ML062060146

Issuance of Amendment Technical Specification Changes to the Reactivity Control System Rod Drop Time Test

ML062060146
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	08/15/2006
From:	Nerses V NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLB
To:	Christian D Dominion Nuclear Connecticut
Nerses V, NRR//DLPM, 415-1484
Shared Package
ML062060099	List: ML062060146 ML062270389
References
TAC MC8430
Download: ML062060146 (10)

Text

August 15, 2006Mr. David A. ChristianSr. Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.

Innsbrook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060-6711

SUBJECT:

MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 3 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTRE: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES TO THE REACTIVITYCONTROL SYSTEM ROD DROP TIME TEST (TAC NO. MC8430)

Dear Mr. Christian:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 231 to Facility Operating LicenseNo. NPF-49 for Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 (MPS3), in response to your applicationdated September 13, 2005.The amendment revises the MPS3 Technical Specification temperature requirement for thereactivity control system rod drop time test.A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included inthe Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.Sincerely,/RA/Victor Nerses, Senior Project ManagerPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket No. 50-423

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 231 to NPF-49

2. Safety Evaluationcc w/encls: See next page August 15, 2006Mr. David A. ChristianSr. Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.

Innsbrook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060-6711

SUBJECT:

MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 3 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTRE: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES TO THE REACTIVITYCONTROL SYSTEM ROD DROP TIME TEST (TAC NO. MC8430)

Dear Mr. Christian:

The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 231 to Facility Operating LicenseNo. NPF-49 for Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 (MPS3), in response to your applicationdated September 13, 2005.The amendment revises the MPS3 Technical Specification temperature requirement for thereactivity control system rod drop time test.A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included inthe Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.Sincerely,/RA/Victor Nerses, Senior Project ManagerPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket No. 50-423

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 231 to NPF-49

2. Safety Evaluationcc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION

PUBLICRidsNrrPMVNersesPKrohn, RGN-1 LPL1-2 R/FRidsNrrLACRaynorTBoyce RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenterRidsOgcRpGHill (2)

RidsNrrDorlLpl1-2JNakoskiFForsatyPackage Accession Number: ML062060099Amendment Accession Number: ML062060416TS(s) Accession Number: ML062270389OFFICELPLI-2/PMLPLI-2/LASPWB/CITSB/COGCLPLI-2/BC (A)NAMEVNerses:rsaCRaynorJNakoskiTKobetzSUttalBPoole DATE8/9/067/27/067/31/06no concurrence req.8/7/068/11/06OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC.DOCKET NO. 50-423MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 3AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSEAmendment No. 231License No. NPF-491.The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:A.The application for amendment by Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (thelicensee) dated September 13, 2005, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I;B.The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of theAct, and the rules and regulations of the Commission;C.There is reasonable assurance: (i) that the activities authorized by thisamendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with theCommission's regulations;D.The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense andsecurity or to the health and safety of the public; and E.The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of theCommission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied. 2.Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications asindicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of FacilityOperating License No. NPF-49 is hereby amended to read as follows:(2)Technical SpecificationsThe Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised throughAmendment No. 231, and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, both of which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated in the license. Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. shall operate the facility inaccordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan. 3.This license amendment is effective as of the date of issuance, and shall beimplemented within 60 days of issuance.FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION/RA/Brooke D. Poole, Acting ChiefPlant Licensing Branch I-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Technical SpecificationsDate of Issuance: August 15, 2006 ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 231FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-49DOCKET NO. 50-423Replace the following page of the Appendix A, Technical Specifications, with the attachedrevised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal lines indicating the areas of change. RemoveInsert3/4 1-253/4 1-25 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATIONRELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 231TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-49DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC.MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 3DOCKET NO. 50-42

31.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated September 13, 2005, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC or licensee)submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) a request for achange to the Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 (MPS3) Technical Specifications (TSs)temperature requirement for the reactivity control system rod drop time test.

