ML16138A751
| ML16138A751 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 01/05/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16138A750 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9301130048 | |
| Download: ML16138A751 (3) | |
Text
CVeAREG(
0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.197 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-38 AMENDMENT NO.197 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-47 AND AMENDMENT NO.194 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-55 DUKE POWER COMPANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1. 2. AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-269, 50-270, AND 50-287
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 13, 1992, as supplemented December 1, 1992, Duke Power Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes would relocate some cycle-specific operating parameter limits currently specified in the TS to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) in accordance with the guidance provided in Generic Letter (GL) 88-16.
Previously, TS Amendments 172/172/169 and 191/191/198 similarly revised Oconee TS to replace the values of other cycle-specific parameter limits with references to the COLR providing these values. The December 1, 1992, letter provided clarifying information that did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The following TS were revised to replace the values of cycle-specific parameter limits with references to the COLR that provide these limits.
(1) TS 2.1 Axial power imbalance protective limits and variable low RCS pressure protective limits for this specification are specified in the COLR.
(2) TS 3.2.2 The concentrated boric acid storage tank volume and boron concentration limits for this specification are specified in the COLR.
9301130048 930105 PDR ADOCK 05000269 P
-2 (3)
TS 3.3.3 The core flood tank boron concentration limit is specified in the COLR.
(4) TS 3.3.4 The borated water storage tank boron concentration limit is specified in the COLR.
We have-reviewed the relocation of the cycle-specific values of the above core operating limits from the TS to the COLR and concluded that the relocation is acceptable in light of the guidance provided in GL 88-16.
The bases of the above specifications have been modified to include appropriate references to the COLR. Based on our review, we conclude that the changes to these bases are acceptable.
TS 6.9, Core Operating Limits Report, is revised to include the currently proposed TS changes in Specification 6.9.1. This clarifying revision is acceptable.
On the basis of its review of the above items, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee's proposed amendments are in accordance with the NRC guidance in GL 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in the TS. Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are established using NRC-approved methodologies, the NRC staff concludes that this change has no impact on plant safety. Accordingly, the NRC staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the South Carolina State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change requirements with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes recordkeeping or reporting requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (57 FR 40210, dated September 2, 1992).
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
-3
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 Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors: T. Huang S. Kirslis Date: January 5, 1993