ML20073M262
| ML20073M262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 10/05/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20073M252 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9410140226 | |
| Download: ML20073M262 (2) | |
Text
I,.
[pA 880g#'o, p
{!:?(,
's g
UNITED STATES i
7 j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g s :. (,c WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-o001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 28 AND 14 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-87 AND NPF-89 TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-445 AND 50-446
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated March 28, 1994, Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric /the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs)
(Appendix A to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89) for the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed request includes two changes to TSs Section 6.9.1.6b, " Core Operating Limits Report."
The first proposed change is to delete topical report WCAP-9220-P-A,
" Westinghouse ECCS Evaluation Model." The second proposed change is to add a topical report for steamline break analysis, RXE-91-005, " Methodology for Reactor Core Response to Steamline Break Events."
2.0 BACKGROUND
TS Section 6.9.1.6b lists references that contain analytical methods approved by the NRC for the determination of core operating limits.
TV Electric has developed analytical methods for determining the core operating limits.
Prior to the fourth fuel cycle, the Westinghouse ECCS evaluation report (WCAP-9220-P-A) had been used to analyze large break loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs) for Unit 1.
Beginning with the fourth fuel cycle for Unit 1, large break LOCA analyses are being performed using the TV Electric methodology RXE-90-007, "Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident Analysis Methodology." This methodology was approved for use by the licensee for CPSES Units 1 and 2 in a staff safety evaluation dated November 16, 1993, in support of License Amendments 21 and 7 to the Units 1 and 2 licenses, respectively.
In a staff safety evaluation dated December 30, 1993, Topical Report RXE-91-005, " Methodology for Reactor Core Response to Steamline Break Events," was approved for use by the licensee for CPSES Units 1 and 2, subject to the conditions stated in that safety evaluation.
3.0 EVALUATION The first proposed change would delete a methodology that is no longer applicable at CPSES.
As noted in the staff's November 16, 1993, safety evaluation, WCAP-9220-P-A was only applicable through fuel cycle 3.
l 9410140226 941005 PDR ADOCK 05000445 P
PDR_
l l
i "
Effective with fuel cycle 4 operations, the licensee was to use RXE-90-007, "Large, Break Loss of Coolant Accident Analysis Methodology," in place of WCAP-9220-P-A.
The staff determined, in the November 16, 1993, safety 1
evaluation, that RXE-90-007, in conjunction with other approved methodologies, would ensure that all applicable limits of the safety analyses are met for reload core configurations. This conclusion remains valid, and therefore, WCAP-9220-P-A may be deleted as it is no longer applicable.
Topical Report RXE-91-005 was approved for use for CPSES, Units 1 and 2, subject to the conditions stated in the staff safety evaluation dated December 30, 1993.
In that safety evaluation, the staff concluded that the use of RXE-91-005, under the conditions stated in the safety evaluation, was acceptable because it would. result in predictions with adequate assurances of i
conservatism. This conclusion remains valid. The inclusion of this methodology into TS is acceptable as it will ensure, in conjunction with other approved methodologies, that all applicable limits of the safety analyses are 1
met for reload core configurations.
4.0 STATLCONSULTATION in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Texas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, the amendment meets l
the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR I
51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR SI.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
A. Bryant Date: October 5, 1994
-