ML20034A693
| ML20034A693 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 04/12/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034A692 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9004240134 | |
| Download: ML20034A693 (8) | |
Text
.
Macg e., e '
jo UNITED $TATES j'y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N e
4
,)
u s m orou.o.c. m ss
\\
)
SAFETY EVALUATION SY THE OFFICE OF NU, CLEAR REACTOR REGULA, TION U
RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.133 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-46 t
NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT COOPER NUCLEAR STATION j
DOCKET NO. 50-298
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated February 12,1990(Ref.1),NebraskaPublicPowerDistrict (NPPD) made application to modify the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) Technical Specifications to accommodate the Cycle 14 reload.
The requested Technical Specification _ changes furnished information to support (1) use of enhanced analytical methodologies for the new fuel design, (2) lowering the Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR) Safety Limit, and (3) editorial and definition changes to reficct the use of the new fuel asserblies and the associated analytical nethodology used for the Cycle 14 Reload.
In support of the Cooper Cycle 14 Reloed, NPPD submitted topical reports which descriaed the reload analysis (Ref. 2) and the design of four General Electric Lead Test Assen.blies (LTA) that are included in the reload (Ref. 3).
2.0 _D_ISCUSSION 2.1 Reload Description The Cooper Cycle 14 Relcad will retain 380 previously irradiated fuel assentlies designated BP8DRB263 (152 frcm Cycle 11), ISEELTA (4 from Cycle 12),
BP8DPB265L (52 from Cycle 12), BP80RB283 (68 from Cycle 12), and BP8DRB283 (104 from Cycle 13), ard will add 168 new General Electric fuel assemblies desicnatedGE11LTA(4),BP8DRB283(12),andGE9B-P8DWB302-10CZ-80M-150-T l
(162).
l 2.2 Fuel Design i
l The new fuel assemblies to be used in Cycle 14, BP8DRB283 and l
GE9B-P80WB302-10GZ-10M-150-T, have been approved and designated as BPBXBR andGEBX8NBrespectively,(Ref.4).in the General Electric Standard Application fo ReactorFuel(GESTARII)
The four new Lead Test Assemblies, i
I designated as GE11LTA are part of a joint program with the General Electric Company and are planned to remain in operation for up to five cycles. A description cf the GE Lead Test Assemblies (Ref. 5) and a licensing eralysis supporting their operation (Ref. 3) has also been provided.
These fuel types have been analyzed fcr this application using u.ethods approved by the NRC staff. The results of these analyses roeet the approved lir.itsofGESTAR11(Ref.4),thereforethenewfueltypesareacceptable r
for Cooper Cycle 14 9004240134 900412 PDR ADOCK0500p,ggG
g.
s a-.
l 4
+
+
1 2.3 huclear Design The nuclear design for Cooper Cycle 14 has been performed with the rethedology describedinGCSTARII(Ref.4). The results of these analyses are given in Reference 2.
The shutdown margin is 1.% celta-k at the beginning cf the cycle and 1.3% delta-k at minimum ccr.ditions. These margins are well in excess of the required shutdown maroin of 0.38% delta-k and are acceptable.
- ht Lter.dy Liquid Control System (SLC) is designed to inject a quantity of tcdium pentaborate solution sufficient to produce shutdown snargin of 3.0f delta-k and a concentraticn cf-t.o.lcss than 600 ppm of boron in the reactor core. The shutdown margin for Cycle 14 was calculated to provide i
a shutdown maroin of 3.7% delta-k for cold conditions with all control L
rods in their full power positions. This meets the shutdcwn margin requirement of 3.07 delta-k and is therefore acceptable. Since the results have been obtained using methods that have been approved by the e
KRC staff, and the results neet the appropriate requirements, the staff concludes that the nuclear design cf the Cooper Cycle 14 Relcad.is acceptabic.
2.4 Thermel-Hydraulic Design The therital-hydraulic design for the Cooper Cycle 14 Rtlead has been carried cut using the rethodology described in GESTAR II (Ref. 4) and the results are giver, in Fcference 2.
The pararaeters used for the analysis are these approved in Reference 3.
