ML19327C237
| ML19327C237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19327C223 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-16, NUDOCS 8911210260 | |
| Download: ML19327C237 (4) | |
Text
j r
d 'p%.
l
,, f UNIT E D $TATES i
+
'h NUCLE AR P,EGULATORY COMMISSION l
y w,
5 L
W A&HING T ON, D. C. 20bbb I
%n....*
{
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION i
i SUPp0RTING AMENDMENT NO.)?B TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-3 YANKEE AT0*!C ELECTRIC COMPANY YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50 029 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Py letter dated September 14,1969 (Ref.1), Yankee Atomic Electric Cortpany (the licenste) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the i
Yankee Rowe plant. The proposed changes would modify specifications having cycle-specific parameter limits by replacing the values of tnose limits with a j
reference to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) for the values of those Ifmits.
The proposed changes also include the addition of the COLR to the Definitions section and to the reporting requirements of the Administrctive l
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).
l
~
2.0 EVALUATION i
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 c' 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 an NRC approved methodology that maintains the limits of the safety analysis. The definition notes that plant operation within these limits is addressed 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.
(a) Specification 3.1.3.5 The Control Rod Insertion limits for these Specifications are specified in the COLR.
8911210260 891114 PDR ADOCK 05000029 P
l 2-(b) Specificatien 3.2.1 and Surveillance Requirement 4.2.1.1 f
The Peak Linear Heat Generation Pete limits for this Specification l
and Surveillance Requiren.ent are specified in the COLR.
(c) Surveillance Requirement 4.2.1.2 The multiplier for xenon redistribution and the reduced power i
multiplier for this Surveillance Requirement are specified in the
- COLR, The bases of affected 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 6.9.4 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 i
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 1
specifications require that the values of these limits be established using NRC approved methodologies and be consistent with all applicable i
limits of the safety analysis. The approved methodologies a.e the l'
following:
(a) SN-75-41. Volumes 1. II, !!! and Supplements 1 through 7 "WREM-Based Generic PWR-ECCS Evaluation Model," Exxon Nuclear Corporation, as amended / supplemented by:
1.
YAEC 1071, " Yankee Rowe Core XI Decay Heat Redistribution i
Factor During Shutdown Conditions," June 1974.
2.
Proposed Change to Technical Specifications No. 125.
3.
Proposed Change to Technical Specifications No. 142.
f 1
4.
XN-76 44, " Revised Nucleate Boiling Lockout for ENC-WREM-Based ECCS Evaluation Mode " Exxon Nuclear Corporation, September 1976.
5.
YAEC-1125,
- Method of Calculating End-of-Bypass Time for Yankee Rowe LOCA Analysis," March 1977.
6.
YAEC-1131
" Method for Calculating Low Flow Film Boiling Coefficients for Yankee WREM-Based Generic PWR ECCS Evaluation Model," June 1977.
7.
YAEC-1133, " Core Flood Rate Stabilization for Yankee WREM-Based Generic PWR ECCS Evaluation Model," July 1977.
8.
Letter. " Yankee Rowe Core XIII LOCA Core inlet Temperature and Accumulator Delay Sensitivity Analysis," and Errata, October 7, and October 11, 1977.
o.-
I i-l 9.
XN-76-27 "WREM Based Generic Letter PWR ECCS Evaluation Model l'pdate ENC-WREM-II," Exxon Nuclear Corporation, July 1976.
i 10.
YAEC-1231, Revision 1, " Application of a lower Plenum Phase Separation Model to Yankee Rowe Large Break LOCA Analysis,"
March 1981.
11.
Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 178.
12.
Letter, "LOCA Injection P Penalty." dated August 16, 1985.
13.
Proposed Change to Technical Specifications No. 188, f
14 Letter, "LOCA Reflood Heat Transfer Models," dated January 5, t
1988.
- 15. Letter, "YAEC Response to NPC Review of Revised Reflood Heat j
Transfer Model for YNPS LOCA Analysis " dated May 2, 1989.
(b) Reactor physics methods as described in Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 115, as amended / supplemented by:
l 1.
Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 125.
I 2.
Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 145.
3.
Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 163.
4.
Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 178.
i (c) Transient analysis methods as described in Proposed Change to Technical Specification No. 115, as amended /supplcmented by:
1.
YAEC-1361, "YNPS Main Steam Line Break Analysis," May 1983.
2.
YAEC-1398, "YNPS Main Steam Line Break Analysis. Addition of Boron Transport Model," February 1984 Finally, the specification requires that all changes in cycle-specific parameter limits be documented in the COLR before each reload cycle or remaining part o# a reload cycle and submitted upon issuance to NRC, prior to operation with the new parameter limits.
On the basis of the review o' +he above items, the NRC s+aff concludes that the licensee provided an acceptable responte to those items as addressed in
'y the NRC guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in 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
'1 in nature and there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence. Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
j' 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 COLR are acceptable.
l 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSipERATION This amendment involves changes to the surveillance requirements, a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in reporting reouirements.
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 Comission has previously published a proposed findino that the amendment involves no significant harards consideration and there has been no public coment on such findino.
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion sct forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 46495) on November 3, 1989 and consulted with the State of Massachusetts.
he public coments were received and the State of Massachusetts did not have any coments.
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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimicel to the common defense and security nor to the health and safety of the public.
l
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter (BYR 89-141) from S. P. Schultz (YAEC) to NRC, dated September 14
- 1989, 2.
Generic letter 88-16, " Removal of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications " dated October 4, 1988.
Principal Contributor: D. Fieno Dated:
flovember 14, 1989
.