ML20023B713
| ML20023B713 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20023B705 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8305060136 | |
| Download: ML20023B713 (3) | |
Text
puc,
o
![) )
o UNITED STATES g
,,.;,g :d...' p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 y-
]
,,, SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NOS. 46 AND 29 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N05. NPF-4 AND NPF-7 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNITS NO. 1 AND N0. 2 DOCKET N05. 50-338 AND 50-339
==
Introduction:==
By letter dated December 8, 1982 (Serial No. 622), the Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) requested an amendment in the form of changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Operating License Nos.
NPF-4 and NPF-7 for the North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (NA-1&2),respectively.
The licensee's requested. amendment would specifically change the existing changesw[ouldallowoptimizationofcoreloadingpatternsandprovide Fxy and F g fractional power multiplier from 0.2 to 0.3.
The proposed additional operating flexibility.
In addition, the licensee's requested change in'cluded an administrative change to the NA-2 TS in order to provide consistency between the NA-1 and NA-2 TS. Specifically, the one-for-one reduction of the F (z) limit, Q
when the Fxy limit is exceeded would be eliminate.d since NA-2 does not use the Axial ower Distribution Monitoring System (APDMS) to ensure FQ limit compliance.
A discussion and our evaluation of the licensee's proposed changes to the NA-1&2 TS is provided below.
Discussion:
(1)FNyTechnicalSpecificationChange:
Historically,increasingtheallowableF$Hwithdecreasingpowerhasbeen permitted for all previously approved Westinghouse designs. The increase is permitted by the Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB) protection setpoints and allows for radial power distribution changes with rod insertion to the insertion limit. The change to a larger (0.2 to 0.3) partial power multi-plierisrequestedforNA-1&2toallowgptimizationofthecoreloading pattern by minimizing restrictions on FAHrat low power. This change will also minimize the probability of making rod insertion limit changes to satisfy peaking factor criteria at low power with the control rod banks at the insertion limit.
8305060136 830422
~
DR ADOCK 05000338 PDR
a
, As a result of the multiplier change the thermal core limits at 2250 and 2400 psia are riightly more limiting below 100 percent power. Also new axial offset limits were calculated and there were minor changes to the f(AI) function. The new core limits and the changes to the f(AI) function were submitted. The analysis showed that no changes to the overpower AT and overtemperature AT setpoints or the K factors were necessary. Therefore no accident reanalysis was required.
Wehaveapprovedthe0.3partialpowermultiplierforF2sforWCAP-9500 and other plants. The licensee's request for the NA-1&2 TS changes is similar. Based on cur review we find this change acceptable.
(2) Fxy Technical Specification Change:
It was determined that there was not sufficient information available in the licensee's submittal for completing our review of the increase in the Fxy partial multiplier (0.2 to 0.3).
The licensee, when advised that additional information was needed, requested that the other proposed TS changes be processed. Therefore, the licensee's proposed change in Fxy has been placed in abeyance until such time that tne additional infor-mation is provided for our review.
(3) Technical Specification 4.2.2.2.g.2:
The licensee has requested the removal of TS 4.2.2.2.g.2 from the NA-2 TS. This TS is required for facilities that use the APDMS to ensure Fg limit compliance.
NA-2 does not use the APDMS, ar,d therefore, we find this change to be acceptable.
==
Conclusion:==
Basedonourreviewofthelicensee'ssubmittalforgheabovenotedchan we find the change in the partial power multiplier Fay (from 0.2 to 0.3)ges, to be acceptable.
In addition, we find the change to the NA-2 TS 4.2.2.2.g.2 acceptable. However, as stated above, we do not find the change in the partial multiplier for F to be acceptable at this time.
xy Environmental. Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR $51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
-n--
9
~
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, do not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, and do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendments do not involve a significant hatards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
April 22, 1983 Principal Contributors:
M. Chatterton CPB/DSI L. B. Engle ORB #3/DL