ML20151B504
| ML20151B504 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 04/01/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151B495 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8804080260 | |
| Download: ML20151B504 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
EP put a
d'
['.
UNITED STATES s
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
7,,
tj WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l
\\.,,,./
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.11800 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-46 NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT COOPER NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-298
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Ccoper Nuclear Station Technical Specifications presently limit the facility to the use of specified fuel and control blade designs. B j
letter dated Decer.ber 14, 1987 the Nebraska Public Power District (ythe licensee) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-46 for the Cooper Nuclear Station. The proposed amendment would cl.ange the Technical Specifications to permit installation of new design (lead Test Assembly or "LTA") fuel assemblies and control blades, 2.0 DISCUSSION Nuclear fuel vendors, as part of the continuing process of improving their products, subject new design fuel assemblies and control blades to actual commercial service conditions. This is done after the materials have been evaluated to the extent practicable by other means (i.e. test reactor or Naval reactor service) and prior to submittal of a licensing topical report for the new design. Since the vendors do not possess power reactors of their own, the service condition experience is gained in cooperation with operating power reactor licensees.
During the forth-coming reload in preparation for Cycle 12 operation, the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) licensee, in ecoperation with the General Electric Co.,
plans to install four fuel assembly and two LTA control blades in the CNS core. Each LTA control blade will contain a limited number of (1) Rare Earth Oxide (RE0) absorber rods and (2) boron carbide absorber rods clad with RADRESIST alloys. One blade will be irradiated for two cycles of operation, the other for four cycles. The control blade LTA's have been analyzed and verified by tests to be mechanically acceptable. A reactivity evaluation was performed by the vendor using the model described in "NEDO 22290 GE Hybrid I Control Rod Assembly, September 1983". The fuel assembly LTA's are similar to standard P8x8R fuel except for an interactive channel with less Zircaloy, and a lower tie plate that will offset the bundle 40 mils toward the control blade. They have been analyzed using th9 approved methods of "General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel" NEDE-24011-P-A-8 and NEDE-24011-P-A-8-US, May 1986. Based on the vendor's 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations, the fuel assembly and centrol blade LTA's are acceptable for installation in Cooper.
LTA programs such as the above are encouraged by the staff because of their general benefits in safety and cperational flexibility. LTAs are 8804000260 000401 PDR ADOCK 05000299 P
. inserted into reactors to confirm expected operation and have a low probability of abnormal behavinr.
In addition, the number of LTAs installed in a core at one time is numerically small.
In a letter from T. Ippolito to R. Engel dated September 23, 1981, the staff advised the General Electric Co. that as long as analyses were perfomed usirg approved methods and acceptance criteria it would be assumed that use of LTAs involves no unresolved safety question.
The licensee's amendment application proposed a requirement for prior NRC approval of LTA installations. However, based on the detemination cited in the above referenced Ippolito letter (that the use of properly analyzed LTA's involves no unresolved safety question), the staff has detemined that prior NRC approval is not required. The staff infomed the licensee of its desire to amend Technical Specification 5.2.0 so as to only require prior NRC notification and the licensee agreed to the change. This change simply reflects the NRC's regulations governing the procedure for modifying design features not specified in the Technical Specifications and does not change the substance of the proposed anendment.
The proposed aner &ent, ac revised by the staff, and agreed to by the licensee, will enable the licensee to im31erent LTA programs in a method acceptable to the NRC and ceneistent witi 10 CFR 50.59.
It is therefore acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S This amendment chances a requirement with respect to installation or use of a fecility 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 effluerts that may be released offsf te, and that there is i
no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amandrent involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment reets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impect statement cr envircrmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the i
issuance of the amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have concludad, 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, 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 comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date! April 1, 1988 Principal Contributor:
W. Long
- -