The use cf a Safety Limit Minimum Critical Peker Ratio (SLPCPR) value of 1.06 is justifitt by the licenste tu.ed on the approved value of 1.0C for a D-lattice ccre ict the CECX8t!E fuel desigr.,1.04 for a D-lattice plant with a ccre that is operated with a second sLccessive reload of high burdle initici R.fcctcr (greater than er equal to 1.04) GE fuel inclucir.g BPBX8R and the sir..ilarities of the fuel design betweer GE11LTA ar.d GECX8hE fuel types. $1nct the. SLHCPR value has been approved (Ref. 4) for cach j
fuel type and the Cooper Cycle 14 fuel tyrts tc.eet the required cerditions specified ir Reference 4, the 1.06 SLMCPR for Cooper is acceptable. The t
Operating Limit MCPR (OLMCPR) values are cetermined by the limiting l
transients, Red Withdrawal Error (RWE), Fuel Loading Error (FLE), Loss of 4
Feedwater Heating (LOFH), Lcad Rejection Without Bypass (LRWEF) and Feedwater Centro 11er Failure (FWCF). The analyses of these pressurization events fer Cooper Cycle 14 using the ODYl! Option B approach provide new Cycle 14 Technical Specification values of OLMCPR as a function of average scram time, tau. The approved methcds (Ref. 4) were used to analyze these events and the results are acceptable to the staff.
The Cooper Technical Specifications have included the recouendations made by General Electric in Service Information Letter SIL-380 with regard to assuring core stability.
Cooper Nuclear Staticn has implerter.teo appropriate ectioris in res l
08-07 (Ref. C)ponse tc the NRC staff's requests contained in !;RC Dulletin 6nd its Supplenent 1 (Ref. 7).
In aedition, the licensee hes clescly foilcwed the BUR Owrar's GroLp 1cng-tcrn stability progran to l
l l
i y
b M4 (;
f resolve the BWR Power oscillation issue at Cooper Nuclear Station. The staff concluces that the licensee's action with regard to the issue cf l
core stability is acceptable.
l 2.5 Transient and Accident-Analysis The transient and accident analysis methodology used for Cooper Cycle 14 l.
isdescribedinGESTARII(Ref.4). Generally, the ODYN Option B approach was used for the transient analysis. The limiting MCPR events have been l
previously evaluated in Section 2.4 The core-wide transient analysis methodologies and results are acceptable and fall within expected ranges.
i for the control rod withdrawal error (RWE) lo' cal transients, the licensee has determinec that a rod block monitor (RBM) upper setting:cf 107% of full power results in a delta CPR cf 0.17 for GEBX8ND/GE11LTA fuel and a-t celta-CPR of 0.18 for PPBX8R/196 ELTA fuel..Therefore, the Technical Specification HCPR Limiting Cenditions of Operation of 1.23 and 1.24,.
respectively, bound the RWE *esults_for these, fuel-types ~in Cycle 14 The fuel assembly miserientatio', event has been* analyzed for Cooper Cycle 14 anc results in a delta-CPR of 0.17 for a variable water gap misoriented j
fuel bur.dle.
The limiting pressurization event, the main si eamlire isolation Valve i
t (MS1V) closure with flux scram, was analyzed'with standard GESTAR 11
- trethods, liesults for peak steam dome and' vessel pressure wete wc11 crder the required limits. Therefore the analyses and the results are acceptable.
LOCA analyses, usiog _ approved methodologies and parameters (Ref. 4), were per-7 formed to provide Maximum Average Planar Linear lleat Generation Rate-(MAPLHGR) valuesforthenewrelcadfuelassevblies(GE9B-P80WB302-10GZ-80M-150-Tand GE11LTA). These results support a MAPLHGR multiplier of 0.77 for BP8X8R and 1988LTA fuel and 0.75 for GE9B-P80WB302-10GZ-8CM-150-T and GE11LTA l
fuel in the Cycle 14 core during single loop operation. Since the LOCA analyses were performed with reviewed and accepted raethcds and the results are well within the limits of 10 CFR 50.46, the staff concludes that-the t
l'APLHGR liraits proposed for Cycle 14 are acceptable.
The Rod Drop Accident (RDA) was not specifically analyzed.for Cooper Cycle 14 Cooper Nuclear Station uses a banked position withdrawal sequence for control rod withdrawal. For plants using this system the RDA event has been statistically analyzed and it has been found with a high degree of confidence that the peak fuel enthalpy would not approach the HRC required limit of 280 cal /gm for this event. This approach and analysis has been approved by the NRC (Ref. 4) and is acceptable for Cycle 14, 2.0 Technical Specifications The Technical Specification changes are for the ocst part minor and prcvide for SLhCPR changes due to the use of a new, approved, boiling
.( + :
.4 transition correlation, MAPLh0R limits for new fuel types,-and other changes to reflect the use of the new, approved,l analytic methods. The following Technical Specification changes have been. proposed:
?
