ML040560065
| ML040560065 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 02/24/2004 |
| From: | Jabbour K NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD2 |
| To: | Scalice J Tennessee Valley Authority |
| Jabbour K, NRR/DLPM, 415-1496 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML040560175 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC MC0918 | |
| Download: ML040560065 (10) | |
Text
February 24, 2004 Mr. J. A. Scalice Chief Nuclear Officer and Executive Vice President Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801
SUBJECT:
BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 3 - ISSUANCE OF AN AMENDMENT REGARDING CYCLE 12 SAFETY LIMIT MINIMUM CRITICAL POWER RATIO VALUES (TAC NO. MC0918)
Dear Mr. Scalice:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 246 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-68 for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 3. This amendment is in response to your application dated October 1, 2003, as supplemented by letter dated December 19, 2003, regarding a proposed revision to the safety limit minimum critical power ratio values for Unit 3, Cycle 12, core reload analysis.
A copy of the Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commissions biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Kahtan N. Jabbour, Senior Project Manager, Section 2 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-296
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 246 to License No. DPR-68
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/enclosures: See next page
SC NAME KJabbour BClayton FAkstulewicz
- STurk**
WBurton DATE 2/24/04 2/24/04 02/05/04 2/23/04 2/24/2004
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY DOCKET NO. 50-296 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 3 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 246 License No. DPR-68 1.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A.
The application for amendment by Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee) dated October 1, 2003, as supplemented by a letter dated December 19, 2003, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commissions rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commissions regulations; D.
The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security 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 the Commissions regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
2.
Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. DPR-68 is hereby amended to read as follows:
(2)
Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 246, are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
3.
This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days from the date of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA/
William F. Burton, Acting Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: February 24, 2004
ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 246 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-68 DOCKET NO. 50-296 Replace the following page of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by an amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.
REMOVE INSERT 2.0-1 2.0-1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 246 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-68 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-296
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated October 1, 2003 (Reference 1), as supplemented by a letter dated December 19, 2003 (Reference 2), the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee) submitted a request for a revision to the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Unit 3, Technical Specifications (TSs). The request would revise the safety limit minimum critical power ratio (SLMCPR) values for Cycle 12 core reload analysis. The December 19, 2003, letter provided clarifying information that did not change the scope of the original request or the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee request would revise the SLMCPR values in TS 2.1.1.2 with the reactor steam dome pressure greater than or equal to 785 psig and core flow greater than or equal to 10 percent of rated core flow from the current specification to MCPR shall be 1.09 for two recirculation loop operation or 1.11 for single recirculation loop operation. The BFN Unit 3, Cycle 12, core has 764 fuel assemblies, of which there are 284 ATRIUM-10 fresh fuel bundles, 284 once-burned GE14 fuel bundles, and 196 twice-burned GE13 fuel bundles.
2.1 Regulatory Evaluation General Design Criterion (GDC) 10 of Appendix A to Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, requires that the reactor core and associated coolant, control, and protective system be designed with appropriate margin to ensure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded during steady state operation, normal operational transients, and anticipated operational occurrences. As stated in 10 CFR 50.36, Technical Specifications, safety limits are limits upon important process variables that are found to be necessary to reasonably protect the integrity of certain physical barriers that guard against the uncontrolled release of radioactivity. The SLMCPR values are required to be in the TSs to ensure that fuel design limits are not exceeded and to ensure compliance with GDC 10. The staff review will ensure that the licensee had performed the plant-specific SLMCPR analyses using Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-approved methodologies discussed in NUREG-0800, Standard
- 2 -
Review Plan, Section 4.4. The SLMCPR values ensure that sufficient conservatism exists in the operating limits such that, in the event of an anticipated operational occurrence, at least 99.9 percent of the fuel rods in the core are expected to avoid boiling transition for the power distribution within the core, including all uncertainties.
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
Framatome Advanced Nuclear Power (FANP) performed the SLMCPR analysis using plant-and cycle-specific fuel and core parameters. The licensee stated that FANP used NRC-approved methodologies, which include ANF-524(P)(A) Revision 2 and Supplements 1 and 2 (Reference 3), EMF-2209(P)(A), Revision 1 (Reference 4), EMF-2245(P)(A), Revision 0 (Reference 5), and EMF-2158(P)(A) Revision 0 (Reference 6).