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's September 13, 2005, application to verify that theproposed change continues to meet with the regulatory requirements as stipulated in thefollowing General Design Criteria (GDC):1.GDC 10, "Reactor design," which requires that the reactor core and associatedcoolant, control, and protection systems be designed with appropriate margin toassure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including the effects of anticipated operationaloccurrences. 2.GDC 26, "Reactivity control system redundan cy and capability," which requires,among other things, that two independent reactivity control systems of differentdesign principles be provided. GDC 26 also require s that one of the systemsshall use control rods, preferably including a positive means for inserting the rods, and shall be capable of reliably controlling reactivity changes to assure thatunder conditions of normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences, and with appropriate margin for malfunctions, such as stuck rods, specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded.3.GDC 27, "Combined reactivity control systems capability," which requires thatthe reactivity control systems be designed to have a combined capability, inconjunction with poison addition by the emergency core cooling system, of reliably controlling reactivity changes to assure that under postulated accidentconditions, and with appropriate margin for stuck rods, the capability to cool thecore is maintained.4.GDC 28, "Reactivity limits," which requires, among other things, that thereactivity control systems be designed with appropriate limits on the potentialamount and rate of reactivity increase to assure that the effects of postulated reactivity accidents can neither (1) result in damage to the reactor coolant pressure boundary greater than limited local yielding, nor (2) sufficiently disturb the core, its support structures or other reactor pressure vessel internals to impair significantly the capability to cool the core.Additionally, the NRC staff verified that the proposed change complies with the MPS3 licensingbasis criteria stated in the Final Safety Analysis Report. The staff used Chapter 4.6 of NUREG-0800, "Standard Review Plan (SRP) for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports forNuclear Power Plants LWR Edition," (Reference 1), and NUREG 1431, "Standard TechnicalSpecifications Westinghouse Plants," (Reference 2) as guidance during the review.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The licensee has proposed to modify Limiting Condition for Operation 3.1.3.4, which isapplicable during MODES 1 and 2, and currently reads as follows:The individual full-length (shutdown and control) rod drop time from the fully withdrawnposition shall be less than or equal to 2.7 seconds from beginning of decay of stationary gripper coil voltage to dashpot entry with:a.Tavg greater than or equal to 551 F, andb.All reactor coolant pumps operating.The licensee's proposed change is to replace "551 F" with "500 F" in subpart "a."The conditions requiring control rods (or the typical terminology: rod cluster control assembly(RCCA)) drop testing are as follows:Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.1.3.4 states that the demonstration of required RCCA droptime is required prior to reactor criticality:a.For all rods following each removal of the reactor vessel head, b.For specifically affected individual rods following any maintenance on ormodification to the Control Rod Drive System which could affect the drop time of those specific rods, andc.At least every 24 months.The RCCA drop test is intended to provide verification that RCCAs will perform as assumedduring a reactor trip from power operation. Verification of RCCA drop time allows the licensee to determine that actual drop times are consistent with the drop times assumed in the plant'ssafety analysis. The RCCA drop test ensures that the reactor internals and RCCA drivemechanisms do not interfere with RCCA motion or increase drop time, and that no degradationin the system has occurred that would adversely affect the operability of the RCCAs.The NRC staff reviewed the results from testing during the initial startup at MPS3. RCCA droptests were performed at cold (Tavg 145 F, reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure 390 psia)and hot (Tavg 557 F, RCS pressure 2250 psia ) reactor coolant temperatures with all reactorcoolant pumps operating. The tests demonstrated a slight increase in RCCA drop time asreactor coolant temperature was decreased. Specifically, a drop time increase of less than 0.3 seconds was observed between the cold and hot coolant temperatures. A slight increase inRCCA drop time at lower reactor coolant temperatures is expected. At lower coolant temperatures, the coolant density increases, which increases the resistive force against a dropping RCCA, thereby increasing its drop time. Measured RCCA drop times taken duringMPS3 Cycle-10 startup were less than 1.6 seconds, and measuring the RCCA drop time at 500 F is expected to increase the RCCA drop time by less than 0.15 seconds. This wouldresult in a drop time estimate at 500 F of approximately 1.75 seconds. Based on the above,the licensee concluded that, there is sufficient margin to accommodate the slight increase indrop times as a result of performing the test at a lower temperature without changing the 2.7-seconds limit in TS 3.1.3.4. Since the decrease of the required average reactor coolanttemperature for the rod drop test would increase the rod drop time, the proposed TS change to reduce the temperature from 551 F to 500 F is still well within the existing TS value.The licensee proposes changes to the TS Bases to conform to the proposed TS change. TheNRC staff has no objection to TS Bases updates that address the proposed TS change.4 .0

SUMMARY

The NRC staff has reviewed the license amendment request and concluded that the proposedTS change continues to meet the regulatory requirements as stipulated in GDC 10, 26, 27 and28. Therefore, the NRC staff finds the change is acceptable.

5.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Connecticut State official was notified ofthe proposed issuance of the amendment. The Connecticut State official agreed with the NRC staff's conclusion as stated in Section 7.0 of this Safety Evaluation.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendment changes a requirement with respect to SRs. The NRC staff has determinedthat the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant changein the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significantchange in individual or cumulative 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 (70 FR 61656). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion as set forth in10 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 theamendment.

7.0 CONCLUSION

The NRC staff concludes that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety ofthe public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activity will beconducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not inimical to the common defense and security or health and safety of thepublic.

8.0 REFERENCES

1.NUREG-0800, "Standard Review Plan (SRP) for the Review of Safety Analysis Reportsfor Nuclear Power Plants LWR Edition."2.NUREG 1431, "Standard Technical Specifications Westinghouse Plants."Principal Contributor: F. ForsatyDate: August 15, 2006 Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 cc:

Lillilan M. Cuoco, EsquireSenior Counsel Dominion Resources Services, Inc.

Building 475, 5 th FloorRope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385Edward L. Wilds, Jr., Ph.D.Director, Division of Radiation Department of Environmental Protection 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106-5127Regional Administrator, Region IU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406First SelectmenTown of Waterford 15 Rope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385Mr. J. W. "Bill" S heehan Co-Chair NEAC 19 Laurel Crest Drive Waterford, CT 06385Mr. Evan W. WoollacottCo-Chair Nuclear Energy Advisory Council 128 Terry's Plain Road Simsbury, CT 06070Senior Resident InspectorMillstone Power Stationc/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

P. O. Box 513 Niantic, CT 06357Ms. Nancy Burton147 Cross Highway Redding Ridge, CT 00870Mr. Joseph Roy, Director of Operations Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company Moody Street

P.O. Box 426 Ludlow, MA 01056Mr. J. Alan PriceSite Vice President Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.

Building 475, 5 th FloorRope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385Mr. Chris FunderburkDirector, Nuclear Licensing and Operations Support Dominion Resources Services, Inc.

5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060-6711Mr. David W. DodsonLicensing Supervisor Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.

Building 475, 5 th FloorRope Ferry Road Waterford, CT 06385