ML20248B966
| ML20248B966 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248B954 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8908090384 | |
| Download: ML20248B966 (3) | |
Text
..
l I
pce
'o UNITED STATES
'[
Tg, g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,,, t WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l
s SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR' REACTOR REGULATION i
SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NOS. 9 AND I TO j
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N05. NPF-76 AND NPF-80 t
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY CITY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF SAN ANTONIO CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS DOCKET NOS. 50-498 AND 50-499 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, UNITS 1 AND 2 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By ap lication dated June 1,1989, Houston Lighting & Power Company, et.
the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications al.} Appendix A to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80) for (TS South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed changes would modify specifications containing 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 requirements of the Administrative Controls section of the TS.
Guidance on the proposed changes was developed by the NRC on the basis of the review of a lead-plant proposal submitted on the Oconee plant docket that was endorsed by the Babcock and Wilcox Owners Group. This guidance was provided to all power reactor licensees and applicants by Generic Letter 88-16, dated October 4, 1988.
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 Definitions section of the TS was modified to include a definition of the COLR that requires cycle-specific parameter limits to be established on a t; nit-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.
89060903B4 090731 f"
PDR ADOCK 05000498; p
PNV
- (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.
I TS 3/4.1, Reactivity Control Systems, Control Rod Insertion Limits TS 3/4.2, Power Distribution Limits, Axial j
Flux Difference i
/
1 (3) Figure 3.1-3, " Rod Bank Insertion Limits Versus Thermal Power, Four-Loop Operation" was deleted from the TS.
(4) Specification 6.9.1.6, " Core Operating Limits Report," was added to the reporting requirements of the Administrative Controls section of the TS. This specification requires that the COLR, including 4
mid-cycle revisions and supplements, be submitted within 30 days of their implementation, for each reload cycle, to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.4.
The report provides the values of the cycle-specific parameter limits that are applicable for the current fuel cycle.
Furthermore, this specification requires the values of these limits j
be established using the NRC-approved methodology in WCAP-8403,
" Power Distribution and Load Following Procedure", and WCAP-9273-A,
" Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation Method" and consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis.
d On the basis of the review of the above items, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee provided an acceptable response to those itens 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, I
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.
l
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments involve changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or l
administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with l
the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
l The Commission made proposed determinations that the amendmants involve no significant-hazards consideration that were published ir the Federal Register (54 FR 27229) on June 28, 1989.
The Commission consulted j
with the State of Texas.
No public comments were received, and the State of Texas did not have any comments.
- ~
.?
- s;
.)
l
' 'On the basis of the' considerations discussed above, the NRC staff concludesthat.(1)thereisreasonableassurance.thatthehealth and safety.-of.the public will not be endangered by operation in the pro)osed manner,.(2) such activities will be conducted in compliance wit 1.the Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of these amendnients will not be inimical to the comon defense and security
-.or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors: Daniel B. Fieno, SRXB/ DEST Thones G. Dunning, OTSB/DOEA l
Claudia M. Abbate PDIV/DRSP Date: ' July 31,1989 4
- j.
I
_ _ _ _ _. - -... - _ _ -.