The staff has reviewed (1) the licensees justification for the revision of the SLMCPR values from 1.08 to 1.09 for two recirculation loop operation, and from 1.10 to 1.11 for single recirculation loop operation; and (2) the applicability of the approved methodologies to this evaluation for first-cycle mixed core operation.
In response to the staffs request for additional information the licensee provided in Reference 2 (1) the reference loading pattern used for BFN Unit 3, Cycle 12, SLMCPR analysis, which is developed to meet the operating requirements and will accommodate the 24-month cycle, and the energy needs including approximately 1,100 Mwd/MTU post-EOFP (end of full-power) and coastdown operations, (2) the identification of the limitations listed for each approved methodology used and its applicability to the BFN Unit 3, Cycle 12, SLMCPR analysis, (3) MCPR values versus exposure to determine the margin through the entire BFN Unit 3, Cycle 12, operation, (4) procedures to determine fuel uncertainties relating to correlation, power and flow for a mixed core, and (5) conditions and assumptions used for this analysis relating to core monitoring equipment out-of-service conditions and no reused second-lifetime fuel channels.
The staff has reviewed the licensees justification to address the increase of the SLMCPR values and the applicability of approved methodologies to the BFN Unit 3, Cycle 12, SLMCPR analysis. The staff has concluded that the licensees justification is acceptable because the calculation results, based on NRC-approved methodologies with the listed limitations and proper uncertainties, indicate that the proposed SLMCPR values are conservative. The proposed BFN Unit 3, Cycle 12, SLMCPR values will ensure that 99.9 percent of the fuel rods in the core will not experience boiling transition, which satisfies the requirements of GDC 10 regarding specified acceptable fuel design limits.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Alabama State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
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. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no
- 3 -
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 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 (68 FR 61481). 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, 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 Commissions 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.
6.0 REFERENCES
- 1. Letter from T. E. Abney to NRC, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) - Unit 3 - Technical Specifications (TS) Change 445 - Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR) -
Cycle 12 Operation, October 1, 2003.
- 2. Letter from T. E. Abney to NRC, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) - Unit 3 - Technical Specifications (TS) Change 445 - Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR) -
Cycle 12 Operation - Response ton Request for Additional Information (RAI)
(TAC No. MC0918), December 19, 2003.
- 3. ANF-524(P)(A) Revision 2 and Supplements 1 and 2, ANF Critical Power Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, November 1990.
- 4. EMF-2209(P)(A) Revision 1, SPCB Critical Power Correlations, Siemens Power Corporation, July 2000.
- 5. EMF-2245(P)(A) Revision 0, Application of Siemens Power Corporations Critical Power Correlations to Co-Resident Fuel, Siemens Power Corporation, August 2000.
- 6. EMF-2158(P)(A) Revision 0, Siemens Power Corporation Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors: Evaluation and Validation of CASMO-4/MICROBURN-B2, Siemens Power Corporation, October 1999.
Principal Contributor: Tai Huang, NRR Date: February 24, 2004
Mr. J. A. Scalice BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT Tennessee Valley Authority cc:
Mr. Karl W. Singer, Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Mr. James E. Maddox, Vice President Engineering & Technical Services Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Mr. Ashok S. Bhatnagar, Site Vice President Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority ET 11A 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, TN 37902 Mr. Michael J. Fecht, Acting General Manager Nuclear Assurance Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Mr. Michael D. Skaggs, Plant Manager Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Mr. Jon R. Rupert, Vice President Browns Ferry Unit 1 Restart Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Mr. Robert G. Jones Browns Ferry Unit 1 Plant Restart Manager Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Mr. Mark J. Burzynski, Manager Nuclear Licensing Tennessee Valley Authority 4X Blue Ridge 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Mr. Timothy E. Abney, Manager Licensing and Industry Affairs Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 10833 Shaw Road Athens, AL 35611 State Health Officer Alabama Dept. of Public Health RSA Tower - Administration Suite 1552 P.O. Box 303017 Montgomery, AL 36130-3017 Chairman Limestone County Commission 310 West Washington Street Athens, AL 35611