ML20216J550
| ML20216J550 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/03/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20216J539 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9709170356 | |
| Download: ML20216J550 (3) | |
Text
_
l mseegk UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WAeHINGTON, D.C. 30eeHopt
- sese SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 148 TO FAClllTY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-49 NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY. ET AL.
MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-423 j
1.0 1NTRODUCTlQH i
By letter dated June 30, 1997, the Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et al.
i (the licensee), submitted a request for changes to the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Technical Specifications (TS).
TS Surveillance Requirements 4.7.1.5.1 and 4.7.1.5.2 require the periodic testing of the main steam isolation valves (MSIVs) to demonstrate operability.
The proposed amendment would (1) clarify when the HSIVs are partial stroked or full closure tested, (2) add a note to the Mode 4 applicability of Technical Specification 3.7.1.5 to r', quire that the MSIVs be closed and deactivated at less than i
320 degrec, F, (3) make editorial changes, and (4) make changes to the associated Bases sections.
2.0 BACKGROUND
By letter dated January 15, 1988, Millstone Unit 3 was granted relief for certain valves from the quarterly full stroke surveillance testing requirements of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code,Section XI.
In the letter, the NRC stated that the licensee's proposal to partially stroke test the MSIVs during power and full stroke test the valves during shutdowns pursuant to TS 4.0.5 was acceptable.
The basis for the relief was that full stroking the MSIVs to the closed position during power o)eration would result in an unbalanced steam flow condition producing an a) normal power distribution in the reactor core, possibly causing a reactor trip.
Currently, Millstone Unit 3 TS 4.7.1.5.1 requires that each MSIV be demonstrated operable by verifying full closure within 10 seconds on an actual or simulated actuation signal in Modes 1, 2, and 3 when tested pursuant to Specification 4.0.5.
3.0 EVALUATION in its letter dated June 30, 1997, the licensee stated that the proposed changes to TS Surve111ances.4.7.1.5.1 and 4.7.1.5.2, and associated footnote, would clarify the testing of the MSIVs by rewording and separating the N
DohK0000$23 P
l 2-requirements into three surveillances.
Surveillance 4.7.1.5.1 would identify a Mode 1 and 2 requirement to partial stroke test the MSIVs in Modes 1 and 2 unless a successful 10-second full stroke test was performed during the surveillance period. Surveillance 4.7.1.5.2 would identify a Mode 3 requirement to perform a 10-second full closure test of the MSIVs in Mode 3 or 4.
Surveillance 4.7.1.5.3 would identify a Mode 4 requirement to perform a l
120-second full closure test of the MSIVs in Mode 4 when the reactor coolant i
system (RCS) temperature is greater than or equal to 320 degrees F.
The licensee further proposed that a footnote be added to the limiting condition for operation and surveillance to identify that the MSIVs are required to be closed and deactivated when the RCS temperature is less than 320 degrees F.
The licensee stated that the footnote would eliminate the potent < a1 to declare the MSIVs operable in the upper range of Mode 4 and then allow the MSIVs to remain open during a cooldown into the lower range of Mode 4 where they may not be able to meet their required stroke time.
3 Partial stroke testing of MSIVs shows that (1) the MSIVs actuation solenoid valves operate in the proper amount of time, and (2)bility of reactor trip.
the main valve is free to move.
Partial stroke testing also reduces the possi Full stroke testing in Modes 3 and/or 4 demonstrate that the valves can fully cycle shut in the required time frames.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's request and the NRC's letter granting relief dated January 15, 1988.
Since the licensee's proposed surveillance requirements are consistent with the granted relief request, do not change the required full stroke time limits, and continue to assure that the valves will function consistent with the Millstone Unit 3 accident analyses, the NRC staff finds the changes acceptable.
The staff has reviewed the addition of the footnote, which requires that in Mode 4, the MSIVs are required to be closed and deactivated with RCS temperature less than 320 degrees F.
Since the temperature restriction is consistent with the valves manufacturers recommendations and, when the valves i
are closed they are performing their design function to mitigate the consequences of accidents that could result in offsite exposures, the staff finds the addition of the footnote acceptable.
in addition, the staff has reviewed the editorial changes and has found them acceptable.
The changes to the Bases were reviewed and the staff had no objection to the wording.
~a.+, -,,
a.-r-nwn
--e.,.
,-wa,,..,.s,.
<m,..
o,,-,,
e--.
e,,+
~
-w..-,--.-e
-,s-,
=.
l
' i
4.0 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 comments.
5.0 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,andthatthereisnoslgnificantincreaseinindividualorcumulative 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 (62 FR 40853 dated July 30,1997).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the el'gibility 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.
6.0 CONCLUSION
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 activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will nut be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: J. Andersen Date: September 3, 1997 E
-,-._,..-,v--
.c
-