ML20212G599

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 103 to License DPR-21

ML20212G599
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	10/27/1997
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212G570	List: ML20212G565 ML20212G586 ML20212G599
References
NUDOCS 9711060242
Download: ML20212G599 (3)

Text

- _ - - - _ - - _ _ _ _ - -

Ot i , g t t -

g

'2 j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 3066H001

\, ...../

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.103 TO FACllITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-21 NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY, MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT 1 DOCKET NC. 50-24]i -

1.0 1HTRODUCT10N By letter dated May 15, 1997, the Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO or licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Technical Specifications (TS). The amendment woeld revise Technical Specification Sections 3.1 and 4.1, " Reactor Protection System," and the associated Bases to remove run mode intermed'. ate ranc monitor high flux / inoperative scram trip function. with the associated average power range t;nitor downscalc The amendment woulo also make other editorial revisions.

2.0 EVALUATION The licensee proposed the following TS revisions:

Revise LCO [ Limiting Condition for Operation) 3.1 Reactor Protection System Table 3.1.1 and associated Tame Notes 5 and 10 to remove the RUN Mode IRM (Intermediate Range Manitor) High Flux / Inoperative with the associated APRM [ Average Power Range Monitor) downscale scram Trip function (IRM RUN Mode SCRAM).

Clarify APRM trip function (Flow Biased High Flux / Reduced High Flux)

Mode requirements and delete Action B for Reduced High Flux on LC0 3.1 Reactor Protection System Table 3.1.1. ,

Add new Note 5 to Surveillance Requirement 4.1 Reactor Protection System Table 4.1.2 to perform an overlap surveillance for (Source Range Monitor) SRM/IRM/APOM.

Revise System. and clarify associated TS Bases Section 3.1 Reactor Protection Regarding the first chag e proposed by the licensee, the staff's latest guidance for-TS requirements relating to reactor scram instrumentation is in NUREG-1433, Rev.1, " Standard Technical Specifications, General Electric Plants, BWR/4," April 1995 (NUREG-1433). The staff verified that the IRM High 9711060E42 971027 PDR ADOCK 05000245 P PDR

Flux / Inoperative functions are not listed as requirements in NUREG-1433. This function.is not required due to adequate protection from other trips and rod blocks. Therefore, the licensee's proposal is in conformance with the latest staff recommendations and is acceptable.

The second change proposed by the licensee corrects an editorial error introduced in a' previous amendment. Therefore, the licensee's proposal is acceptable.

Regarding the third and-fourth changes proposed by the licensee, the licensee's new note requires verification of adequate overlaps between SRM/IRM and IRM/APRM instrumentation. This new requirement enhances safety by ensuring that reactor power will not be increased or dec eased into a new '

neutron flux region without adequate indication or rod block protection.

Therefore, the licensee's proposal is acceptable. The associated Bases provided for this new surveillance requirement provides adequate information  !

for plant operators to determine the basis for the new surveillance and is

{

therefore acceptable. Also, the Bases clarification provided by the licensee '

is acceptable since it explicitly states the relationship between the APRMs.

3.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Connecticut State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comm,nts.

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

' Part 20 and changes 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 si i occupational radiation exposure.gnificant increasehas The Commission in individual or cumulativa previously issued a proposed-findin consideration, g that-the amendment involves no significant hazards and there has been no public comment on such finding (62 FR 33127 dated June 18,1997). 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 Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above,

'thati (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safet public will not be endangered by operation-in the-proposed manner,y (2)of the such

)

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.

Principa'l Contributor: S. Dembek Date: October 27, 1997 l

1

__