ML20209G003
| ML20209G003 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 08/28/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209F993 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-62137, TAC-62138, NUDOCS 8609120340 | |
| Download: ML20209G003 (2) | |
Text
,c
/
UNITED STATES d'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 77 AND 70 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-42 AND DPR-60 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY PRAIF.IE ISLAND NUCLEAR GEhEFATING PLANT, UNIT N05. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NCS. 50-282 AND 50-306 IhTRODUCTION By letter dated June 6, 1986, Northern States Power Company (NSP), the licensee, requested arrendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60 for the Prairie Islano Nuclear Generating Plant Unit Nos. I and 2 (PINGP). The arnendments would change the technical specifications by including the operability and the surveillance requirements associated with the instrurrentation for detecting inadequate core cooling consisting of subcooling margin monitors, core-exit thermocouples, and the reactor vessel level instrumentation systen.s (RVLIS).
Specifically, additional requirements would be placed in sections 3.15 (Table TS.3.15-1, TS.3.15-2, and Table TS.3.15-3) and 4.1 (Table TS.4.1-1) of the Prairie Island Technical Specifications. These additional requirements would restrict plant operation resulting f rom the nalfunctions of these instrumentation components and would provide periodic testing to assure adequate operability of these components when called for to perform the intended safety function.
EVALUATION In our Generic Letter (GL) 82-20 dated December 10, 1982, actions were identitteo requiring all licensees of Westir,ghouse operating reactors to install and to assure operability of instrumentation for detecting inadequate core cooling, in addition, our GL 83-37 dated Noven.ber 1,1983 identified NUREG-0737, item !!.F-2 related to the inadequate core cooling instrumentation (ICC1) and requested the licensee to apply the model technical specification covering ICCI to the Prairie Island technical specifications. The licensee provided letters dated June 18, October 22, 1985 and April 4, 1986 that addresses our concerns related to the design of these instruments and modifications to the model technical specificaticr.
in order to satisfy the specific application for Prairie Island.
By letter dated May 8, 1986, the NRC issued a safety evaluation dealing with the design modification of the ICCI and finding the rhodel technical specification submitted by the licensee's letter dated April 4,1966 acceptable. As discussed in our May 8, 198C safety evaluation, deviations of the proposed model technical specification (of the Arril 4, 1966 submittal) from our standard nodel technical specifications were found 0609120340 060020 PDR ADOCH 00000202 P
pop
. acceptable. The proposed changes associated with this amer.dment request (by letter dated June C,1986) are essentially the same as those previously approved by our safety evaluation issued on May 8, 19E6 except for minor editorial changes required to fit these revisions into the existing technical specifications. We have reviewed these minor editorial changes and agree with the licensee that they are necessary in order to fit the changes into the existing text of the specifications and that they in no way change the previously approved requirements appearing in the n.odel technical specifications. On this basis, the proposed technical specifications related to the subcooling margin monitors, core-exit thermocouples and the reactor vessel level instrument are found acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a
. facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 Conmission has prey'ously published a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards considera-tion and there has been no public comrrent on such finding. Accordingly, these an.endments rreet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
These amendments also involve changes in recordkeeping, repurting or admini-strative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, with respect to these items, the amendrrents meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFP 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environrrental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with tht issuance of these arrendments.
CONCLUSION We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Connission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendrrents will not be inimical to the comnon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Cuntributor:
D. C. Dilanni Date:
August 28, 1S86 c
-