ML17059B933
| ML17059B933 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/16/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17059B932 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9803230160 | |
| Download: ML17059B933 (4) | |
Text
'~8 ~F00 Cy A,0 C
O Ilh O
Vr
~O
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATIONBYTHE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATEDTO AMENDMENTNO. 79TO FACILITYOPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-69 NIAGARAMOHAWKPOWER CORPORATION 7
NINE MILEPOINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 5(h410
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 31, 1997, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC or the licensee)
,requested a license amendment to change the Techriical Specifications (TSs) for Nine Mile Point, Unit 2 (NMP2),. The proposed change would revise Action Statement 36 of TS Table 3.3;3-1, "Emergency Core Cooling System Actuation Instrumentation," so as to include actions to be taken ifmore than one channel per trip function should, be inoperable in the high-pressure
'ore"spray (HPCS) dryw'ell pressure and,reactor water level instrumentation.
Presently, Action 36 only addresses actions for the plant condition of having one channel per trip function inoperable.
Specifically, Action 36 w'ould be changed to require that, with the number of operable channels less than required by the minimum operable channels per trip function requirement,
'then (1) witlion'e channel inoperable, the inoperable channel is to be placed in the tripped, condition within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or the HPCS.system is to be declared inoperable, and (2) with more
'tlian one channel inoperable, the HPCS system is to be declared inoperable.
The effect of this change is to allow the licensee to declare the HPCS system inoperable when more than one channel is inoperable,'and thereby allow entry into a specified TS action statement, rather than entering TS 3.0.3.
2.0 EVALUATION The current TS Table 3.3.3-1, Action 36, does not address plant conditions when more channels than the required minimum operable channels per trip function are inoperable.
Accordingly, instead of declaring HPCS inoperable, the license'e is required to shut down in accordance with TS 3.0.3.
The proposed changes to TS Table 3.3.3-1, Action 36, aflow the licensee to declare HPCS inoperable during plant conditions when more than one HPCS instrumentation channel per trip function is inoperable.
Declaring HPCS inoperable because of inoperable initiating instrumentation is consistent with TS actions that declare HPCS inoperable for other equipment
'failures within the system.
The revised Action 36 allows the licensee to followthe appropriate TS for HPCS inoperability instead of following TS 3.0.3.
Accordingly, the staff concludes that the changes are appropriate and acceptable because they (1) 'prevent 'unnecessary plant'hutdowns as presently required by TS 3.0.3, by allowing the licensee to declare. the HPCS system inoperable when more than one channel per trip function of HPCS drywell pressure and reactor water level instrumentation is inoperable, and (2) provide consistency in the Emergency Core Cooling System instrumentation and system TS actions when less than the minimum required channels are operable.
9803230160 9803ih PDR ADQCK 05000410 P
0 1
I T
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New York State officialwas notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.'he State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTALCONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facilitycomponent 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 effluen that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individu'al or cumulative occupational radiation ex'posure., The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendmerit involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (62 FR 45460): Accordingly, the amendment
.meets the eligibilitycriteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10, CFR 51.22(b), no erivironmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in'connection with'the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 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 willnot be endangered by operation in,th'e'proposed manner, (2) such activities willbe conducted in compliance with the
. Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment willnot be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
M. Waterman D. Hood Date:
Yiai"ch 16, 1998
~
~ ~