(1) 1.0 DEFINITIONS
+
1.0.A.1 The GEXL Correlation is replaced by an NRC approved critical power correlation. This is acceptable _to the staff.
1.0.A.4 The design LHGR_for 7X7 fuel assemblies, which-are no longer used at-Cooper, has been deleted and a LHGR fcr the GEBX8HB and GE11LTA fuel essentlies, that will be. loaded in Cycle 14, has been added. This change is acceptable 11
~
the staff.
1.0.D This change deletes e trivial statement "and the power to which the safety analysis applies." This deletion does not impact any analyses and is acceptable.
1.0.Q This change deletes a trivial explanatory statement " Design-power, the power to which the safety analysis applies,-is 104.4% of rated power (100% of rated steam flow), which corresponds to 2486 megawatts thermal." This deletion does not effect any analyses and is acceptable.
l (2) Specification 1.1, ' FUEL-CLADDING INTEGRITY SAFETY. LIMIT" 1.1.A MCPP, is changed from.1.07 to 1.06 for twc recirculation iccp operation and from 1.08 to 1.07 for single loop operation. This.is acceptable based or, the apprcved GEXL-PLUS boiling trarsition thermti limits correlation.-
l (3) Specification 2.1, " FUEL CLADDING INTEGRITY LIMITING SYSTEM SETTINC" l
2.1.A.1 These changes delete the 18.5 KW/ft limiting r
power density for 7X7 fuel and add a 14.4 KW/ft limiting power density for the new GE8X8NB and GE11LTA fuel that will be added in Reload 14.
These limits are acceptable.
t t
i f
4 f~
54 i
(4). Bases I
1.1.D References!for 1.1 Beses.
This change replaces the designation "most current approved subn.ittal" by " latest approved revision". This change is of an editorial nature and is acceptable.
2.1 This change deletes the words "up to 105%.of i
rated steat' flow".
The change is editorial and c
3 is acceptable.
3.3 This cher.gc corrects the number of a referer.cc 4.3.A.1.
to the Updated Safety Analysis Report and is-and acceptable.
3.3 This changes the number of the Reference from>"3* t0.2".-
1 and This corrects an editcrial error and is acceptable..
4.3.C Ref.
Revise Reference 1 to reflect the correct titir for cf the document and rn ise Reference 2 to delete bases the phrase " Unit la fron. the title. These changes are editorial in nature and are acceptable to the staff, 3.11.A Average Planar Linear lit.at Generation Ratei(APLHGR)
The Bases for Specification 3.11.A are revised to replace the term "10CFR50, Appendix K" by "10CFR50.46". This is acceptable because the r
LOCA accident criteria are located in Section 50-46 rather than in Appendix K.
A sentence is added to the-Bases for Specification 3.11.A that discusses the APLHGR single loop reduction factors.
This change is acceptable because the reduction facters were developed using approved ir.ethods.
3.11.B LinearHeatGenerationRate(LHGR)
The Bases for Specification 3.11.B are revised to delete the reference to the LilGR pcKer spike pr.tity that had previously been applied tc. GE7X7 i
fuel. This is acceptable because there is no 7X7 fuel in the Cycle 14 core 1cading. The basis has
~
also beer, further ncdified to docuner.t that p11et densificaticn is now handled generically in GESTAR II.
This char.5e is acceptatic because the nrthods contair.ed in GESTAR 11 tue been approved by NRC.
Figure 3.11-3 has been replaced by. Table 3.11-1 to supply the Flow Desendent MCPR Multiplier (K,) Factors. This csange is acce) table because'-
Table 3.11-1 was developed using tie new NRC-approved boiling trar.sition.
3.11.!
The Basis for Specification 3.11.C is revised to state that K,-is as calculated in Table 3.11-1 instead of being shown ir. Figure 3.11-3. This char,ge reflects the acceptable change made to Figure 3'.113 er'd is similarly acceptable.
Figures 3.11-2a, 3.11-2b, and 3.11-2c are revised to provide MCFR curves for the GEEXBf!B,5 GE11LTA, and BP8X8R/1988LTA' fuel, respectively, for Cycle 14 operation. This is acceptable because the l'.CFR values were calculated using t%C approved r.ethodology for the fuel types that are to be loaded in Cycle 14.
Reference tc Figure 3.11-3 is replaced by
-reference to Tahl* '.11.1 to supply the K. flow dependent MCPR,
ier. Thisisacceplable-because the va".
t have been calculated 7
y' usii.g f1RC appr, e ' -
sdology.
