ML17328A265
| ML17328A265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 05/23/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17328A264 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-16, NUDOCS 9006130401 | |
| Download: ML17328A265 (7) | |
Text
gAS REGIJ
~P
+
0
">>*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 122 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-74 INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY DONALD C.
COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT NO.
2 DOCKET NO. 50-316
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By le'tter dated February 6, 1990 (Ref. 1), Indiana and Michigan Power Company (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant Unit No.
2.
The proposed changes would modify specifications having cycle-specific parameter limits by replacing the values of those limits with a reference to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) for the values of those limits.
The proposed changes also include the addition of the COLR to the Definitions section and to the reporting requirements of the Administrative Controls section of TS.
Guidance on the proposed changes was developed by NRC on the basis of the review of a lead-plant proposal submitted on the Oconee plant docket by Duke Power Company.
This guidance was provided to all power reactor licensees and applicants by Generic Letter 88-16, dated October 4, 1988 (Ref. 2).
- 2. 0 EVALUATION The licensee's proposed changes to the TS are in accordance with the guidance provided by Generic Letter 88-16 and are addressed below.
(1)
The Definition section of the TS'was modified to include a definition of the Core Operating Limits Report that requires cycle/reload-specific parameter limits to be established on a unit-specific basis in accordance with NRC approved methodologies that maintains the limits of the safety analysis.
The definition notes that plant operation within these limits is addr essed by individual specifications.
(2)
The following specifications were revised to replace the values of cycle-specific parameter limits with a reference to the COLR that provides these limits.
9pp613p~
'5ppp316
~ 900523 pDR ADOCK pDC p
-2" (a)
Specification 3/4.1.1.4 The moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) limits for this specifica-tion and surveillance requirement are specified in the COLR.
(b)
Specification 3/4 ~ 1.3.4 The rod drop time fully withdrawn position for this specification is specified in the COLR.
(c)
Specification 3/4. 1.3.5 The shutdown bank insertion limit for this specification and surveil-.
lance requirement is specified in the COLR.
(d)
Specification 3/4. 1.3.6 The control bank insertion limits for this specification are specified in the COLR.
(e)
Specification 3/4.2.1 The axial flux difference limits for this specification and surveil-lance requirement are specified in the COLR.
(f)
Specification 3/4. 2. 2 The heat flux hot channel factor (F ) limit at rated thermal power and the normalized F
limit as a fuIIction of core height K(Z) for this specification a% e specified in the COLR.
(g)
Specification 3/4.2.3 The nuclear enthalpy rise hot channel factor (F-delta-H) limit at rated thermal power and the power factor multiplier for this specification are specified in the COLR.
(h)
Specification 3/4.2.6 The allowable power level (APL) limit and the transient xenon effect on F as a function of core height V(Z) for this specification are spec'ffied in the COLR.
(i)
Specification
- 3. 1'. 1 This Moveable Control Assemblies - Group Height Specification's action statement was revised to reference the control rod insertion limits specified in the COLR.
The affected bases of the specifications have been modified by the licensee to include appropriate reference to the COLR.
Based on our review, we conclude that the changes to these bases are acceptable.
(3)
Specification 6'.9.1.11 was added to the reporting requirements of the Administrative Controls section of the TS.
This specification requires that the COLR be submitted, upon issuance, to the NRC Document Control Desk with copies to the Regional Administrator and Resident Inspector.
The report provides the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are applicable for the current fuel cycle.
Furthermore, these specifica-tions require that the values of these limits be established using NRC approved methodologies and be consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis.
The approved methodologies are the following:
(a)
WCAP-9272-P-A, "Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation Methodology,"
July 1985 (Westinghouse Proprietary),
(b)
WCAP-8385, "Power Distribution Control and Load Following Procedures-Topical Report," September 1974 (Westinghouse Proprietary),
(c)
WCAP-10216-P-A, Part B, "Relaxation of Constant Axial Offset Control/F Surveillance Technical Specification,"
June 1983 (Westinghfuse Proprietary),
(d)
MCAP-10266-P-A Rev. 2, "The 1981 Version of Westinghouse Evaluation Model Using BASH Code," Harch 1987 (Westinghouse Proprietary).
Finally, the specification requires that all changes in cycle-specific parameter limits be documented in the COLR before each reload cycle or remaining part of a reload cycle and submitted upon issuance to NRC, prior to operation with the new parameter limits.
On the basis of the review of the above items, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee provided an acceptable response to those items as addressed in the NRC guidance in Generic Letter 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 is administrative in nature and there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence.
Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
As, part of the implementation of Generic Letter 88-16, the staff has also reviewed a sample COLR that was provided by the licensee.
On the basis of this review, the staff concludes that the format and content of the sample COLR are acceptable.
3.0 Me have reviewed the request by the Indiana and Michigan Power Company to modify the Technical Specifications of the Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant Unit No.
2 that would remove the specific values of some cycle-dependent parameters from the specifications and place the values in a Core 'Operating Limits Report that would be referenced by the Specification.
Based on this review, we conclude that these Technical Specification modifications are acceptable and are in accordance with the provisions of Generic Letter 88-16.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined, in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
This amendment also involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuances of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff 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) issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
t!ay 23, 1990 Principal Contributor:
Dan Fieno, SRXB
4 C
~>
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter (AEP:NRC:1077A) from H. P. Alexich ( IMPC) to. NRC, dated February 6,
. 1990.
2.
Generic Letter 88-16, "Removal of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications,"
dated October 4, 1988.
~ c
+
p, VQ' 4