ML20079D719
| ML20079D719 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079D718 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9107240254 | |
| Download: ML20079D719 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
$ska tsow9,%
UNITED STATES l
. ;f \\
{.
,1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WA$HINGf oN, D C,20004 i
r SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION j
RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.184 TO FACILITY OPERATING _ LICENSE NO. DPR-62 CAROLINAPOWER&LIGHLCOMPANY, BRUNSWlCK STEAM _ ELECTRIC PLAN M NIT _2 DOCKET NO. 50 324
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated April 23 1991 l
Power A; Light Company (1Icensee,)as supplemented July 9,1991 Carolina submitted a request for Technical Specifications'(TS) chances for Brunswick Steam Elvetric Plant (Brunswick),
't Unit 2. TS for Cycle 10.
The Cycle 10 reload cure _ will be limited to fuel
' types BP8x8R, GE8x8EB, GE8x8HB, and GE8x8NB 3 of which the type GE8x8HB is a new fuel type. -The GE8x8NB-3 fuel was approved for reload in A:aendment 21 to GESTAR il (NEDE-24011-P-A). Due to the use of new fuel GE8x8NB-3, the licensee recalculated the minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) safety limit and proposed a change in the TS.
The July 9, 1991, letter provided updated TS pages and did not change the initial determination of no significant hazards consideration as published in the Federal Register.
2.0 EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES (1) Section 2.1.2 THERMAL POWER The MCPR safety limit for Cycle 10 with the new GE8x8HB 3 fuel type is
- changed from 1.06 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 Corrpany 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 o
adequate margin to assure that more than 99.9 percent of the fuel rods-in l
the core will not experience boiling transition during normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences.
-Based on the approved methodology and adequate conservatism, the staff concludes that the new MCPR limit of 1.07 is acceptable for u6e in Cycle j-
- 10. -
l~
i i
i 9107240254 910718 i DR ADOCK 0500
t 2-(2) 5.3.1 filEL ASSEMBLIES The fuel types in the Cycle 10 reload core are Bp8x8R, d8x8EB, GE8x8NB, and GE8x8HB-3.
The fuel types BP8x8R and GE8x8EB, formerly named GE8 and GE8x8NB, have been prtviously approved for use in the Cycle 9 core. The new fuel type GE8x8NB-3 was included in the previously approved Amendment 21 to NEDE-24011-p-A.
The staff thus concludes that the four fuel types Bp8x8R, GE8x8ED, GE8x8HB, and GE8x8HB-3 are acceptable for use in Cycle 10, 3.0 STATE CONStlLTAT10N in accordance with the Cornission's regulations, the State of North Carolina official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no coments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CfR part 20. The NRC 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 e.tposu re.
The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that th3 amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has beer no public comment on such finding (56 FR 24206). Accordingly, the ameno3ent meets the elig(ibility criteria for categorical exclusion setpursuant to 10 CFR 51.22 forth in 10 CfR 51.22(c) 9),
impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 CONCLtJS10N The Connission 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 amendment will not be inimical to the cormon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public, principal Contributors:
S. Wu N. Le L. Raghavan Date: July 18,1991 l
t AMENDMENT N0. 184 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR BRUNSWICK, UNIT 2 DocketFile!
NRC PDR Local PDR Brunswick file S.- Varga (14E4)
G. Lainas E. Adensam P. Anderson N. Le OGC D.Hagan(MNBB3302 G. Hill (3)(Pl.137 Wanda Jones (P-130A C. Grimes (1103)
R. Jones ACRS (10)
GPA/PA OC/LFMB L. Reyes R!l cc:
Brunswick Service List
...