ML20093J812
| ML20093J812 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1995 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20093J811 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9510230408 | |
| Download: ML20093J812 (2) | |
Text
.
,. = -. - - - _... _ -..
. ~.-. - -. -. -
4 3. Sa crog t
UNITED STATES -
p
-j j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
t WASHINGTON, D.C. 2008M201 A...../
I j
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION l
RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 120 TO FACILITY OPERATING. LICENSE NO. NPF-49 j
NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY. ET AL.
i MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-423
?
i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 i
By letter dated Narch 29, 1995, the Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, submitted a request for changes to the Millstone Nuclear Power Station,
{
Unit No. 3 Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would modify the current Technical Specifications that have cycle-specific parameter limits in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) to include an additional cycle-a_
specific parameter and its supporting methodologies, b
2.0 EVALUATION i-The licensee requested TS changes in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of r
i Federal Regulations Part 50.90. The revised Specifications were proposed as follows:
(a)
Specifications 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.2 l
i The proposed changes involve deletion of the words " perform one j
of the following actions" and addition of words "or" between the three options provided by the action statement. These changes are administrative in nature, therefore, are acceptable.
b (b)
Surveillance Requirements 4.2.2.1.2.e, 4.2.2.1.4.e, 4.2.2.2.2.e and 4.2.2.2.4.e The present TS call for a fixed penalty of 2% to be applied to change involves using a penalty factor which,"is a cycle-specific the measured heat flux hot channel factor, F (Z).
The proposed parameter over certain burnup ranges and core design. The penalty factors are specified in the COLR. The penalty factor is calculated using an NRC-approved method indicated in a letter dated November 26, 1993, " Acceptance for Referencing of Revised Version of Licensing Topical Report WCAP-10216-P, Rev.1, Relaxation of Constant Axial Offset Control - F, Surveillance i
Technical Specifications." Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable..
l l
9510230408 951018 PDR ADOCK 05000423 I
(c)
Specification 6.9.1.6 The approved supporting methodology is identified in reference 5 of TS 6.9.1.6.b.
The bases of affected specifications have been modified by the licensee 4
to include appropriate reference to the COLR. Based on the NRC staff's.
j review, the staff has no objection to the changes to these bases.
l The NRC staff concludes that the licensee provided an acceptable response to those items addressed in the NRC guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in TS.
Because plant operation continues to
}
be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are established using NRC approved methodologies, the NRC staff concludes that these changes to these specifications are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
i In'accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Connecticut State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State 4
official had no comments.
l 1
j
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR t
Part 20. The amendment also relates to changes in administrative procedures or 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment'on such finding (60 FR 24912). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact i
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
l 5.0 CONCLUS10N 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 i
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) 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:
T. Huang Date:
October 18, 1995
!