March 18, 2016 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML16078A065).

The amendments modify TS 3.1.1.g, "Reactivity Anomalies" for NMP1 and TS 3.1.2, "Reactivity Anomalies" for NMP2 to change the method used to perform the reactivity anomaly surveillance.

Specifically, the amendments allow performance of the surveillance based on the difference between the monitored (i.e., actual) core reactivity and the predicted core reactivity.

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

Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 224 to DPR-63

2. Amendment No. 158 to NPF-69

3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv Sincerely, Brenda L. Mozafari, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, LLC EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NO. 50-220 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 224 Renewed License No. DPR-63

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

A.

The application for amendment by Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon, the licensee) dated March 18, 2016, 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 1; 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 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-63 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2)

Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, which is attached hereto, as revised through Amendment No. 224 is hereby incorporated into this license. Exelon Generation, 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 from the date of issuance.

Attachment:

Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: Septan be r 1 s, 2 O 16 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Travis L. Tate, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 224 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-63 DOCKET NO. 50-220 Replace the following page of the Renewed Facility Operating License with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal line indicating the area of change.

REMOVE INSERT Replace the following page of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.

REMOVE 36 INSERT 36 (2)

Exelon Generation pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Part 70, to receive, possess and use at any time special nuclear material as reactor fuel, in accordance with the limitations for storage and amounts required for reactor operation, as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report, as supplemented and amended; (3)

Exelon Generation pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70 to receive, possess and use at any time any byproduct, source and special nuclear material as sealed neutron sources for reactor startup, sealed sources for reactor instrumentation and radiation monitoring equipment calibration, and as fission detectors in amounts as required; (4)

Exelon Generation pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70, to receive, possess and use in amounts as required any byproduct, source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument and equipment calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components.

(5)

Exelon Generation pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.

C.

This renewed operating license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the following Commission regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I:

Part 20, Section 30.34 of Part 30; Section 40.41 of Part 40; Section 50.54 and 50.59 of Part 50; and Section 70.32 of Part 70. This renewed license is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect and is also subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:

(1)

Maximum Power Level The licensee is authorized to operate the facility at steady state reactor core power levels not in excess of 1850 megawatts (thermal).

(2)

Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, which is attached hereto, as revised through Amendment No. 2 2 4 is hereby incorporated into this license. Exelon Generation shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.

(3)

Deleted Renewed License No. DPR-63 Amendment No. 191 through 210, 211, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 220, 222, 224 Correotion Letter Dated August 7, 2012 Correotion Letter Dated Marsh 17, 2015 Correotion Letter dated July 29, 2016

LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION

f.

If specification 3.1.1.b through e, above, are not met, the reactor shall be placed in the hot shutdown condition within ten hours.

g.

Reactivity Anomalies The difference between a monitored and predicted core kett shall be within +/- 1 % lik/k. If this limit is exceeded, the reactor shall be brought to the cold shutdown condition by normal orderly shutdown procedure. Operation shall not be permitted until the cause has been evaluated and the appropriate corrective action has been completed.

AMENDMENT NO. 142. 180, 2 2 4 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT

g.

Reactivity Anomalies The monitored core kett shall be compared with the predicted core kett during startup, following refueling or major core alteration.

These comparisons will be used as base data for reactivity monitoring during subsequent power operation throughout the fuel cycle. At specific power operating conditions, the monitored core kett will be compared with the predicted core kett. This comparison will be made every equivalent full power month.

36

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, LLC EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NO. 50-410 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 2 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 158 Renewed License No. NPF-69

1.

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

A.

The application for amendment by Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon, the licensee) dated March 18, 2016, 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 1; 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 1 O 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 Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-69 is hereby amended to read as follows:

(2)

Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, both of which are attached hereto, as revised through Amendment No. 158 are hereby incorporated into this license. Exelon Generation shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

3.

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

Attachment:

Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: Septanb er 15, 2O16 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~,,,A-~

Travis L. Tate, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 158 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 2 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-69 DOCKET NO. 50-410 Replace the following page of the Renewed Facility Operating License with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.

