ML20072P604
| ML20072P604 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072P602 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9409080088 | |
| Download: ML20072P604 (2) | |
Text
-.
~.
7"%[,
f t
UNITED STATES i 'l NiE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
( { g ' p' j WASHINoToN D.C. 20066 0001 s, ~
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 79 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-42 WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET N0. 50-482
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated June 7,1994, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS)
(Appendix A to facility Operating License No. NPF-42) for the Wolf Creek Generating Station.
The proposed changes would revise TS Table 2.2-1,
" Reactor Trip System Instrumentation Setpoints," to change the over-temperature-delta-temperature (0 TDT) axial flux difference (AFD) limits to reflect results of the Cycle 8 core maneuvering analysis.
2.0 EVALVATION Core reload analyses are performed to ensure that key safety parameters remain bounded by the assumptions of the design basis transient analyses.
For limits related to core power distributions, the analyses model variations in power, xenon distributions, control rod positions, and other variables associated with the planned reload cycle. The simulated power distributions for a specific cycle are compared to established core peaking limits.
Failure to satisfy the peaking criteria can result in either justification of revised peaking criteria or determination of revised limits for parameters such as allowable control rod positions or AFD.
Additional information about the licensee's determination of limits and about comparisons performed for specific reload cycles can be found in the NRC-approved topical reports listed in TS 6.9.1.9, " Core Operating Limits Report (COLR)."
The licensee's core reload analyses supporting plant operation during the eighth operating cycle confirmed that key safety parameters remained bounded by the design basis, provided that the OTDT AFD limits were made slightly more restrictive.
The OTDT and over-power-delta-temperature (0PDT) reactor trip limits are established to prevent exceeding reactor protection system i
departure from nucleate boiling (DNB) or centerline fuel melting criteria.
The changes proposed by the licensee include the slopes and negative I
breakpoint of the OTDT AFD envelope based on the Cycle 8 maneuvering analysis and associated changes in the OTDT setpoint terms "Z" and allowable value.
i Other key parameters, including the planned operation at a nominal vessel average reactor coolant temperature of 586.5 'F, were verified to be within established limits.
9409080088 940825 PDR ADOCK 05000482 P
g The staff has reviewed the licensee's submittal related to the revised setpoints derived using NRC-approved methodologies, and has determined that the licensee has shown that operation in the proposed manner is within applicable safety parameters and limits.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Kansas State 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 (59 FR 34672).
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.
6.0- 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:
W. Reckley Date:
August 25, 1994 l
l l
1 i