ML20080F144
| ML20080F144 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 01/23/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20080F138 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8402100349 | |
| Download: ML20080F144 (2) | |
Text
._.
,. s
- n.,,,
1.,
UNITED STATES
>-f)
,g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wnma Tot o. c. :cm SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SilPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 21 TO FACILITY OPERATING f.ICEllSE NO. DPR-??
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY' MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATTNG PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-263 1.0 Introduction By letter dated May 15, 1980, (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical SpecificationsNorthern States Pow Facility Operating License No. DPR-22 for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.
The changes to the Technical Specifications incorporate a detailed definition of the term " operable" as requested in aur April 10, 1980 letter to all power reactor licensees. Thi.s letter clarifies the' term " operable" and requests licensees to take specific actions to assure that it is appropriately applied at thei.r facilities.
2.0 Evaluation The NRC's Standard Technical Specifications (STS) were formulated to preserve the single failure criterion for systems that are relied upon in the safety analysis report.
By and large, the single failure criterion is preserved by specifying Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCOs) that require all redundant components of safety related systems to be OPERABLE. When the required redundancy is not maintained, either due to equipment failure or maintenance outaae, action is reouired, within a specified time, to change the operating mode of the plant to place it in a safe condition. The specified time to take action, usually called the equipment out-of-service time, is a temporary relaxation o# the single failure criterion, which, consistent with overall. system reliability considerations, provides a limited time to fix equipment or otherwise make it OPERABLE.
If equipment can be returned to OPERABLE status within the specified time, plant shutdown is not required.
LCOs are specified for each safety related system in the plant, and with few exceptions, the ACTION statements address sing 1,e outages of comoonents, trains or subsystems.
l' The licensee responded to the ceneric letter stating that the existing TS adequately implement'the NRC criteria and only proposed a revised definition of the term " operable."
8402100349 840123 PDR ADOCK 05000263 l
P PM
. The proposed TS changes did not incoronrate the aeneral Action statenent sof the Standard Technical Specifications for Boiling Water Reactors (NUREG-0123, Rev. 3) concerning operation under circumstances in excess of those addressed in the specification. Our consultant, EG&G, reviewed the necessity of having such a statement in the Monticello TS and finds that the current TS were formulated to preserve the single failure criterion for systems that are relied upon in the Monticello Safety Analysis Report. The existing TS contain Limiting Conditions for Operation which (1) require that all redundant components of safety-related systems and their associated power supplies be " operable" and (2) specify appropriate actions to be taken in the event that the minimum operability requirements are not satisfied.
Therefore, we agree that this change is not necessary for Monticello.
r EG8G also reviewed the proposed changes to the TS for redefining the term
" operable" and has determined that the licensee has incorporated the definition of the term " operable" from NUREG-0123, Rav. 3.
A copy of the Technical Evaluation Report is enclosed.
Since the current TS were formulated to preserve the single failure criterion for systems relied upon in the Monticello Safety Analysis Report and the proposed TS changes incorporate the applicable specification of NUREG-0123, Rev. 3, we conclude that these chances are acceptable.
3.0 Environmental Considerations We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level tand will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Havina made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact stctement, or negative declaration and environmental inpact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
4.0 Conclusions We have 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 the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
H. Nicolaras
Enclosure:
EG&G Report Dated:
January 23, 1984 T