ML20247R664
| ML20247R664 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247R660 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-16, NUDOCS 8910020038 | |
| Download: ML20247R664 (4) | |
Text
_
,.?
per g
UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
l WASHING TON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION.BY THE OFFICE-OF. NUCLEAR. REACTOR. REGULATION RELATING.TO-AMFNDMENT.NO.116 TO LICENSE NO. DPR-28 VERMONT-YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION VERMONT YANKEE. NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-271
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 12,1989 (Ref.1), as clarified by letter dated July 14, 1989 (Ref. 2), Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Vermont Yankee.
The clarification of July 14, 1989 did not affect the staff's proposed no significant hazards consideration determination. The proposed changes would modify specifications:having cycle-specific parameter limits 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 require-ments of the Administrative Controls section of TS. Guidance on the proposed changes was developed by NRC on-the basis of the review of a lead-plant proposal submitted on the Oconee plant docket by Duke Power Company. This guidance was provided to all power reactor licensees and applicants by Generic Letter 88-16, dated October 4,1988 (Ref. 3).
2.0 EVALUATION 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 Operation 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) Specifications 3.6.G.la and 3.11.A The average planar linear heat generation rate (APLHGR) limits for these specifications are provided in the COLR.
(b) Specification 3.11.C The K factors that are applied to the operating limit minimum f
critical power ratio (MCPR) for this specification are provided in the COLR.
s910020038 890913 DR ADOCK 0500
~{ 1
7
! 7;-.
A
,, A
)
,t 1 [
(c) Specifications 3.6.G.Ia and 3.11.C l
The minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) limits for these specifications are provided in the COLR.
U (d) Specifications 2.1.A.Ia, 2.1.B.1, and 3.11.B The linearheat generation rate (LHGR) limits for these specifications are provided in the COLR.
(e) Specification 3.2 - Protective Instrument Systems (Control Rod Block Instrumentation - Table 3.2.5)
The value of N used in the Rod Block Monitor Setpoint and specified in Note 5 to Table 3.2.5 is provided in the COLR.
The bases of affected specifications have been modified by the licensee to include appropriate reference to the COLR. We conclude that the inges to these bases are acceptable.
-(3) Specification 6.7.A.4 was added to the reporting requirements of the Administrative Controls section of the TS. This specification requires that the COLR be submitted, upon issuance, to the NRC Document Control Desk with copies to the Regional Administrator and Resident Inspector.
The report provities 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 using NRC approved methodology and be consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis. The approved methodologies are the following:
(a) Report, E. E. Pilat, " Methods for the Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors Lattice Physics," YAEC-1232, December 1980 (approved by NRC SER, dated September 15,1982).
(b) Report, D. M. VerPlanck, " Methods for the Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors Steady State Core Physics," YAEC-1238, March 1981 (approved by NRC SER, dated September 15,1982).
(c) Report, J. M. Holzer, " Methods for the Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors Transient Core Physics," YAEC-1239P, August 1981 (approved by NRC SER, dated September 15,1982).
(d) Report, S. P. Schultz and K. E. St. John, " Methods for the Analysis of Guide Fuel Rod Steady-State Thermal Effects (FROSSTEY):
Code /Model Description Manual," YAEC-1242P, April 1981 (approved by NRC SER, da.ted September 27,1985).
A e
g o
3-(e) Report, S. P. Schultz and K. E. St. John, " Methods for the Analysis of 0xide Fuel Rod Steady-State Thermal Effects (FROSSTEY): Code Qualification and Application," YAEC-1265P, June 1981 (approved by NRC SER, dated September 27,1985).
(f) Report, A. A. F. Ansari and J. T. Cronin, " Methods for the Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors: A System Transient Analysis Model (RETRAN)," YAEC-1233, April 1981 (approved by NRC SERs, dated November 27, 1981 and September 4, 1984).
(g) Report, A. A. F. Ansari, K. J. Burns and D. K. Beller, " Methods for the Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors: Transient critical Power Ratio Analysis (RETRAN-TCPYA01)," YAEC-1299P, March 1982 (approved by NRC SER, dated September 15,1982).
(h) Report, " Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analysis for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station," NED0-21697, August 1977, as amended (approved by NRC SER, dated November 30,1977).
(1) Report, " General-Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel (GESTARII)," NEDE-24011-P-A-9, GE Company Proprietary, September 1988, as amended.
Finally, the speciff tation 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 upon issuance to NRC, 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 NRC approved methodology, the NRC staff concludes that this change is administrative in riature and there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence. Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
As part of the implementation of Generic Letter 88-16, the staff has also l
reviewed a sample COLR that was provided by the licensee. On the basis of this review, the staff concludes that the format and content of the sample COLR are acceptable.
In addition to the changes requested by the licensee to implement the COLR in accordance with Generic Letter 88-16, the licensee also proposed a modification l
to the definition of the minimum critical power ratio (MCPR). The change to the definition is an administrative change and is, therefore, acceptable.
t
p c,7 j,
(
- s,. A t
i
.o
- 4'-
3.0 ENVIRONMENT CONSIDERATION This amendment involves-a change in the record keeping, reporting and administrative controls. The amendment also involves requirements with respect to installation or use of facility components located within the restricted areas, as defined in 10 CFR 20.3(a)(4). The staff has determined
-that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant changes 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 considera-tion and there has been no public comment on such finding.- Accordingly,. this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
S We have reviewed the request by the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation to modify the Technical Specifications of the Vermont Yankee plant that would 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. Based on this review, we conclude that these Technical Specification modifications are acceptable.
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.
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter (BYY-89-43) from Warren P. Murphy (VYNPC) to NRC, dated May 12, 1989.
2.
Letter (BVY-89-67) from Warren P. Murphy (VYNPC) to NRC, dated July 14, 1989.
3.
Generic Letter 88-16, " Removal of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications," dated October 4,1988.
Principal Contributor:
D. Fieno Dated: September 15, 1989 l
l I
xm 7
. o
~.,,
i t-9',
- AMENDMENT NO.116 TO DPR-28 VERMONT '/ANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DATED September 15,'1989 j DISTRIBUTION:~
t Docket File 50-271
PDI-3 Reading 1
S. Varga
'8. Boger M. Rushbrook
- M. Fairtile' R. Wessman OGC.
Dennis.Hagan-E. Jordan B. Grimes-T. Meek (4).
Wanda Jones - P-522 Phillips Building J. Calvo D. Fieno ACRS(10)
GPA/PA - 2G5 0WFN ARM /LFMB J. Wiggins, Region I I.~Barth, 0GC 9foi i t l
l m-h.
W...y y,-3-,..,,...
~
..g
,,3.;,...
,,.,,c...
.c;...
.,. - ~, - -
.7.,~.-r
- ~,
s