ML20245J300
| ML20245J300 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 04/19/1989 |
| From: | Tourigny E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245J201 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905040088 | |
| Download: ML20245J300 (4) | |
Text
. -
j#" "**
~
UNITED STATES e"
^
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
g 1
e wAsmHGTON, D. C 20555 e
SAFETY EYALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-71 AND AMENDMENT NO. 157 TO FACILITY OPEPATING LICENSE NO. DPR-62 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY et al.
BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-325 AND 50-324
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated August 3,1987, Carolina Power & Light Company submitted a request for changes to the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Unit 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (TS).
The amendment would require the use of the Banked Position Withdrawal Sequence (BPWS) as the Rod Worth Minimizer (RWM) Control Rod Program in TS 3/4.1.4, " Control Rod Program Controls."
In addition, the word
" Operational" would be placed before the word " Condition" in TS 3/4.1.4.
2.0 EVALUATION At the present time, TS 4.1.4.1.2 states that the RWM shall be demonstrated i
operable by verifying the control rod sequence input to the RWM computer is correct following any loading of the sequence program in the computer.
By requiring the BPWS, this surveillance requirement would state that the RWM shall be demonstrated operable by verifying the control rod Banked Position Withdrawal Sequence input to the RWM computer is correct following any loading of the sequence program into the computer.
The licensee's safety analysis in support of this amendment is as follows:
General Electric (GE) has developed BPWS rod patterns applicable to Group Notch Rod Sequence Control reactors, such as the BSEP units. The NRC has issued a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) to GE on October 11, 1985, which allows group notch reactors to take credit for the Control Rod Drop Accident (CRDA) statistical analysis and conclusions previously approved by the NRC for GE in an SER dated October 13, 1983 for reactors using BPWS, enforced only by the RWM.
A BWR's control rods are removed from the reactor core from the bottom, thus the possibility that a control rod could become unlatched from its drive mechanism and later fall from the core, resulting in possible fuel failure, must be addressed. One of the mechanisms designed to ensure that fuel failure does not result if a I
8905040088 890419 hDR ADOCK 05000324-
PNU l
j.-
CRDA should occur is the RWM. The. RWM tracks control rod movement and generates rod blocks in the high worth area from 100
- rods inserted) percent control rod density. (all control to approximately 20 percent power.. It ensures that a programmed control rod sequence is being followed when the reactor is. in the high worth ~ area..The BPWS rod patterns have been analytically determined to keep the fuel pellet enthalpy less than 280 calories per gram under worst-case CRDA condit9ns.
Currently, Surveillance Requirement 4.1.4.1.2 requires verification that the control rod _ sequence input to the RWM computer is correct following its loading into the computer.. The proposed revision specifies that this sequence program be GE's generic BPWS rod pattern program.
Brunswick normally implements this program but does not-take credit.for its use in cycle specific reload topical
. reports. Specifying the use of BPWS rod patterns allow use of GE's generic CRDA analysis and eliminates the need
. for performing cycle specific analyses.
The staff has reviewed the above described safety analysis presented by the licensee. The BPW3 rod patterns ensure that, under worst-case CRDA conditions, the fuel pellet enthalpy will remain at less than 280 calories per gram. Therefore, fuel failure will not occur. On this basis, the Technical Specification change is acceptable.
Presently, TS 3/4.1.4 does not use the phrase " Operational Condition" and jutt ases the word " Condition". The phrase " Operational Condition" is used throughout the TS. The licensee is proposing the phrase " Operational-Condition" to ensure consistency throughout the TS. The staff agrees that there should be terminology consistency throughout the TS, and the admin-istrative change is acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S These amendmesits change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted areas as-defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes the surveillance requirements. The staff has determined that these amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released off site; and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)gibility criteria such finding. Accordingly, these amendments meet the eli Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 7625) on February 22, 1989, and consulted with the State of North Carolina. No public comments or requests for hearing were received, and the State of North Carolina did not have any comments.
The staff 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's 4
regulations, and 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:
E. Tourigny Dated:
April 19,1989
'l 4'
'e Mr. L. W. Eury Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Carolina Power & Ligh+. Company Units I and 2 CC*
Mr. Russell B. Starkey, Jr.
Mr. J. L. Harness Project Manager Plant General Manager Brunswick Nuclear Project Brunswick Steam Electric Plant P. O. Box 10429 P. O. Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461 Southport, North Carolina 28461 Mr. R. E. Jones, General Counsel Mr. H. A. Cole Carolina Power & Light Company Special Deputy Attorney General P. O. Box 1551 State of North Carolina Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Mark S. Calvert Associate General Counsel Mr. Robert P. Gruber Carolina Power & Light Company Executive Director P. O. Box 1551 Public Staff - NCUC Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 P. O. Box 29520 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0520 Ms. Grace Beasley Board of Commissioners P. O. Box 249 Bolivia, North Carolina 28422 Mrs. Chrys Baggett State Clearinghouse Budget and Management 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Star Route 1 P. G. Box 208 Southport, North Carolina 28461 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Dayne H. Brown, Chief Radiation Protection Branch Division of Facility Services i
N. C. Department of Human Resources l
701 Barbour Drive i
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-2008
)
l l
l i
(
/
...n 0 14e n
AMENDMENT NO.127' TO FACILITY-OPERATING' LICENSE N0. DPR BRUNSWICK,' UNIT 1 AMENDMENT NO. 157 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-62 -. BRUNSWICK, UNIT 2 D6cteQtje-
+
NRC#PDR
-Local PDR PDII-1 Reading..
G. Lainas (14r4)
E. Adensam E. Reeves P. Anderson.
E..Tourigny
'N.
Le L.Spessard~(MNBB3701) 0GC D..Hagan'(MNBB3302)
E. Jordan (MNBB3302)
B. Grimes (9A2).
T. ~ Meeks (4) (P1-137)
W. Jones (P-130A)'
E. Butcher-(11F23)
ACRS (10)
GPA/PA ARM /LFMB cc:
Licensee / Applicant Service List i
1 4
/
_ _ - -