ML20058L032
| ML20058L032 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058L026 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9008060063 | |
| Download: ML20058L032 (3) | |
Text
P
, gnaug@,
+
UNITED STATES E\\ -
'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r, m
.~j-WASHINGTON. D C. 20$$5 s
a g%
f
....+
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 133 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-3 YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO.50-029 INTRODUCTION By letter.datad May 31, 1990, the Y wkee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC or the licensee) requested an amendmen; to Facility Operating License No. DPR-3 for the Yankee Nuclear Power Station (YNPS or the plant). The proposed arendment would incorporate wording from Standard Westinghouse Technical Specifications into YNPS's LCO Specifications 3.10.3 and 3.10.4.
This wording allows physics testing to be conducted with the number of OPERABLE Power Range and Intermediate Power Range Neutron Flux channels being determined by the LCO require'nents of Technical Specification 3.3.1 instead of the specific number of channels presently specified.
4 EVALUATION The changes proposed by Yankee letter dated January 5, 1990 regarding proposed Amendment 130 and incorporated by NRC letter, dated March 6, 1990 regarding Amendment 130 included a modification to Technical Specification LCOs 3.10.3 and 3.10.4 to require that all Intermediate Power Pange and Power Range Nuclear Channels be OPERABLE for physics testing. This change increased the number of OPERABLE nuclear channels from three to six during physics testing and was done to take advantage of the wider range of trip setpoint edjustability with the new nuclear instrumentation being installed this refueling outage.
However, the modifications to LCOs 3.10.3 and 3.10.4 did not account for the need to connect one or two of the nuclear flux channels to taonitoring instrumen-tation used specifically for physics testing. This physics testing use of a channel (s) causes the channel (s) to be INOPERABLE from an LCO perspective.
This oversight, if not corrected, will prevent Yankee from performing its standard testing program of the new reload cores.
This proposed change corrects the above-described oversight by removing from the LCO of 3.10.3 and 3.10.4 the specific number of nuclear channels to be OPERABLE and allowing the OPERABILITY requirements for nuclear channels to be determined by Specification 3.3.1.
Specification 3.3.1 requires that at least four channels be operable in modes including those when physics testing is performed. This nuclear channel configuration will result in more channels being required in the OPERABLE condition with reduced trip setpoints than in previous physics testing programs while giving Yankee the needed flexibility to connect physics testing instrumentation. Additionally, the wording of this change is consistent with NUREG-0452, " Standard Technical Specifications for Westinghouse PWRs." Thus the proposed change is acceptable, j@$80$$$$ $O
,f P
~.
O
- ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change in a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a f acility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part P0. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the tyoes, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual i
c.- cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Comission las previously published a proposed finding that the amendment involves no signi1' cant hazards consideration and there bas been no Dublic comment on such finding.
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuantto10CFR51.22(b),noenvironmentel impact statunent or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
CONCLUSION The Commission wde a proposed determination that the amendment involves ro significant hasards consideration which was published in the Federal Frgister (55 FR E!.674) on June 18, 1990.
No public coments were received innd the State of Massachusetts did not have any comments.
The staff 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment wil' not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Princinal Contributor:
Scott Newberry Patrick M. Sears Dated: August ?, 1990 l
o
.o AMENDMENT tiO.133 TO DPR-3 YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION (ROWE) DATED August 2,1990 DISTRIBUTION:
Decket; File 60429 NRC PDR Local PDR PDI-3 Reading S. Varga B. Boger M. Rushbrook P. Sears R. H. Wessman OGC Dennis Hagan E. Jordan G. Hill (4)
Wanda Jones - 7103 MNBB J. Calvo S. Newberr ACRS(10)y,SICB GPA/PA
_2G5 OWril ARH/LFMB J. Johnson, Region I i
l l
l