ML20205A314

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 125 to License NPF-1

ML20205A314
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	03/20/1987
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20205A259	List: ML20205A253 ML20205A309 ML20205A314
References
NUDOCS 8703270414
Download: ML20205A314 (2)

Text

- . - .-

g --*

1. UNITED STATES

[g k'g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .

j WASHINGTON, D. C 20555

%,e...e/

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ,

'RELATED' TO AMENDMENT N0.125 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-1.

PORTLAND GENEPAL ELECTRIC COMPANY THE CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON PACIFIC POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TRO.1AN NUCLEAR PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-344

' INTRODUCTION-Py letter dated October 31, 1986, Portland General Electric Company (PGE) oroposed changes' to the Trojan Technical Specifications Sections 3.1.3.4,

" Shutdown Rod Insertion Limit," and 3.1.3.5, " Control Rod Insertion Limit,"

and to Figure 3.1-1 and Figure 3.1-2, Rod Bank Insertion Limits Versus Thermal Power. The proposed chances revise the definition of " fully withdrawn" for the control rods from 228 steps to greater than 225 sters. In a letter dated

. December 8,1986 PGE provided more detailed results of an analysis-supporting the proposed changes.

DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION g

To minimize localized rod cluster control assembly (RCCA) wear at the top of the control rods, the proposed Technical Specification chance will allow operation with the RCCAs inserted two steps into the reactor from their normal withdrawn position of 228 steps. At 226 steps withdrawn, the RCCAs are only 1.25 inches into the active fuel region. Since the top region of the core has such low worth, the resultant power distribution perturbations are calculated to be negligible and can be accommodated with available margin. Similarly, the effect on shutdown margin is minimal (4 to 6 pcm), and can be accommodated by

-available excess shutdown margin (about 400 pcm).

The impact on other key safety parameters was found to be negligible in the t licensee's analysis. Because the proposed change will insert the RCCAs so little into the active fuel region, we would expect essentially negligible effects of the proposed change as reported in the licensee's evaluation.

As such, we find the proposed change to be acceptable.

8703270414 DR B70320 p ADOCK 05000344 PDR i

,.,_.,__,-,-c-__, m,,.,._.,-....e.- -~

~,,,.m.- ,,.__._,..,.-mm-.m -

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

.. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change .in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFP 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 effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously published 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 the elioibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 651.22(c)(9).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 651.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connectior with the issuance of the amendment.

CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endancered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the araendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Dated: March 20, 1987 PPINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:

M. Chatterton

.