ML20247M430
| ML20247M430 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247M426 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-16, NUDOCS 8906050041 | |
| Download: ML20247M430 (6) | |
Text
- _ - - -
),g C
UNITED STATES j-g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)
' rn
- j.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655
,,e SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 131 TO LICENSE NO. DPR-71 AND AMENDMENT NO.
161 TO LICENSE NO. DPR-62 CA_ROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT N05. 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-325 AND 50-324
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 4, 1987 ()Ref.1), as amended and supplemented by letter dated April 5,1988 (Ref. 2, the Carolina Power & Light Company.
(the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Brunswick Units 1 and 2.
These two letters (Refs. I and 2) were superseded by a letter dated February 20,1989(Ref.3)andamendedbyletterdated March 20, 1989 (Ref. 6). The proposed changes include two distinct areas which have been reviewed and urnroved by the NRC in the context of TS improvement. The first set of proposed changes would modify specifications having cycle-specific parameter limiu by replacing the values of those limits with a reference to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) for the values of those limits. The proposed changes also include the addition of the COLR to the " Definitions" section and to the reporting requirements of the " Administrative Controls" section of TS. Guidance on the modification of TS that have cycle specific parameters was developed by NRC on the basis of the review of a lead-plant proposal submitted on the Oconee plant docket. This guidance was provided to all power reactor licensees and applicants by Generic tetter 88-16, dated October 4,1988 (Ref. 4).
The other set of proposed changes would modify specifications by deleting redundant limits from the TS.
These redundant limits incluoe the limits on the linear heat generation rate (LHGR) and associated total peaking factor (TPF).
Guidance on the proposed changes was developed by NRC on the basis of its review of Amendment 19 to NEDE-24011-P-A (Ref. 5). All of the Definitions, Specifications, and Bases of the TS that are affected by the proposed change are provided in Reference 5.
The staff review of the licensee's initial submittals (Refs.1 and 2) led to clarifying telephone calls. The licensee provided Reference 3 which supersedes References 1 and 2.
Our evaluation of the licensee's proposed changes to the TS is based on this latest submittal (Ref. 3), as amended by Reference 6.
8906050041 890412 PDR ADOCK 05000324 P
t 1
4 2.0 EVALUATION
~
2.1 Changes Related to Cycle-Specific Parameter Values (Generic Letter 88-16) 1 The licensee's proposed changes to the TS are in accordance with the guidance provided by Generic Letter 88-16 and are addressed below.
(1) The Definition section of the TS was modified to include a definition of the Core Operating Limits Report that requires cycle / reload-specific parameter limits to be established on a unit-specific basis in accordance with an NRC-approved methodology that maintains' the limits of the safety analysis.
The definition notes that plant operation within these limits is addressed by individual specifications.
(2) The-following specifications were revised to replace the values of cycle-specific parameter limits with a reference to the COLR-that provides these limits, a.
Specification 3.2.1 - Average Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate The average planar linear heat generation limits are provided in the.COLR.
b.
Specification 3.2.3.1 - Minimum Critical Power Ratio i
The K factors and MCPRs are provided in the COLR.
f c.
Specification 3.2.3.2 - Minimum Critical Power Ratio The MCPRs are provided in the'COLR.
(3) Specification 6.9.3.1, 6.9.3.2, 6.9.3.3, and 6.9.3.4 were added to the reporting requirements of the administrative controls section of the TS. These specifications require that the COLR be submitted to the NRC Document Control Desk, upon issuance, f
with copies to the Regional Administrator and Resident Inspector.
The report provides the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are applicable for the current fuel cycle.
Furthermore, these specifications require that the values of these limits be established uring NRC-approved methodology and be consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis. The approved methodologies are the following:
a.
NEDE-24011-P-A, " General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel" (latest approved version).
t t
1 l
o l 1
l b.
Brunswick re'lcad methodologies approved by the NRC in Safety Evaluation of May 18, 1984 and October 22, 1984 for the following topical reports:
1.
Topical Report NF-1583.01, " Description and Validation of Steady-State Analysis Methods for Boiling Water Reactors," February 1983.
2.
Topical Report NF-1583.02, " Method of RECORD,"
February 1983.
3.
Topical Report NF-1583.03, " Methods of PREST 0-B,"
February 1983.
4.
Topical Report NF-1583.04, " Verification of CP&L Reference BWR Thermal-Hydraulic Methods Using the FIBWR Code," May 1983.
Finally, the specification requires that all changes in cycle-specific parameter limits be documented in the COLR before each reload cycle or remaining part of a reload cycle and submitted to NRC, upon issuance, prior to operation with the new parameter limits.
On the basis of the review of the above items, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee provided an acceptable response to those items as addressed in the NRC guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in TS.
Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are established using an hRC approved methodology, the NRC staff concludes that there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence.
Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
2.2 Chances Related to Deleting the Linear Heat Generation Rate Limit from the T,5 The licensee has followed the guidance provided by the staff in its Safety Evaluation (Ref. 5) on Amendment 19 to GESTAR-II with respect to deleting the linear heat generation rate (LHGR) limit from the TS. All affected Definitions, Specifications, and Bases have been appropriately changed.
All applicable APLHGRs (average planar LHGRs) will include (as a function of fuel burnup and, when necessary, fuel bundle lattice type) the more limiting of either APLHGR based on ECCS analysis requirements or APLHGR bared on fuel mechanical design analysis requirements. The proposed TS changes will result in the same operating power distribution limits and safety margins as the current TS.
In addition, the proposed TS will reduce TS complexity by removing specifications which are in effect redundant and will preclude the need for inclusion of numerous lattice specific maximum average planar linear heat generation rate (MAPLHGR) limit curves. Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with appropriate thermal limits, the NRC staff concludes that
r.
)
l-t v.
l 4-
~
the proposed TS changes are acceptable and there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence. Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
2.3 Other TS Changes The licensee has also made a number of editorial changes to the TS. The most important is the removal of the specific value of the safety limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR) from a number of Specifications and Bases and referring to the safety limit MCPR of Specification 2.1.2..The staff concludes that these editorial changes are acceptable.
3.0
SUMMARY
We have reviewed the request by the Carolina Power & Light Company to modify the TS of the Brunswick Units I and 2 plants that would (1) remove the specific values of some cycle-dependent parameters from the specifications and place the values in a Core Operating Limits Report that would be referenced by the specification, and (2) delete the redundant linear heat generation rate limit from the specifications.
Based on this review we conclude that these TS modifications are acceptable.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S These amendments 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 to 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 rnay 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 such finding. Accordingly, these amendments meet 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 statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federa_1 Register (54 FR 15822) on April 19, 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.
W i
l t
. ~
i 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 regulations, and issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
D. Tieno Dated: May 25, 1989 I
l
./
t t !
6.0 REFERENCES
~
1.
Letter (NLS-87-185) from L.W. Eury (CP&L) to NRC, dated September 4, 1987.
2.
Letter (NLS-88-062) from L.W. Eury (CP&L) to NRC, dated April 5,1988.
3.
Letter (NLS-89-038) from M.A. McDuffie (Cf1L) to NRC, dated February 20, 1989.
4.
Generic Letter 88-16, " Removal of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications," October 4, 1988.
5.
Letter from Ashok C. Thadani (NRC) to J.S. Charnley (GE), " Acceptance for Referencing of Amendment 19 to General Electric Licensing Topical Report NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR-II), ' General Electric Standard Application for Reactor fuel,' April 7, 1987," dated November 17, 1987.
6.
Letter (NLS-89-055) from M. A. McDuffie (CP&L) to NRC, dated March 20, 1989.
l