REMOVE INSERT 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 3.1.2-1 3.1.2-2 INSERT 3.1.2-1 3.1.2-2

• (1)

Maximum Power Level Exelon Generation is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 3988 megawatts thermal (100 percent rated power) in accordance with the conditions specified herein.

(2)

Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, both of which are attached hereto, as revised through Amendment No. 157 are hereby incorporated into this license. Exelon Generation shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

(3)

Fuel Storage and Handling (Section 9.1, SSER 4)*

a.

Fuel assemblies, when stored in their shipping containers, shall be stacked no more than three containers high.

b.

When not in the reactor vessel, no more than three fuel assemblies shall be allowed outside of their shipping containers or storage racks in the New Fuel Vault or Spent Fuel Storage Facility.

c.

The above three fuel assemblies shall maintain a minimum edge-to-edge spacing of twelve ( 12) inches from the shipping container array and approved storage rack locations.

d.

The New Fuel Storage Vault shall have no more than ten fresh fuel assemblies uncovered at any one time.

(4)

Turbine System Maintenance Program (Section 3.5.1.3.10, SER)

The operating licensee shall submit for NRC approval by October 31, 1989, a turbine system maintenance program based on the manufacturer's calculations of missile generation probabilities.

(Submitted by NMPC letter dated October 30, 1989 from C.D. Terry and approved by NRC letter dated March 15, 1990 from Robert Martin to Mr. Lawrence Burkhardt, Ill).

The parenthetical notation following the title of many license conditions denotes the section of the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) and/or its supplements wherein the license condition is discussed.

Renewed License No. NPF-69 Amendment 117through140, 141, 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 154, 156, 158

3.1 REACTIVITY CONTROL SYSTEMS 3.1.2 Reactivity Anomalies Reactivity Anomalies 3.1.2 LCO 3.1.2 The reactivity difference between the monitored core ke1t and the predicted core ke1t shall be within +/- 1 % ~k/k.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1 and 2.

ACTIONS CONDITION REQUIRED ACTION COMPLETION TIME A.

Core reactivity A.1 Restore core 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> difference not within reactivity difference limit.

to within limit.

B.

Required Action and B.1 Be in MODE 3.

12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> associated Completion Time not met.

NMP2 3.1.2-1 Amendment 94, 1513

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS SR 3.1.2.1 NMP2 SURVEILLANCE Verify core reactivity difference between the monitored core kett and the predicted core ke11 is within +/- 1 % b.k/k.

3.1.2-2 Reactivity Anomalies 3.1.2 FREQUENCY Once within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after reaching equilibrium conditions following startup after fuel movement within the reactor pressure vessel or control rod replacement AND 1000 MWD/T thereafter during operations in MODE1 Amendment 9-t, 158

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 224 AND 158 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-63 AND NPF-69 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, LLC EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NOS. 50-220 AND 50-410 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By application dated March 18, 2016 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML16078A065), Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon, the licensee), requested changes to the technical specifications (TSs) for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (NMP1) and Unit 2 (NMP2). The proposed amendments would modify TS 3.1.1.g, "Reactivity Anomalies," for NMP1 and TS 3.1.2, "Reactivity Anomalies," for NMP2, to change the method used to perform the reactivity anomaly surveillance. Specifically, the amendments would allow performance of the surveillance based on the difference between the monitored (i.e., actual) core reactivity and the predicted core reactivity. The surveillance is currently performed based on the difference between the monitored control rod density and the predicted control rod density.

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criteria (GDC) 26, "Reactivity control system redundancy and capability," GDC 28, "Reactivity limits," and GDC 29, "Protection against anticipated operational occurrences," require that reactivity within the core be controllable to ensure that subcriticality is achievable and maintainable under cold conditions (most reactive conditions). In addition, these GDC also specify that applicable fuel design limits must not be exceeded during normal operations and anticipated operational occurrences.

