ML20076G427
| ML20076G427 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 10/12/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076G412 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9410190319 | |
| Download: ML20076G427 (3) | |
Text
. #pc nauq'o, UNITED STATES
~ 7.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 205$5
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.149 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-9 AND AMENDMENT NO.131 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-17 DUKE POWER COMPANY MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-369 AND 50-370 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 24, 1994, as supplemented August 4 and September 8, 1994, Duke Power Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the i
McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would transfer the boron concentration values in TS 3.9.1 for the reactor coolant system and the refueling canal during MODE 6, and the i
baron concentration values in TS 3/4.9.12 for the spent fuel pool from the TS to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). The associated Bases to the TS are also changed. The application is submitted in response to the guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 which addresses the transfer of fuel cycle-specific parameter limits from the TS to the COLR. The August 4, 1994 and September 8, 1994, letters provided clarifying information that did not change the scope of the May 24, 1994 application and the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The proposed changes to McGuire's current TS are in accordance with the guidance provided by Generic Letter 88-16 and are addressed below, j
(1) The following specifications were revised to replace the values of cycle-specific parameter limits with reference to the COLR that provides these limits.
(a) TS 3.9.1.b:
The numerical value of the boron concentration, for example 2000 ppm in the most recent amendment to this TS, is replaced with the term:
"the minimum boron concentration specified in the core operating limits report." A corresponding change is made to the ACTION statement.
4 (b) TS 3.9.12.a and 4.9.12.b: The numerical value of the boron concentration, for example 2000 ppm in the most recent amendment to this TS, is replaced with the term:
"the minimum boron concentration specified in the core operating limits report." A corresponding change is made to the ACTION statement.
9410190319 941012 PDR ADOCK 05000369 p
~
. The Bases of affected specifications have been modified by the licensee to. include appropriate reference to the COLR.
(2) The COLR provides the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are i
applicable.for the current fuel cycle. TS 6.9.1.9 requires that NRC.
approved methodologies be used in establishing the values of these limits fcr the relevant specifications and that the values be consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis. The COLR is submitted, upon. issuance, to the NRC. The licensee's submittal of May 24, 1994 indicated that the subject boron concentration limits would continue to be evaluated using methodology in the report DPC-NF-2010 A, " Nuclear Physics Methodology for Reload Design," which was approved by the NRC staff on May 13, 1985.
The NRC staff requested additional information regarding how the methodology in the report DPC-NF-2010 A would be used to develop the boron concentration values. The licensee's letter of September 8, 1994 proposed to make the spent fuel pool concentration equal to that in the refueling water storage tank (RWST).
During refueling operations, water from the RWST is used to fill the refueling canal and during fuel transfer the water in the canal can mix with water in the spent fuel pool. The licensee states that it would therefore be desirable to have the minimum concentration values for the RWST, the refueling canal and the spent fuel pool be the same in order to prevent dilution problems which could result from different concentrations in separate volumes of water. The RWST boron concentration value is based on the post-LOCA subcriticality evaluation and its associated all-rods-out critical boron concentration. The methodology for determining the all-rods-out boron concentration is included in DPC-NF-2010 A and the staff approved this i
report on May 13, 1985. The staff approved the tra'nsfer of the RWST boron concentration value to the COLR by amendments to the McGuire operating licenses that were issued on May 31, 1994. Therefore, the staff concludes that the subject boron concentration values to be transferred to the COLR are developed based on NRC-approved methodology.
~
This specification continues to require that all changes in cycle-specific parameter limits be documented in the COLR before each reload cycle or remaining part of a reload cycle and submitted upon issuance to the NRC.
Based on our review, the NRC staff concludes that the modifications proposed by the licensee are in accordance with the NRC guidance in Generic Letter i
88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in TS.
Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are established using NRC-ar, proved methodologies, the NRC staff concludes that this change has no impact on plant safety. Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
1
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the North Carolina State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change requirements with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and change surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined tnat the amendments involve 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 exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public co;cment on such finding (59FR 32228 dated June 22,1994). Accordingly,.the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(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 amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: T. Huang, SRXB R. Martin, PDII-3 Date:
October 12, 1994 i