ML20043H159
| ML20043H159 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 06/18/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20043H157 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9006220091 | |
| Download: ML20043H159 (2) | |
Text
,.
+*lO** *
- hg\\
r UNITED STATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7.
WASHING TON, D. C. 20665 SAFETY EVAlll?. TION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORT 1HG AMENDMENT NO.142 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-71 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT 1 o
DOCKET NO. 50-3?S
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 t
By letters dated February 28 1990 and April 4, 1990, Carolina Power &
Light Company (the licensee), submitted a request for Technical Specification changes for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (Brunswick), Unit 1, for Cycle 8.
The Cycle 8 reload core will consist of three types of GE fuel: BP8xBR, GE8x8EB, and GE8xBNB-3 of which the type GE8x8MB-3 is a new fuel type. The GE8x8MB-3 fuel was approved for reload in Amendment 21 to GESTAR-II (NEDE-24011-P-A). Due to tie use of new fuel GE8xBNB-3, the licensee recalculated the minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) safety limit and proposed a change in the Technical Specifications.-
2.0 EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES l
(1)Section2.1.2THERMALPOWER The PCPR safety limit for Cycle 8 with the new GE8x8HB-3 fuel type is changed from 1.04 to 1.07. The new MCPR limit is based on an approved methodology-described in Amendment 21 to NEDE-24011-P-A which was approved by the staff's letter to the General Electric Company dated March 17,
- 1989, the degree of conservatism associated with the new MCPR limit is the same as that of the old MCPR limit, i.e., there is an adequate _ margin to assure that more than 99.9 percent of the fuel rods in the core will i
not experience boiling transition during normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences (A00s).
Based on the approved methodology and adequate conservatism, the staff concludes that the new MCPR limit of 1.07 is acceptable for use in Cycle 8.
s (2) 5.3.1 FUEL ASSEMBLIES The fuel types in the Cycle 8 reload core are BP8X8R, GE8x8EB, and GE8x8NB-3. The fuel types BP8x8R and GE8x8EB formerly named GE8 have been previously approved for use in the Cycle 7 core. The new fuel type GE8x8MB-3 was included in the previously approved Amendment 21 to NEDE-24011-P-A. The staff thus concludes that the three fuel types BP8x8R, GE8xBEB, and GE8x8HB-3 are acceptable for use in Cycle 8.
$k$$o$kobON25 p
n
(
k 4
,g Uw
- *w
.c.
Ir 3.0 ENVIPONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS i
L This amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a f acility component located within +.he 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 sionificant change in the types, of any effle19ts that may be released off site, and that there i
should be no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
i anu there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, this j
emendment meets the eli forth in 10 CFR 551.PP(gibility criteria for categorical exclusion set c)(9).- Pursuant to 10 CFR 551.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the isst.ance of the amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission made a preposed determ', nation that this amendment involves no significant hazards consioeratior.which was published in the Federal Register (55FR20351)onMay16,1990, and consulted with the State of North Carolina. No public coments or requests for hearing were received,=
and the State of North Carolina did not have any coments.
4 The staff has concluded,' based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public i
-will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with-the Comission's reguia.
tiens, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
- 5. Wu
~
N. Le -
Dated::l June 18, 1990
_