ML20055C517
| ML20055C517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 05/09/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055C515 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-16, NUDOCS 9005240249 | |
| Download: ML20055C517 (4) | |
Text
,.
'y r.
I y#g* t'8
%'o UNITED STATES
'g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g'
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$$5
....+l
)
r SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR _ REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 42 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-47 GULF STATES UTILITI.ES_ COMPANY RIVER BEND STATION. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-458
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 17, 1989 (Ref. 1) as amended by letters dated March 30, 1990(Ref.2)andApril 16,1990(Ref.3),GulfStatesUtilitiesCompany (GSU) (the licensee) requested an amendment to facility Operating License No.
NPF-47 for the River Bend Station Unit 1.
The proposed amendment would remove certain cycle specific parameter limits from the Technical Specifications (TSs) andrelocatetheselimitsintoaCoreOperatingLimitsReport(COLR). The affected TSs would reference the COLR for values of these 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 develo)ed by NRC on the basis of the review of a lead-plant proposal submitted on t1e Oconee plant docket by Duke power Company. This guidance was provided to all power reactor licenseesandapplicantsbyGenericLetter88-16,datedOctober4,1988(Ref.4).
The March 30, 1990, submittal deleted the proposed changes to Section 2 of the TSs that were requested in the original application and also deleted the associated proposed changes in Section 3.
Editorial changes were also made.
The April 16, 1990, submittal corrects an editorial omission in the March 30, 1990, proposed TS 3/4.2.1. The March 30 and April 16, 1990 submittals did not change the initial no significant hazards determination in the Federal Register notice (54 FR 53207) or the scope of the amendment request.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee's proposed changes to the TS are in accordance with the guidance i
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 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.
9005240249 900509 DR ADOCK03OOg8
3 e..
~
i
+
i '
(a) Specification 3/4.2.1 TheAveragePlanarLinearHeatGenerationRate(AplHGR)limitsfor this specification are specified in the COLR.
(b) Specification 3/4.2.3 TheMinimumCriticalpowerRatio(MCpR) limits,theflowdependent 1
limit, and the power dependent MCPR limit for this MCpR,fication are specified in the COLR. p speci (c) Specification 3.2.4 1
TheLinearHeatGenerationRate(LHGR)limitsforthisspecification are specified in the COLR.
(d) Specification 4/3.3.1 The simulated thermal time constant specified in footnote ** of Table 3.3.1-2 and item i of Table 4.3.1.-1 for this specification is specified in the COLR.
These changes to the specifications also required changes to the Bases.
l (3) Specification 6.9.3 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 Dest with copies to the Regiunal Administrator and Resident Inspector.
The report provides the-values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are applicable for the current fuel cycle.
Furthermore, this specification requires that the values of these limits be established using an NRC approved methodology and be consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis. The approved methodology is the following:
' General Electric Stendard Application for Reactor Fuel," NEDE-24011-p-A (latestapprovedversion).
Finally, the specification requires that all changes in cycle-specific paraneter 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 lin.its in TS.
Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are established using en NRC approved methodology, the NRC staff concludes that this change is administrative in nature and there is no irrpact on plant safety as a consequence. Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
-=-
., :. o
'e 3
r As part of the implementation of Generic Letter 88-16, the staff 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 when modified to delete specifications that were deleted from the COLR process by Reference 2.
i The NRC staff also reviewed the changes to Specifications 5.3.1 and 5.3.2.
These two specifications provide design features of the fuel assemblies and control rod assemblies. The descriptions include information on the number of fuel and water rods, cladding material, active fuel length, bundle enrichments, and control rod meterial and dimensions. These details may change with new, approved designs or different enrichments of the same design. Therefore, these descriptions have been revised to a more general description.
The specific reload bundle types and reference core loading sattern will be included in each supplemental reload licensing report which will ae referenced in the COLR. Thus, for each reload, the design features will be submitted for NRC staff review and approval. Accordingly, the staff finds these changes acceptable.
3.0 QNylRONMENTAL C0NSIDERAT10N The amendment involves a change in a requirement with respect to the installa-tion or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as j
defined in 10 CFR part 20 and change in surveillance requirements. 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 exposures. The Comission has previously i
issued a proposed finding thct this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibilit l
forth in 10 CFR Section 51.22(c)(9)y criteria for categorical exclusion set This amendment also involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, with respect to these items, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categoricalexclusionsetforthin10CFR51.22(c)(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 staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) public such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. The staff therefore concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable.
\\
'o>>
o i.
t
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter (RBG-31781) from J. C. Deddens (GSU) to NRC, dated November 17, 1989.
2.
Letter (RBG-32605)fromJ.C.Deddens(GSU)toNRC,datedMarch 30, 1990.
3.
Letter (RBG-32704)fromW.H.Odell(GSU)toNRC,datedApril 16, 1990, i
4.
TechnicalSpecificatIons,movalofCycle-SpecificParameterLimitsfrom Generic Letter 88-16 "Re
" dated October 4, 1988.
Dated:
May 9, 1990 Principal Contributors:
D. Fieno W. Paulson 4
t s
1 l
.