ML20136G803

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 105 to License DPR-21

ML20136G803
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone, Haddam Neck, 05000000
Issue date:	08/12/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20136G766	List: ML20136G758 ML20136G783 ML20136G790 ML20136G803 ML20136G812 ML20136G835
References
NUDOCS 8508200019
Download: ML20136G803 (2)

Text

_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

e ,' .

g URHTED STATES i- [ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c -

wasHwooToN. D. C.20005

....+ ,

l h SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOP PEGULATION

! SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 105 TO PPOVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPP-21

(

NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-2a5 INTRODUCTION

[

By letter dated Fay IP. 1983, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNEco or the licensee) requested an amendment to the Appendix A Technical Specifications <

.. (TS) apperded to Provisional Operating License No. DPR-21 for the M111 store

Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1. The proposed changes would delete certeir i environmental qualification schedule and documentation requirements, which "

have been superseded by new requirements in 10 CFR 50.49.

A Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to License and Prnensed No ,

j Significant Harerds Consideration Deterinination and Opportunity for Hearing i related to the recuested action was published in the Federal Recister on l May 21, 1985 (50 FR 20984). No reovests for hearing and no comments were ,

received. ,

EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION l'

Currently, Adrinistrative Controls TS 6.13 " Environmental Qualification" describes the implementation schedule and records requirements for j environmental qualification of all safety-related electrical equipment l

in the facility. Specification 6.10.2.1 reovires records for environmental qualification to be retained for the duration of the facility operating license. The licensee proposed to delete TS 6.13. Additinnally, during 4

i i the staff's evaluetion, the staff noted that TS 6.10.2.1 contained words i in part that were no longer applicable and should be deleted. The proposed i revisions by the licensee and additional changes by the staff were discussed 1

and agreed to by the licensee during a telephone conference on May 31, 1985.

The steff finds that deletion of these requirements from the TS can be made j since schedule and documentation requirements for environmental qualificatier 1 of electrical equipment are superseded by 10 CFR 50.49 (effective June 30.

j 1982). The deletion of these requirements from Millstone Unit 1 Technical Specifications published in theisFederalalso consistentRegister on with final rulemeking(by November 15, 1984 49FR45114). the Consnission, as

}

1 1

1 P I

2 The staff has evalueted the proposed changes to the TS and conched that these changes are administrative and do not invc1ve any physical c..ange to the plant's safety-releted structures, systems or components, Further, these changes do not increase the likelihnod of a malfunctinn of safety-related eouipment, or increase the consequences of an accident previously analyzed or create the possibility cf a malfunction.different from those previously evaluated. Therefore, based on the above, the staff finds the licensee requested changes to revise record retention reoufrements and environ-mental qualification schedule and documentation requirements to be acceptable.

ENVIPOWENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves changes in recordkeeping and administrative procedures

~

or requirements. This amendment also involves changes in schedule requirements with respect to installation or use of facility electrical conporents located within the restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has deter-mined that the amendment involves no significant cherce in the types, and no significant increase in the amounts, of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increese in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Corsnission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been ce public conenent on such finding.

Accordingly, this amendment meets the clicibility) criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.??fc)(9) and (10 . Pursuant to 10 CFR j 51.22(b) no environmental imoact statement or environmental assessment need l'e prepared in connection with the issuarce of this amendment. j CONCLUSION The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public wilf i not bs endangered by operation in the proposed manner; and (2) such ectivities will be conducted in conpliance with the Consnission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the corspen defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

AcryfMFDGEMENT This safety evalution was prepared by Mr. Fichael Schaeffer, Region I.

DATED: August 12, 1965