In Section 4.1 of Attachment 1 to the licensee's application dated March 18, 2016, the licensee cited the following GDCs as being applicable to the proposed amendment:

NMP1 (1965 Atomic Energy Commission proposed GDCs described in Section 1 of Updated Final Safety Analysis Report):

GDC 7, "Reactivity Worth" GDC 8, "Reactivity Shutdown Capability" GDC 9, "Backup Reactivity Shutdown" GDC 14, "Relative Reactivity Status" NMP2:

GDC 26, "Reactivity control system redundancy and capability" GDC 28, "Reactivity limits" GDC 29, "Protection against anticipated operational occurrences" Consistent with the requirements in GDCs 7, 8, 9, 14, 26, 28, and 29: (1) reactivity shall be controllable such that subcriticality is achievable and maintainable under cold conditions (most reactive conditions); and (2) specified applicable fuel design limits must not be exceeded during normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) regulatory requirements related to the content of the TSs are contained in 10 CFR 50.36. Paragraph (c)(2)(i) of 10 CFR 50.36 states, in part, that "Limiting conditions for operation [LCOs] are the lowest functional capability or performance levels of equipment required for safe operation of the facility." Paragraph (c)(3) of 10 CFR 50.36 states that "Surveillance requirements [SRs] are requirements relating to test, calibration, or inspection to assure that the necessary quality of systems and components is maintained, that facility operation will be within safety limits, and that the limiting conditions for operation will be met."

The reactivity anomaly surveillance required by the TS serves, in part, to satisfy the above GDC by comparing the observed reactivity behavior of the core (at hot operating conditions) to the expected reactivity behavior that was calculated during the core design process. This ensures that certain assumptions in the design-basis accident and transient safety analyses remain valid. Any difference between these two observations is compared to the TS acceptance criterion of +/-1 % delta (Li)k/k and if the criterion is not met, the action required by the TS is then taken.

As shown in Attachment 2 of the licensee's application dated March 18, 2016, the proposed amendments would revise the following:

NMP1 TS:

TS LCO 3.1.1.g currently reads as follows:

The difference between an,observed and predicted control rod inventory shall not exceed the equivalent of one percent in reactivity. If this limit is exceeded, the reactor shall be brought to the cold shutdown condition by normal orderly shutdown procedure. Operation shall not be permitted until the cause has been evaluated and the appropriate corrective action has been completed.

The amendment would revise LCO 3.1.1.g to read as follows:

The difference between a monitored and predicted core keff shall be within +/- 1 % ~k/k. If this limit is exceeded, the reactor shall be brought to the cold shutdown condition by normal orderly shutdown procedure. Operation shall not be permitted until the cause has been evaluated and the appropriate corrective action has been completed.

SR 3.1.1.g currently reads as follows:

The observed control rod inventory shall be compared with a normalized computed prediction of the control rod inventory during startup, following refueling or major core alteration.

These comparisons will be used as base data for reactivity monitoring during subsequent power operation throughout the fuel cycle. At specific power operating conditions, the actual control rod configuration will be compared with the expected configuration based upon appropriately corrected past data. This comparison will be made every equivalent full power month.

The amendment would revise SR 3.1.1.g to read as follows:

The monitored core keff shall be compared with the predicted core keff during startup, following refueling or major core alteration.

These comparisons will be used as base data for reactivity monitoring during subsequent power operation throughout the fuel cycle. At specific power operating conditions, monitored core keff, will be compared with the predicted core keff. This comparison will be made every equivalent full power month.

NMP2 TSs:

TS 3.1.2 changes LCO 3.1.2 and SR 3.1.2.1. The specific changes are discussed below.

LCO 3.1.2 currently reads as follows:

The reactivity difference between the monitored rod density and the predicted rod density shall be within +/- 1 % ~k/k.

The amendment would revise LCO 3.1.2 to read as follows:

The reactivity difference between the monitored core keff and the predicted core keff shall be within +/- 1 % ~k/k.

