ML20059C236
| ML20059C236 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold  |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059C230 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9008310126 | |
| Download: ML20059C236 (5) | |
Text
l m llil D
ll d
'I I'
<?
(
UMTE3 sTAvts
/
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a
- - 5 mass m orow,n.c. sones SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.167 TO FACILITY OPExAi!NG LICENSE NO. DPR-49 10WA ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY CENTRAL IOWA POWER C00 PERATIVE CORN BELT POWER C00PERATIY5 DUANE ARNOLD EN GY CENTER DOCKET NO. 50-331 1.0 _ INTRODUCTION By letter dated January 5,1990 (Ref.1), as amended by letter dated June 19, 1990(Ref.2),IowaElectricLightandPowerCompany thelicensee) proposedchangestothe-TechnicalSpecifications(TS)(fortheDuaneArnold EnergyCenter(DAEC). The proposed changes would modify specifications having cycle-specific parameter limits by replacing the values of those limits with a reference to a Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) for the values of those limits. The proposed changes alto include the addition of the COLR to the Definitions section and to the reporting requirements o' 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. 3).
The licensee's June 19, 1990 submittal withdrew those portions of the January 5, 1990 request relating to the Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR).
The staff had previously indicated that the SLMCPR was outside the scope of those cycle-specific garameters addressed by Generic Letter 88-16. Consequently, proposed changes to tie SLMCPR (TS 1.1.A) are being addressed as a separate action.
In further discussions between the staff and the licensee on June 22, 1990, it was agreed that an additional revision to the original request should be made.
The additional change consists of a revision to proposed TS 6.11.2.a.4 to explicitly state that certain multiplying factors for MAPLHGR limits shall be documented in the COLR. This change is merely a clarification, as the licensee had included these factors in the sample COLR pre"ided with its initial request and would also continue to include them in future revisions of the COLR.
Consequently, the licensee's June 19, 1990 withdrawal of portions of the original request and the added clarification agreed to by the licensee on June 22, 1990 l
did not significantly alter the proposed action nr affect the conclusions in the I
staff's initial no significant hazards considera ion determination published in the Federal Register on May 16, 1990.
p$[kOb P
k
o.
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 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 ^'e safety analysis. The definition notes that plant operation within ths. e limits is addressed by individual specifications.
1 (2) The following specifications were revised to replace the values of I
cycle-specific parameter limits with a reference to the COLR that q
provides these limits, j
(a) Specification 3.6.F.2.a The MAPFAC and MAPFAC factors, which multiply the Maximum i
AverageP15narLinearSeatGenerationRate(MAPLHGR) limits,for this specification are specified in the COLR.
(b) Specification 3.12.A.1 The Maxinium Average Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate (MAPLHGR) limits for this specification are specified in the COLR.
(c) Specification 3.12.B.1 TheLinearHeatGenerationRate(LHGR)limitsforthis specification are specified in the COLR.
(d) Specifications 3.12.C.1 and 3.12.C.2 TheMinimumCriticalPowerRatio(MCPR)limitsandtheMCPR power dependent multiplier (K ) for this specification are specified in the COLR.
p These changes to the specifications also required changes to the bases.
Based on its review, the staff concludes that the changes to these bases are acceptable.
(3) Specification 6.11.2 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 paraneter limits that are appilcable for the current fuel cycle.
Furthermore, this specifi-cation requires that the values of these limits be established using an NRC-approved methodology and be consistent with all applicable i
limits of the safety analysis. The approved methodology is the fo -
lowing:
1-
=
c s
NEDE-24011-P-A ' General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel" approved revision number at time reload analyses are performed.
1 Finally, the specification requires that all changes in cycle-specific paraseter limits be documented in the COLR before each reload cycle or remaining part of a reload cycle and, upon issuance, be submitted to NRC prior ta operation with the new parameter limits.
.On the basis of the review of the above items, the NRC staff concludes that i
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 TS. Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-s socific parameter limits that are i
established using an NRC-approved metiodology, 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 i
changes are acceptable.
l As part of the implementation of Generic Letter 88-16, the staff has also reviewed a sam)1e COLR that was provided by the licensee. On the basis of this review, tie staff concludes that the format and content of the sample COLR are acceptable.
The staff has reviewed the proposed change to Surveillance Requirement 4.12.c.
to delete the requirement to determine MCPR every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> during a Limiting Control Rod Pattern. The MCPR will still be required to be determined every 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> during power operation above 25% of rated sower, consistent with the surveillance frequency for MAPLHGR (TS 4.12.A) and.HGR (TS 4.12.B), and following any significant change in power level or distribution. The Rod Block Monitor system will still he required to be operable during operation with a Limiting Control Rod Pattern (TS. 3.3.B.5).
The staff concludes that-these requirements will ensure tin,ely determination of the MCPR and will restrict control rod withdrawal while operating with a Limiting Control Rod Pattern; therefore, the requested change is acceptable.
In addition to the changes discussed above, the licensee made a number of other changes to the TS that are administrative in nature. Technical Specification 2.1. A.1 is revised to refer to the LHGR and MCPR limits listed in the COLR.
Reference 3 on page 3.5-26 is revised to indicate that the report I
is cycle-specific. TS Surveillance Requirements 4.12.A. B and C are reworded for clarification.
The staff has reviewed these TS changes and concludes that they appropriately clarify the TSs and, therefore, they are acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the instal-lation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or a change to a surveillance requirement. The staff has' determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the
o t
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 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 eligib"ity criteria for categorical exclusion set forthin10CFR51.22(c)(9). This amendment also involves changes in record-keeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, with respect to these items, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 551.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),noenvironmentalim)actstatementorenvironmentalassessmentneedbe prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has reviewed the request by the Iowa Electric Light and Power Company to modify the Technical Specifications of the Duane Arnold plant to 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 specifiestions. Based on this review, the staff concludes that these Technical Specifications modifications are acceptable bt asse they are in accordance with Generic Letter 88-16.
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above that: (1) thereisreasonableassurancethatthehealthandsafetyofthepub1Icwillnot 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 the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and cafety of the public, j
l Principal Contributor:
D. Fieno, RSB/NRR Dated: August 23, 1990 l
l j
L
m a.
- .i r o
,t
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter (NG-90-0002) fromD.L.Mineck(IELP) tot.E.Murley(NRC)'
dated January 5, 1990.
2.
Letter (NGt'Mi'3)fromD.L.Mineck(IELP) tot.E.Murley(NRC),
dated June 13,~1990.
..3.
Generic Letter 88-16, " Removal of Cycle-specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications," dated October 4,1988.
t i
l l'
l 1
k
_. _