ML17108A384: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:April 19, 2017  
{{#Wiki_filter:April 19, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO:           Biweekly Notice Coordinator FROM:                   Blake Purnell, Project Manager /RA/
 
Plant Licensing Branch III Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
MEMORANDUM TO: Biweekly Notice Coordinator  
 
FROM: Blake Purnell, Project Manager  
/RA/ Plant Licensing Branch III Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation  


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION IN BIWEEKLY FR NOTICE- NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES, PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING (CAC NOS. MF9470-MF9490)  
REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION IN BIWEEKLY FR NOTICE- NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES, PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING (CAC NOS. MF9470-MF9490)
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, Maryland Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and No. 50-353, Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York


Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, Maryland Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and No. 50-353, Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York Biweekly Notice Coordinator Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Wayne County, New York Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: March 28, 2017. Publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17087A028. Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the technical specifications (TSs) based on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-529, "Clarify Use and Application Rules" (ADAMS Accession No. ML16062A271). The changes would revise and clarify the TS usage rules for completion times, limiting conditions for operation (LCOs), and surveillance requirements (SRs). Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Biweekly Notice Coordinator                       Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Wayne County, New York Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: March 28, 2017. Publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17087A028.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the technical specifications (TSs) based on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-529, Clarify Use and Application Rules (ADAMS Accession No. ML16062A271). The changes would revise and clarify the TS usage rules for completion times, limiting conditions for operation (LCOs), and surveillance requirements (SRs).
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Response: No.
The proposed changes to [TS] Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 have no effect on the requirement for systems to be Operable and have no effect on the application of TS actions. The proposed change to SR 3.0.3 (or equivalent) states that the allowance may only be used when there is a reasonable expectation the surveillance will be met when performed.
The proposed changes to [TS] Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 have no effect on the requirement for systems to be Operable and have no effect on the application of TS actions. The proposed change to SR 3.0.3 (or equivalent) states that the allowance may only be used when there is a reasonable expectation the surveillance will be met when performed.
Since the proposed changes do not significantly affect system Operability, the proposed changes will have no significant effect on the initiating events for accidents previously evaluated and will have no significant effect on the ability of the systems to mitigate accidents previously  
Since the proposed changes do not significantly affect system Operability, the proposed changes will have no significant effect on the initiating events for accidents previously evaluated and will have no significant effect on the ability of the systems to mitigate accidents previously evaluated.
 
evaluated.
Biweekly Notice Coordinator  Therefore, it is concluded that these changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously


evaluated.
Biweekly Notice Coordinator                                      Therefore, it is concluded that these changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
: 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
: 2.     Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Response: No.
The proposed changes to the TS usage rules do not affect the design or function of any plant systems. The proposed changes do not change the  
The proposed changes to the TS usage rules do not affect the design or function of any plant systems. The proposed changes do not change the Operability requirements for plant systems or the actions taken when plant systems are not operable.
 
Therefore, it is concluded that the changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Operability requirements for plant systems or the actions taken when plant systems are not operable.
: 3.     Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Therefore, it is concluded that the changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously  
 
evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
Response: No.
The proposed changes clarify the application of [TS] Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 and do not result in changes in plant operation. SR 3.0.3 (or equivalent) is revised to allow application of SR 3.0.3 when an SR has not been previously performed if there is reasonable expectation that the SR  
The proposed changes clarify the application of [TS] Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 and do not result in changes in plant operation. SR 3.0.3 (or equivalent) is revised to allow application of SR 3.0.3 when an SR has not been previously performed if there is reasonable expectation that the SR will be met when performed. This expands the use of SR 3.0.3 while ensuring the affected system is capable of performing its safety function.
 
will be met when performed. This expands the use of SR 3.0.3 while ensuring the affected system is capable of performing its safety function.
As a result, plant safety is either improved or unaffected.
As a result, plant safety is either improved or unaffected.
Therefore, it is concluded that the changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Therefore, it is concluded that the changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona  
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona


ML17108A384 OFFICE DORL/LPL3/PM DORL/LPL3/LA DORL/LPL3/BC DORL/LPL3/PM NAME BPurnell SRohrer DWrona BPurnell DATE 4/18/2017 4/18/2017 4/19/2017 4/19/2017}}
ML17108A384 OFFICE DORL/LPL3/PM         DORL/LPL3/LA       DORL/LPL3/BC         DORL/LPL3/PM NAME     BPurnell           SRohrer           DWrona               BPurnell DATE     4/18/2017         4/18/2017         4/19/2017           4/19/2017}}

Revision as of 05:35, 30 October 2019

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing (CAC Nos. MF9470-MF9490)
ML17108A384
Person / Time
Site: Byron, Braidwood  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 04/19/2017
From: Blake Purnell
Plant Licensing Branch III
To:
Purnell B, NRR/DORL/LPLIII, 415-1380
References
CAC MF9470, CAC MF9471, CAC MF9472, CAC MF9473, CAC MF9474, CAC MF9475, CAC MF9476, CAC MF9477, CAC MF9478, CAC MF9479, CAC MF9480, CAC MF9481, CAC MF9482, CAC MF9483, CAC MF9484, CAC MF9485, CAC MF9486, CAC MF9487, CAC MF9488, CAC MF9489, CAC MF9490
Download: ML17108A384 (4)
v • d • e


Text

April 19, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO: Biweekly Notice Coordinator FROM: Blake Purnell, Project Manager /RA/

Plant Licensing Branch III Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION IN BIWEEKLY FR NOTICE- NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES, PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING (CAC NOS. MF9470-MF9490)

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, Maryland Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and No. 50-353, Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York

Biweekly Notice Coordinator Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Wayne County, New York Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: March 28, 2017. Publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17087A028.

Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the technical specifications (TSs) based on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-529, Clarify Use and Application Rules (ADAMS Accession No. ML16062A271). The changes would revise and clarify the TS usage rules for completion times, limiting conditions for operation (LCOs), and surveillance requirements (SRs).

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

Response: No.

The proposed changes to [TS] Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 have no effect on the requirement for systems to be Operable and have no effect on the application of TS actions. The proposed change to SR 3.0.3 (or equivalent) states that the allowance may only be used when there is a reasonable expectation the surveillance will be met when performed.

Since the proposed changes do not significantly affect system Operability, the proposed changes will have no significant effect on the initiating events for accidents previously evaluated and will have no significant effect on the ability of the systems to mitigate accidents previously evaluated.

Biweekly Notice Coordinator Therefore, it is concluded that these changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

Response: No.

The proposed changes to the TS usage rules do not affect the design or function of any plant systems. The proposed changes do not change the Operability requirements for plant systems or the actions taken when plant systems are not operable.

Therefore, it is concluded that the changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Response: No.

The proposed changes clarify the application of [TS] Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 and do not result in changes in plant operation. SR 3.0.3 (or equivalent) is revised to allow application of SR 3.0.3 when an SR has not been previously performed if there is reasonable expectation that the SR will be met when performed. This expands the use of SR 3.0.3 while ensuring the affected system is capable of performing its safety function.

As a result, plant safety is either improved or unaffected.

Therefore, it is concluded that the changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona

ML17108A384 OFFICE DORL/LPL3/PM DORL/LPL3/LA DORL/LPL3/BC DORL/LPL3/PM NAME BPurnell SRohrer DWrona BPurnell DATE 4/18/2017 4/18/2017 4/19/2017 4/19/2017

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17108A384&oldid=2009039"