ML14183A329
| ML14183A329 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1996 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14183A328 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9601310164 | |
| Download: ML14183A329 (2) | |
Text
~pF1 REQU4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 167 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-23 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 11, 1995, the Carolina Power & Light Company (licensee) submitted a request for changes to the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBR), Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested change to TS 3.10.1.3 would modify the time allowance that the full length control rod insertion limits (RILs) specified in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) can be exceeded. Specifically, the proposed change would add an allowance for RILs to be exceeded for a time no greater than the time.
criteria established by the axial power distribution methodology or 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, whichever is sooner. An action is also added for the reactor to be placed in the hot shutdown condition within 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> if compliance with the RILs cannot be restored within the specified time period.
2.0 EVALUATION The limits on control rod insertion have been established to ensure (1) core subcriticality after a reactor trip and during normal shutdown conditions, (2) limited potential reactivity insertions from a hypothetical control rod ejection event, and (3) an acceptable core power distribution during power operation. When the control rods are outside of the acceptable insertion limits, they must be restored by eitherrepositioning the rods to the insertion limits consistent with the core power level or by boration to reduce power to be consistent with the power limit associated with the existing rod position.
The proposed change adds an allowance for RILs to be exceeded for a maximum of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. Operation beyond the RILs is allowed for a short time period in order to take conservative action because the simultaneous occurrence of either a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA), loss-of-flow accident, ejected rod accident, or other accident during this short time period, together with an inadequate power distribution or reactivity capability, has an extremely low probability.
The maximum allowed time of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for restoring the control rods to within the RILs provides an acceptable time for evaluating and repairing minor problems without allowing the plant to remain in an unacceptable condition for an extended period of time. In addition, this time period is more restrictive than the comparable time period of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> which has been accepted in the improved Standard Technical Specifications for Westinghouse plants (NUREG 1431, Revision 1, TS Section 3.1.7). If, however, the axial power distribution methodology stated in TS 3.10.2.6 through 3.10.2.8 indicates that 96Ol.3161 9Aol26 PDR ADOCK 05000261 P
-2 the axial flux difference has exceeded the allowed cumulative time that it may deviate from its target band and an immediate correction is required, this shorter time requirement will govern. The NRC staff finds this requested change acceptable.
If compliance with the RILs cannot be restored within the above specified time requirement, another proposed action consists of placing the reactor in the hot shutdown condition within 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> utilizing normal operating procedures.
Based on operating experience, this proposed action and completion time are reasonable for reaching hot shutdown conditions from full power conditions in an orderly manner and without challenging plant systems. In addition, they are comparable to the corresponding action in NUREG-1431, Revision 1, TS Section 3.1.7 and are consistent with the text of similar requirements in other HBR TS Sections. Therefore, the staff finds this requested change acceptable.
The proposed Bases changes for TS Section 3.10.1.3 provide the justification for the proposed TS changes and the NRC staff has no objection.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the State of South Carolina official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change 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 issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (60 FR 54716).
Accordingly, the amendment meets 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 the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: L. Kopp Date:
January 26, 1996