SR 3.1.2.1 currently reads as follows:

Verify core reactivity difference between the monitored rod density and the predicted rod density is within +/- 1 % ~k/k.

The amendment would revise SR 3.1.2.1 to read as follows:

Verify core reactivity difference between the monitored core kett and the predicted core kett is within +/- 1 % L'.1k/k.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

3.1 Current Method for Reactivity Anomaly Check As described in the application dated March 18, 2016, the licensee currently assesses reactivity anomalies at NMP1 and NMP2, by using control rod density to provide a convenient representation for the effective core multiplication factor (kett). This method is utilized primarily because early core monitoring systems did not directly calculate core kett values for comparison to design values. The NMP1 and NMP2 TSs currently require that the reactivity anomaly check be done by comparing a predicted control rod density (calculated prior to the start of operation for a particular cycle) to an actual control rod density. The comparison is done at the frequency specified by the associated surveillance requirement.

Specifically, comparison of predicted control rod density to actual control rod density is done via a set of reactivity anomaly curves. Development of the curves begins with predicted critical core kett values, which have been calculated for projected operating states and conditions throughout the life of the cycle, and their associated derived control rod patterns. A calculation is made of the number of notches inserted in these rod patterns and also the number of average notches required to make a change of +/-1 % L'.1k/k around the predicted critical core kettValues. The notches are converted to control rod density and plotted as a function of cycle exposure to produce a predicted control rod density curve with upper and lower bounds that represent the +/-1 % L'.1k/k TS acceptance criterion. As a result, the comparison is based on critical kett but with a "translation" of acceptance criteria to control rod density.

Under the current method, an anomaly would be the difference between the predicted and measured control rod density in the reactor under the existing conditions (e.g., time in cycle, power level, and control rod pattern). The observed anomaly is then translated into a reactivity difference between the two values (the measured versus the predicted control rod density) for comparison to the TS limit of +/-1 % L'.1k/k. In the event that the limit is exceeded, the NMP1 and NMP2 TSs requirements differ slightly.

If the limit is exceeded for NMP1, the reactor shall be brought to the cold shutdown condition by normal orderly shutdown procedure. Operation shall not be permitted until the cause has been evaluated and the appropriate corrective action has been completed. If the limit is exceeded for NMP2, the licensee has 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to restore the core reactivity difference to within the limit. If the completion time cannot be met, the plant must be in MODE 3 within the next 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.

The measure of criticality is the effective neutron multiplication factor, k-effective, or kett. The multiplication factor is the ratio of the rate of neutron production to neutron loss (e.g., due to absorption or leakage). Criticality is achieved when kett is equal to 1.0 (i.e., neutron population is constant). When kett is less than 1.0, the reactor is subcritical. When kett is greater than 1.0, the reactor is supercritical. Reactivity is the measure of the fractional change in neutron population and is defined as (kett -1)11<ett Therefore, in a critical reactor, reactivity is equal to zero. Although reactivity is unitless, it is assigned the units of L'.1k/k for convenience.

The licensee stated that, while being a convenient measurement of core reactivity, the control rod density method has limitations, such as differing impacts on reactivity from deeply inserted central control rods versus control rods on the outer edge of the core, or shallowly inserted rods.

The licensee indicated that it is not uncommon for reactivity anomaly concerns to arise during operation simply because of greater use of near-edge or shallow inserted control rods than anticipated, when in fact no true anomaly exists.

3.2 Proposed Method for Reactivity Anomaly Check The proposed change to the TSs would eliminate the translation of core keff into control rod density. Instead, the revised method for evaluating a potential reactivity anomaly would compare the measured core keff and the predicted core keff directly. The proposed TS change will not impact the required frequency of surveillance or any condition within the SR.