Ref.
Referer,ce I has-ha. revised to reflect the-for correct titie'of the docun'ert. This char.ge is'-
Bases editorial ir. nature and is-accep_ table.
Referenct 2 is tcviseo to reraove the phrase-
" Unit 1" froni the title. This is-acceptable.
~
Reference 10 is added to the Bases of Specificaticr. 3.11. This is acceptable i
because'the referenced topical report has been i
approved.
(5) Technical Specification LCO, 3.11 Fuel Rods 3.11.A The foiiowii.s charges are made.to reflect the new fuel types used in the Cycle 14 Reload:
Incorporate the liAPLHGR single loop reduction facters for GE8XBl!B, GE11LTA, and the 1988LTA i
fuel bundles.
a Revise Figure 3.11-1.2 to contain the l'APU;Gh versus exposure cutye and data cccrdiratts f or j
the GE11LTA fuel.
I l
~
J
' l.. -
y v,
kenumber the Figures to 3.11-1.3 and 3.11-1.4,-.
and revise the-title of-the upper figures to
. include the 1988LTA fuel. -These changes implement the results of the Cycle 14 analyses.
These analyses were carried out with methods that have_been approved by the staff and are therefore acceptable.
3.11.B >
This specification is revised'to. incorporate the LllGR limits for.the BP8X8R, 1988LTA, GE8X8HB, and GE11LTA fuel bundles-and to delete the'LHGR equation-that contains a maximum power spiking penalty. These shanges reflect the composition cf the Cycle 14 core loading, the limits have been calculated using approved ntthcds. therefore.these limits are acceptable.
(6) Major Design Features 5.2 This change deletes references to specific fuel types and replaces it with a more' generic description ci fun types. The description limits the types of fuel assenblies to those.that are approved by the !!RC for use in bciling water
- t
~
reactors and is acceptable to reflect the Cycle 14.
fuel types..
3.0 EIN1R0!if1 ENTAL C0t:51 DERAT 10N The amendment involves a change in a requirement with respect to the ir.stt11ation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area ts defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillarce requirements.
The staff has detern.ine.d that the amendment involves no significant.
l increase in the amcunts, and oc significant change in the types, of any -
effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual cr cumulative occupatienti radiation exposures.-
The Commissicn has previcusly issued a proposed finding that the amendment-inycives no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public t
comment on such finding. Acccrdingly, the amendment meets.the eligibility j
criteria fcr categorical exclusion. set forth in 10 CFR Section-51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant'to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environrental impact statement or environ-mental assessment need bc prepared in connection with the issuance of the atendMent.
. 1 c
\\
w a
+.
1 j
4.0 CONCLUSION
l As a result of our review, which is described above we conclude that the proposed Cooper Reload 14 and the proposed Technical Specification changes are acceptable. This cccclusion is based on the following:
1.
Previously approved analysis methods and techniques are employed.
2.
The results of the transients and accidents which are affected by the reload are in conformance with the applicable requirements in our standard review criterie and are therefore acceptable for Cycle 14.
3 The revisions to the Technical SpecificLtions have been found to be acceptable.
The staff has concluded', based on the consideratici.s discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health ar.d safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activitics will be conducted in compliance with the Corra.ission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendnent will nct be inimical to the common defense and security or to.the health and safety of the public.
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter fror; L. G. Kuncl (NPPD) to NRC, " Proposed Change No. 77 to Technical Specifications, Cycle 14 Operation, Cooper Nuclear Station, NRC Docket No. 50-298, DPR-46," February 12, 1990.
2.
Gencral Electric Report - 23A5994, Rev 0, " Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittel for Cooper Nuclear Station, Reload 13-Cycle 14," January 1990.
l 3.
General Electric Information Report, " Gell Lead Test Assembly Information-Report for Ccoper Nuclear Station, Reload 13, Cycle 14," January 18, 1990.
4.
hEDE-24011-P-A-9, September 1988, " General Electric Standard Application forReactorFuel,"(GESTARII).
l E.
General Electric Proprietary Information, "GE11LTA Fuel Bundle Descriptien for Cooper Nucitar Station, Reload 13, Cycle 14," January 18, 1990.
6.
NFC Bulletin No. 88-07," Power.0scillations in Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs)," June 15, 1988.
7.
NRC Bulletin No. 88-07, Supplement 1,
" Power Oscillations in Boiling i
WaterReactors(BWRs)," December 30, 1988.
l l
Date:
April 12, 1990 Frincipal Centributor:
T.
Huang
. _.