ML20248B429
| ML20248B429 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron, Braidwood, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 06/05/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248B424 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906090049 | |
| Download: ML20248B429 (2) | |
Text
. - _ _ _ _ _ - -
p f '
Warq k
UNITED STATES
. [,
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,
- y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%.....j SAFETY. EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF. NUCLEAR REACTOR. REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT.NO. 29..TO. FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES NOS. NPF-37 AND NPF-66 BYRON. STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET.NOS. 50-454 AND.50-455 b!LD SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO..18 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES NOS. NPF-72. AND.NPF-77 BRAICWOOD. STATION, UNITS.1 AND.2 DOCKET N05. 50-456.AND 50-457
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter cated J6nuary 25,1909, supplemented February 3, 1989,(CoirmonwealthTS) f Edison Coinpany proposed changes to the Technical Specifications Station, Units 1 and 2, ano Braidwood St6 tion, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed changes would scodify specifications having cycle-specific maximum enrichment of reload fuel by replacing the values of those limits with a reference to a report entitled " Criticality Analysis of Byron and Braidwood Station Fuel Storage Racks" for the values of those lisaits. The proposed changes also include the addition of this report to the Definitions Section and to the reporting requirements of the Administrative Controls Section of TS. Guiclence on the proposed changes was developed by NRC on the basis of the review of a lead-plant proposal subsuitted on the Oconee Plant docket that was endorsed by the Babcuck and Wilcox Owners Group. This guidance was provided to all power reactor Itcensees and applicants by Generic Letter 88-16 dated October 4,1988.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee's proposed changes to the TS are in accoroance with the guidance provided by Generic Letter 88-16 and are addressed below.
(1) The Definitions Section of the TS was modified to include a definition of l
the report entitled " Criticality Analysis of Byron and Braiowood Fuel Storage Racks" that requires cycle / reload-specific parameter limits to be established on a unit-specific basis in accorcence with NRC - approved methodology that maintains the limits of the shfety analysis. The definition notes that plant operation within these limits is addressed i
by inoivioual specifications.
8906090049 890605 PDR ADOCK 05000454 P
FDC i
_____mm_m__.____
y 6
(2) Specification 5.3.1 was revised to replace the values of cycle-specific limits reload fuel enrichment with a reference to this report that provides these limits.
~
(3) Specification 6.9.1.10 was changed in the reporting requirements of the Administrative Controls Section of the TS. This specification requires that the report be submitted upon issuance to the NRC Document Control Desk with copies to the Regional Administrator and Resident Inspector.
The report provides the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are app 1', cable for the current fuel cycle. Furthermore, this specification requires that the values of these limits be determined so that all applicable limits of the safety analysis are met.
Finally, the specification requires that all changes in cycle-specific parameter limits be documented in the report and submitted upon issuance of any changes.
On the basis of the review of the above items, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee provided an accepteble response to those items as addressed in the NRC guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific 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 nature and there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence. Accordingly, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL C0t: SIDERATION These amendments involve changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or l
i administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the emendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), ne environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared u connection with the issuance of these amendnents.
4.0 CONCLUSION
l On the basis of the considerations discussed above, the hRC staff concludes l
that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of these amendnents will te inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
d Principal Contributors: Daniel B. Fieno, SRXB/ DEST Thomas G. Dunning, OTSB/DOEA Leonard N. 01shan, PDIII-2/DRSP Dated:
June 5,1989
____.m
-._m._
'I