The licensee stated that NMP utilizes the Global Nuclear Fuels core monitoring system, 3D MONICORE, which incorporates the three-dimensional (3D) core simulator code, PANACEA Version 11 (PANAC11). The system allows for a direct comparison of predicted core keff to monitored core keff. Measured core keff is calculated by PANAC11 using measured plant operating data provided by 3D MONICORE. The predicted core keff as a function of cycle exposure, is developed using PANAC11 prior to the start of each operating cycle. The PANAC11-computed core keff behavior from the previous cycle is used as the starting point for the calculation. Any fuel vendor recommended adjustments due to planned changes in fuel design, core design, or operating strategy for the upcoming cycle are also incorporated into the development of the predicted core keff.

By letter dated March 11, 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML993140059), the NRC approved the power distribution uncertainty for the 3D MONICORE system by accepting licensing topical report NEDC-32694P, "Power Distribution Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR [Minimum Critical Power Ratio] Evaluations," with limitations, for referencing in license applications.

Further, by letter dated November 10, 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML993230184), the NRC staff documented an evaluation of a version of the PANACEA core simulator code, referred to as PANAC11. In that evaluation, the NRC staff concluded that a proposed improvement in General Electric (GE) steady-state methods (reflected in PANAC11) was acceptable and appropriate for inclusion into the GE licensing topical report for core design, NEDE-24011-P-A.

The NRC staff has reviewed the information provided by the licensee and concludes that the use of monitored (i.e., actual) to predicted core keff instead of rod density: (1) eliminates the limitations described in Section 3.1 of this safety evaluation (SE); (2) provides for a technically superior comparison; and (3) is a simple and straightforward approach utilizing appropriate computer codes and methods.

The NRC staff notes that the licensee's proposed TS change for NMP2 is similar to the Boiling Water Reactor (BWR)/6 Standard TS for reactivity anomalies, in that it performs the reactivity difference comparison using core keff. Although NMP2 is a BWR/5 plant, it has the hardware and software in place (3D MON I CORE, PANAC11) to allow direct comparison of predicted keff to measured keff as described in the basis for the comparable BWR/6 surveillance (NUREG-1434, "Standard Technical Specifications General Electric Plants, BWR/6," Volume 2, Revision 3 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML041910223 and ML041910224)).

The licensee also assessed the impact of this request on the NMP transient and accident analyses, and determined that the proposed changes will not affect any of the transient and accident analyses. This is because only the method of performing the reactivity anomaly surveillance is changing, and the proposed method will provide an adequate acceptable comparison as discussed above. Furthermore, the anomaly check will continue to be performed at the current required frequency. The NRC staff agrees with this assessment, and therefore, concludes that the proposed surveillance will continue to ensure that the assumptions in the transient and accident analysis regarding core reactivity remain valid with this change.

3.3 Technical Evaluation Conclusion

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's request to revise the method used to perform SRs and concludes, based on the discussion above in SE Sections 3.1 and 3.2 that the proposed TS revisions are acceptable and will provide an improved approach for the determination of reactivity anomalies. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed amendment is 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 amendments change 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 surveillance requirements. The NRC 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding published in the Federal Register on May 10, 2016 (81 FR 28897).

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 or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the 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) there is reasonable assurance that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's 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 Contributors: G. Thomas D. Beacom Date: September 15, 2016

ML16188A029 Sincerely, IRA/

Brenda L. Mozafari, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation RidsNrrDssStsb Resource RidsNrrDssSrxb Resource RidsNrrDssSnpb Resource GThomas, NRR DBeacom, NRR ADimitriadis, RI CTilton, NRR

• by memo dated OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL 1-1/PM NRR/DORL/LPL 1-1/LA NRR/DSS/SNPB/BC*

NRR/DSS/STSB NAME BMozafari KGoldstein JDean AKlein DATE 7/13/2016 7/14/2016 5/10/2016 7/29/2016 OFFICE NRR/DSS/SRXB/BC*

OGC-NLO NRR/DORL/LPL 1-1/BC NRR/DORL/LPL 1-1/PM NAME EOesterle VHoang TT ate BMozafari DATE 6/17/2016 7/23/2016 9/13/2016 9/15/2016