ML20086T401
| ML20086T401 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1984 |
| From: | Howe P CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086T404 | List: |
| References | |
| NLS-84-070, NLS-84-70, NUDOCS 8403060300 | |
| Download: ML20086T401 (3) | |
Text
- _. _
9 r
CA&L SERIAL: NLS-84-070 Carolina Posver & Light Company FEB 281984
- Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-Attention:
Mr. D. B. Vassallo, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 2 Division _of Licensing United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC.
20555 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2
~ DOCKET NOS. 50-325 & 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 & DPR-62 SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REACTIVITY ANOMALIES
Dear Mr. Vassallo:
SUMMARY
accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Titic 10, Parts 50.90 and I,p,101, Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L) hereby requests revisions to the 2.'
Technical Specifications (TS) for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2.
The purpose of the enclosed revisions, which supplement and k
supersede those changes'provided in our December 29, 1982 letter, is to clarify when the reactivity anomaly surveillance in TS 4.1.2.a is to be performed.
DISCUSSION In our letter-dated December 29, 1982, CP&L proposed a revision to TS 4.1.2.a to eliminate possible confusion concerning exactly when the reactivity anomaly surveillance check should be conducted. The' proposed revisions provided in that. submittal would not require the initial reactivity anomaly surveillance
~
to be performed until an equilibrium power of at least 90 percent of rated thermal power _is reached. The basis for the proposed revision was that waiting until this power is reached to perform the reactivity anomaly surveillance would not have a detrimental effect on plant safety because ntber tests' performed at the initial criticality of a new fuel cycle (specifically the shutdown margin test) indirectly tests - for reactivity anomalics anel would
- increase' the accuracy of the surveillatice.
I 9403060300 840228 PDR ADOCK 05000324 P
\\
411 Fayetteville Street
- P. O. Box 1551
- Raleigh. N. C. 27602 y
c=u D. B. Vassallo Based on our discussions with members of your staff concerning this request, it has been concluded that revising TS 4.1.2.a doas not provide the best method of clarifying this requirement.
Instead, the requirements of this surveillance should be addressed'by adding a d'scussion of the requirement in the Bases section of the TS.
Accordingly, you will find enclosed a revised Bases page for each unit that incorporates a short statement clarifying when the surveillance of TS 4.1.2.a should be performed.
In addition, a typographical change has been made to the Shutdown Margin Bases Section on the same page. The typographical change consists of substituting the word " delta" for the greek symbol "A" and is being made to facilitate word processing handling of the page. This change is consistent with the format used in the Standard Technical Specifications.
SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS ANALYSIS Carolina Power & Light Company has reviewed this supplemental request and determined that the proposed revisions involve no significant hazard consideration because the proposed revisions are an administrative change clarifying the TS.
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of its standards set forth in 10CFR50.92 for no significant hazards considerations by providing certain examples published in the Federal Register on April 6, 1983 (48 FR 14864). One of the examples of an amendment which will likely be found to involve no significant hazard considerations is a change that is purely administrative in nature.- The proposed change to the Bases, which simply provide clarificatica on exactly when the reactivity anomaly surveillance check shou,ld be performed, do not revise the provisions of the Surveillance Requirement and are an administrative clarification of the TS.
Therefore, CP&L believes the proposed changes fall within the Commission's example (i) of an action not likely-to involve a significant hazard consideration.
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION l
The proposed Bases pages for Brunswick-1 and Brunswick-2 are provided in i.
Since this submittal is a supplement to our December 29, 1982 I
request, we have determined that no additional license amendment fee is needed.
I l
g_ _
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact our Licensing Staff.
Y3urs very truly, D.}
W P. W. Howe Vice President Brunswick Nuclear Project WRM/pgp (9510WRM) t Enclosure cc:
Mr. D. O. Myers (NRC-BSEP)
Mr. J. P. O'Reilly (NRC-RII)
Mr. M. Grotenhuis (NRC) 4 Mr. D. H. Brown Radiation Protection Branch' Division of Facility Services Department of Human Resources 1
P. W. Howe, having been first duly sworn, did depose and say thet the information contained herein is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and-belief; and the sources of his information are officers, employees, contractors, and agents of Carolina Power & Light
. Company.-
Y Lo Notary (Seal)
My commission expires:
- r commiston Expr:s '/a./ap//f 1
1 l
s l
1
.,m
.. _..,.. ~,. _..
,_,.~,,,.-.,-,,,..,,,,,e.
,,.,,,_,,.m,,,m_r
- - _ = -.-