ML20205M573

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 108,25,134 & 26 to Licenses DPR-61,DPR-21,DPR-65 & NPF-49,respectively

ML20205M573
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone, Haddam Neck, 05000000
Issue date:	10/26/1988
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20205M530	List: ML20205M525 ML20205M559 ML20205M573
References
NUDOCS 8811030152
Download: ML20205M573 (2)

Text

%

s'

/ 'o UNITED STATES

/go 8" 3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f ,E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

\...../

SAFETY EVALUATION M ThE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REAC10R REGULATION RELA 1ED_TO AMENDMENT NOS. 108,, 25_7 134 AND 26 TO DPR-612,DP,R-21,,, P DPR-65, A,Np,,NP,F,,4,9 C,0,Ng,C,TJ,CRT, ,Y,ANJ,E, ,A,T,@J,C, ,PpKE,R,1@ff NJ AND NORTHEA,Si NUCLEAR EhERGY COMPANY, ET AL.

HADDAM hECL FLAhl AhD MILLST0kE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, Ut:IT N,05.,J,, 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-213,,,,2,45,,, 336 AND 423 1.0 lhTRODUCTION By applicaticr. dated April 29, IcFP as supplernented by letter dated July 21, 1988, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company and Northeast Nuclear Energy Corrpany (the licer, sees) requested changes to the Techr.ical Specifications (TS) for Haddam Neck ard Millstone Units 1, 2 and 3. The proposed changes affect the TSs which specify the qualifications cnd conduct of the Nuclear Review Board (NRB) for all Units and the Site Nuclear Review Board for Millstone Units 1, 2 and 3.

2.0 DISCUS $1pApp, ,E,Vply,A,T),0!.

The licensees have proposed the following changes to the Haddam Neck TS:

(1) A new TS 6.5.2.la would specify the qualifications of the NRB Chaiman and NRB members which had previously been incorporated in TS 6.5.2.2, "Composition", (2) the NRB functional review areas which are in TS 6.5.2.1, "Function," would be designated as new TS 6.5.2.1b, (3) the minimum composition of the NRS, ,

specified'.in TS 6.2.2, "Composition," would be changed from seven to eight members, (4) a "charter" for the NRB review function would be added to TS 6.5.2.6, "Review," to require that -

"The NR8 shall function as ari independent review body...", and (5) the minimum quorum for the MRB, given in TS 6.5.2.5, "Quorum" would no longer be fixed at four members plus the chairwan but would be established as "...a majority of the men.bers including the chainnan."

kol20gK0500023 2 001026 P

PN

2-In addition, the licensees have proposed the followirg changes to the TS for Millstone Units 1, 2 and 3:

(1) A new TS 6.5.3.la would s)ecify the qualificat'ons of the NRB Chainnan and NRB members whici had previously been incorporated in TS 6.5.3.2, "Composition", (2) the NRB functionO v eview areas which are presently in 6.5.3.1, "Function", would be duignated as new TS 6.5.2.1b, (3) the minimum composition of the NRB, specified in TS 6.5.3.2, "Composition", would bc ..anged from seven to eight members, (4) a "charter" for the NRB review function would be added to TS 6.5.3.6, "Review", to require that "The NRB shall function as a independent review body...", (5) the minimum quorum for the NRB, given in TS 6.5.3.5 would no longer be fixed at four members plus the chairman but would be established as "... a majority of the members including the chairman.", (6) a new TS 6.5.4.la would specify the qualifications of the Site Nuclear Review Board (SNRB) Chairman and SNRB members which had previously been incorporated in TS 6.5.4.2, "Composition," (7) the SNRB functional review areas which are presently in TS 6.5.4.1, "Function", would be designated as new TS 6.5.4.lb, and (8) a "charter" for the SNRB would be added to TS 6.5.3.6, "Review" to require that, "The SNRB shall function as an independent review body ...."

The proposed changes to the TS would provide an irrproved level of comonality among the requirements for NRB for Haddam Neck and Millstone Units 1, 2 and 3.

In addition, the TS would not decrease the effectiveness, in terns of qualifi-cations or operating efficiency of the NRB or SNRB. Accordingly, the safety review and audit functions of NRB/SNRB would not be changed by the proposed TS and thus the proposed changes to the TS are acceptable.

l 3.0 ENVIRONFENTAL_ CONSIDERATION The amendments for Haddam Neck and Millstone Units 1, 2 ard 3 involve changes which are administrative in nature. Accordingly, the amendments meet the l eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CrR 551.22(c)(10). * ,

l Pursuant to 10 CFR 651.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.

I l

4.0 CONCLUSION

l We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the pubite will not be endangered by operation in the pro)osed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance wit 1 the Comission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Dated: October 26, 1988 Principal Contributor: D. Jaffe I

_ _ ._ _ _ _ _ . , . __