ML20092D459
| ML20092D459 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1995 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092D453 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9509140207 | |
| Download: ML20092D459 (2) | |
Text
_
i I'.
g,a ano t-UNITED STATES p
e j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20086-0001 1
i o
%*****/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.
78 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-57 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY j
ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY i
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION i
l DOCKET NO. 50-354 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 29, 1994, the Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Hope Creek Generating i
Station, Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested changes would revise lable 4.3.6-1, " Control Rod Block Instrumentation Surveillance," of the Hope l
Creek TSs. The channel calibration frequencies for the Source Range Monitor l
(SRM) and the Intermediate Range Monitor (IRM), in TS Table 4.3.6-1, would be i
changed for the up-scale and the down-scale trip functions on each instrument from "SA" (once-per-184 days) to "R" (once-per-refueling cycle).
i 2.0 EVALUATION The SRM and IRM upscale and downscale trip function instrumentation is part of the control rod block instrumentation that is provided to prevent excessive l
control rod withdrawal. The current surveillance requirements for SRM and IRM upscale and downscale trip function channel calibration in TS Table 4.3.6-1 l
specify an interval of once per 184 days. The licensee has proposed a revision to TS Table 4.3.6-1 that would specify a channel calibration interval l
of once per refueling cycle.
NUREG-1366, " Improvements to Technical Specification Surveillance Requirements," provided the results of a comprehensive examination of i
surveillance requirements in TS that require testing during power operation.
The results of this effort indicated that while the majority of the testing at power was important, safety could be improved, equipment degradation decreased, and an unnecessary burden on personnel resources eliminated by reducing the amount of testing that the TS require during power operation.
4 One of the recommendations in NUREG-1366 was the extension of channel calibrations for SRM and IRM upscale and downscale trip functions to once each refueling cycle.
Based upon a review of surveillance requirement results for the past 3 years for SRM and IRM channel calibrations, the licensee has concluded that the proposed TS changes are compatible with plant operating experience and are consistent with the guidance provided by NUREG-1366.
l 9509140207 950912 PDR AD P _.
OCK 05000354
.PDR
4
)
E.
l i
l The staff has reviewed the licensee's proposal and finds that it is compatible with plant operations and is consistent with the guidance provided by NUREG-1366.
i
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Comission's regulations, the New Jersey State Official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes the 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 significant increase in individual or cumulative 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 (60 FR 3676). 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 Comission 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:
B. Marcus Date: September 12, 1995
.