ML16161A307
| ML16161A307 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16161A308 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9909290194 | |
| Download: ML16161A307 (2) | |
Text
pjt REG 0 4.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Z
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 306 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-38 AMENDMENT NO.
306 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-47 AND AMENDMENT NO.
306 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-55 DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1. 2, AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-269, 50-270, AND 50-287
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 24, 1999, Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would revise the maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature safety limit in Technical Specification 2.1.1.1 from the limit determined using the TACO2 fuel performance computer code to the value determined using a newer TACO3 computer code.
2.0 BACKGROUND
The current Oconee TS contain a requirement which specifies that the limit for maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature shall be "less than or equal to 5080 - (6.5E-3 x bumup) in degree F." This expression was derived fror the approved TACO2 fuel performance code, developed by Framatome Cogema Fuels (FCF), which tends to be more conservative. The more recently approved fuel performance code used by FCF is TACO3. Ihe NRC staff approved the use of TACO3 by the licensee in a safety evaluation letter from H. N. Berkow to M. S. Tuckman dated April 3, 1995. Because of the different methods in treating code uncertainties between these two codes, the expression of maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature limit using TACO3 was changed to "less than or equal to 4642 - (5.8E-3 x Bumup) in degree F." In the submittal, the licensee proposed to replace the existing expression in TS 2.1.1.1 with the new expression for determining the maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature limit. The licensee stated that this change is administrative with no significant safety implications.
3.0 EVALUATION The licensee proposed to replace the limit of maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature in Modes 1 and 2 in TS 2.1.1 Reactor Core Safety Limits, with a new expression derived from the approved TACO3 code. The new expression is:
9909290194 990924 PDR ADOCK 05000269 P
-2 "In MODES 1 and 2, the maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature shall be less than or equal to 4642 - (5.8E-3 x (Bumup, MWD/MTU))
degree F..."
The use of the TACO3 code is also referenced in Section 1.1, "References," of the Oconee, Unit 1 core operating limits report (COLR). For Units 2 and 3, the licensee stated that the COLRs will be administratively updated to reflect the use of TACO3 during their next refueling outages.
The staff has reviewed the licensee submittal of the proposed TS change to revise the limit for the maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature using the TACO3 code that has been approved by the staff. Based on this evaluation, the staff has concluded that the revised limit for the maximum local fuel pin centerline temperature is consistent with the approved safety evaluation and is, therefore, acceptable.
Based on the licensee's use of the approved TACO3 code, the staff has concluded that the TS changes are acceptable for Oconee, Units 1, 2, and 3.
4.0 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.
5.0 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. 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 (64 FR 35203). Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 amendments.
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 amendments will not be inimical to the common ueiense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: S. Wu, SRXB Date:
September 24, 1999