ML20147B516

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 117 to License DPR-46

ML20147B516
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	02/23/1988
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20147B449	List: ML20147B445 ML20147B491 ML20147B516
References
NUDOCS 8803020112
Download: ML20147B516 (2)

Text

• • • 0 0 '/  %'o.,

UNITED STATES

!" 3 g NUCLE AF( REGULATORY COMMISSION r,

f WASHINGTON, D. C,20555

\...../ SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.ll7TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-46 NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWE_R_ D,1,S,TRICT COOPER NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-298

1.0 INTRODUCTION

i By letter dated December 22, 1987 the N^ raska Public Power District (the licensee) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-46

• for the Cooper Nuclear Station. The proposed amendment would change the Technical Specifications to modify the operability requirments for the  :

~

Rod Sequence Control System and Rod Worth Minimizer between 1007,and 50%

rod density. This change would permit credit to be taken for a statistical analysis of the Control Rod Drop Accident, eliminating the need to reanalyze the event for reloads.

2.0 DISCUSSION & EVALUATION By letter from Cecil 0. Thomas to J.S. Charnley dated October 11, 1985, the staff issued its evaluation of Amendment 12 to Topical Report NEDE-24011-P-A

("GESTAR"). In that evaluation, which is hereby incorporated into this amendment by reference, the staff concluded that it is preferable for Group Notch Rod Sequence Control System facilities, of which Cooper  :

Nuclear Station is an example, to have the improved rod pattern control of the Banked Position Withdrawal System (BPWS) as monitored by the Rod Worth Minimizer, for the first 50 percent of rod withdrawal. The October 11, ,

1985 evaluation further stated that plants e heting the make the change will be able to take credit for the statisticai analysis of the CRDA and will not have to reanalyze the event for reloads. The proposed amendment would implement appropriate Technical Specifications for Cooper Nuclear Station. Based on the October 11, 1985 evaluation, the proposed amendment is acceptable.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

S r This 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 staff has determined that the amendment involves no I significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the I 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 the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets  !

p & O20122 880223ADOCK 0W290 PDR l

V o

i '.

) ,

.l 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 ste'.in.cnt or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

4.0 CONCLUSION

We have 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 such (2) public activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission'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.

Date: February 23, 1988 Principal-Contributor: W. Long 1

e f

p