ML20091E533
| ML20091E533 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20091E518 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9204140238 | |
| Download: ML20091E533 (2) | |
Text
. - -
- [pe asa \\
UNITED STATES
'i NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_[
w 8
W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 y
y/
3 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0156 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-65 NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY. ET AL.
MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET N0. 50-331
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application for license amendment dated February 7,- 1992, ' Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (the licensee)-requested changes to the Technical Specifica-tions (T5) for Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2.
The amendment would change the TS Sections by extending the surveillance requirements of TS-
'4.6.1.2.a to allow the second Type A Containment Integrated Leakage Rate test (ILRT), within the second 10-year service period, to be conducted during the Cycle 11 refueling outage scheduled to commence in May 1992.
The TS change is a one time extension for Cycle 11 only. Consistent with this change, the amendment would also add a -Surveillance Requirement 4.6.1.2.h which states the provisions of Technical Specification 4.0.2 are not applicable.
2.0 EVALUATION The existing TS 4.6.1.2.a. " Containment Leakage Surveillance Requirements,"
states that-_three Type A tests (Overall Integrated Containment Leakage Rate) shall be conducted at 40 i 10-month intervals during shutdown at Pa (54 psig)
- during each 10-year service period.
The third test of each set shall be conducted during the shutdown for the 10-year plant: inservice inspection. The 50-month time' limit (April:8,
- 92) for the second Type A_ test within the second 10-year service period would be extended to approximately 56 months due to the number of in-cycle shutdowns which have exended the time period for the next refueling cutage to begin in May 1992, and continue until a projected startup in October 1992.
On February 8/1988, Millstone Unit No. 2 :,uccessfully conducted a Type A test, which was the First Type A test in the second 10-year service period, and passed both the "as-found" and "as-left " ILRTs.- Since then, there have not been any modifications.made to the plant which could adversely affect the test'results.
Type B and C tests have also been completed during the 1989 and 1990 refueling outages and are scheduled to be performed during the upcoming 1992 refueling outage. The upcoming-fuel outage will be an extended outage to accommodate the replacement of steam generators.
Demonstrated operability of the components and penetrations, with the local leak rate test program, provides additional assurance that containment integrity has been maintained.
The leakage condition of the containment determined from the ILRT of
-e NNb73
t
' February 8, 1988, was 36.8% of the TS limit and, as indicated above, no operations are known to have occurred which would suggest a significant degradation of this value.
Since the licensee has planned to conduct the second ILRT during the scheduled shutdown for next refueling and because the licensee has justified the leaktight integrity of the containment based on previous leakage test results, the staff concludes that a one time delay of approximately 6 to 7 months beyond the maximum permitted test interval will not have a significant safety impact.
The staff, therefore, concludes that the licensee's requested test interval TS changes for deh ' in conducting the second ILRT of the second 10-year service period are acce, ible.
Technical Specification 4.0.2 allows a 25% increase of a surveillance interval.
Since the existing and proposed Millstone Unit 2 Technical Spacifications provide for an explicit time interval for Type A test, it is not necessary for TS 4.0.2 to apply.
Therefore, we find it acceptable to provide the proposed TS 4.6.1.2.h which states that the provisions of Specification 4.0.2 are not applicable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Connecticut State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no coments.
4.0 ENVIRON!i(NTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes surveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 s'ignificant increase in individual or cumulave occupational radiation exposure The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (57 FR 7812). Accordingly, the amendment meets 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 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 will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
G. S. Vissing Date:
April 8, 1992
_ -______ ___