ML20071F450

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 88 to License DPR-22

ML20071F450
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	06/30/1994
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20071F449	List: ML20071F445 ML20071F450
References
NUDOCS 9407080226
Download: ML20071F450 (3)

Text

p at u, Y

/

jrj Z ',..E UNITED STATES Q

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION q

's

/

WASHINGTON D.C. 20$5 MOO 1 6

. SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ML ATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 88 T0 iACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-21 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY MONilCELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANI DOCKET NO. 50-263

}.0 INTRODUC110N By letter dated January 4,1994, as supplemented March 28, 1994, Northern States Power Company requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.

These proposed changes would modify Section 3.11, Reactor Fuel Assemblies, by removing information concerning the analytical method to determine average planar linear heat generation rate (APLHGR) and adding a reference to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR).

Also, in Section 6.7, Reportir.g Requirements, the listing of approved analytical methods for developing the COLR was revised.

The Bases for Section 3.11 concerning the calcult.tional methodology for minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) was also revised.

The March 28, 1994, submittal incorporates an improvement in the wording for Section 6.7 concerning the identification of the approved analytical methods used to develop the COLR and was within the scope of the March 2,1994, Federal Reaister notice and did not affect the initial no significant hazards consideration determination.

2.0 [VALVATION lhe APLHGR is a measure of the average linear heat generation rate of all the f uel rods in a fuel assembly at any axial location.

APLHGR limits are based on two phenomena:

emergency core cooling system (ECCS) peak clad temperature and thermal-mechanical limits.

The APLHGR limit ensures' that calculated ECCS peak clad temperatures at rated conditions conform to 10 CFR 50.46.

The APLHGR limit also ensures that fuel thermal-mechanical limits are met by limiting peak fuel pin power below that at which cladding cracking due to plastic strain or transient condition center line melting would occur.

The analytical methods used to determine the APLHGR are specified in both i

Sections 3.llA and 6.7.A.7 of the current TS.

The licensee proposed removal l

of the statement about the analytical methods used to determine the APLHGR from Section 3.llA.

This change is acceptable because there is no need for this duplication in Sections 3.llA and 6.7.A.7.

Section 6.7 would be m iified to include the methodology used by Siemens Power Corporation.

This chanor is acceptable because the methodology has previously been approved by the MC and will assure that values of cycle-specific parameters are v inin the acceptance criteria for safe operation.

The final change, a ch...ga to the bases concerning MCPR, revises the description of the MCPR calculation methodology to be ' consistent with' that currently being used and is therefore acceptable.

9407080226 940630 PDR ADOCK 05000263 P

PDR

i e

i.

3.0 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGLS Section 3.11

- The change eliminates the reference to the analytical methodology used to calculate the MPLHGR limits and adds a statement that the limiting values are specified in the COLR.

Section 6.7 - The change adds the Siemens Power Corporation approved topical to the list of documents approved and changes all documents from "the latest approved version" to "the approved version at the time the reload analyses are performed."

Bases - The change revises the section to be consistent with current analysis.

3.1 Symmary Based on the staff evaluation in Section 2.0 above, the staff concludes that the proposed TS changes are acceptable.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATIDN In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Minnesota State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.

The State official had no comments.

5.0 [NVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the 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 significant change in the types, of any ef fluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has presiously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 10011).

Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR

- Sl.22(c)(9).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared-in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

6.0 LONCLUSION The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

i (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public 1

l will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will he conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations.

and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defens' n security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor:

M. Chatterton Dato: June 30,' 1994

DATED:

June 3(L 1994 AMENDMENT NO.

88 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-22-MONTICELLO Docket file NRC & Local PDRs PD*31 Reading J. Roe J. Zwolinski L. Marsh B. Wetzel C. Jamerson OGC D. Hagan G. Hill (2) i C. Grimes j

M. Chatterton ACRS (10) i' OPA i

i OC/lIDCB M. Phillips. Rill cc:

Plant Service list j

i i

1 L

l 9

P

.. -... -.,. _ _.,