ML20094H349

Proposed TS 5.9.5 Re Core Operating Limits Rept

ML20094H349
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	03/05/1992
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20094H290	List: ML20094H287 ML20094H293 ML20094H349
References
NUDOCS 9203100009
Download: ML20094H349 (5)

Text

__ --_ _ _ _ _ - - ._ _. ._ -_ ._. _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . - - . _

5.9.5 Core Operatine Limits ReS0d

a. Core Operating Limits shall be established and documented in the Core Operating Limits Report before each reload cycle or any remaining part of a relord cycle.

b. The analytical methods used to determine the core operating limits shall be those previously reviewed and approved by the NRC as follows:

1. OPPD-NA 8301 P-A, Rev. 3 4 " Reload Core Analysis Methodology Overview" dated April 4988.L921,

2. OPPD NA 8302 P-A, Rev. 2 "Neutronics Design Methods and Verification" dated April 1988.

3. OPPD-NA-8303 P-A, Rev. 2 3 " Transient and Accident Methods and Verification" dated April-4988 March 1991,

c. The core operating limits shall be determined so that all applicable limits of the safety analysis are met. The Core Operating Limits Report, including any mid-cycle revisions or supplements thereto, shall be provided upon issuance, for each reload cycle, to the NRC Document Control Desk with copies to the Region IV Administrator and Senior Resident inspector.

5-17a Amendment No.

9203100009 920305 PDR ADOCK 05000285 P PDR

5.9 5 Core Ooerating Limits Report

a. Core Operatmg Limits shall be established and documented in the Core Operating Limits Report before each reload cycle or any remaining part of a reload cycle,

b. The analytical methods used to determine the core operating limits shall be those previously reviewed and approved by the NRC as follows:

1, OPPD NA-8301 P A,Rev,4 " Reload Core Analysis hiethodology Overview" dated April 1991.

2. OPPD NA-8302-P-A, Rev. 2 "Neutronics Design hiethods and 1 Verification" dated April 1988.

3. OPPD-NA-8303-P-A, Rev 3 " Transient and Accident hiethods and Verification" dated hiarch 1991, ,

c. The core operating limits shall be determined so that all applicable limits of the safety analysis are met. The Core Operating Limits Report, including any mid-cycle revisions or supplements thereto, shall be provided upon issuance, for each reload cycle, to the NRC Document Control Desk with copies to the Region IV Administrator and Senior Resident Inspector, l

5-17a Amendment No.

.. - . - - - - = . - _ - ..- . - - . . . - .

I

?

f a

1 T

i L

i ATTACHME1'T B J

5 y

f

,w ww,mw mwwe w w,,, w

DISCUSSION, JUSTIFICATION AND NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS DISCUSSION AND JUSTIFICATION The Omaha Public Power District (0 PPD) proposes to revise the Fort Calhoun Station Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications to incorporate the latest NR(,

pproved revisions to core reload topical reports. The proposed changes revises Specification S.9.S to reflect approval of Revision 4 to topical report OPPD NA-8301-P-A, " Reload Core Analysis Methodology Overview," and Revision 3 to topical report OPPD-NA-8303 P-A, Transient and Accident Methods and Verification,"

contained in NRC Safety Evaluation Reports dated March 2, 1992.

BASIS FOR NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION:

The proposed changes do not involve significant hazards considerations because operation of Fort Calhoun Station Unit No.1 in accordance with these changes would not; (1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The proposed changes are administrative in nature in that the revisions to the topical reports for conducting reload analyses have been previou:,1y reviewed and approved by the NRC in Safety Evaluation Reports dated March 2,1992. The proposed changes merely incorporate a reference to these approved revisions into the Technical Specifications. Therefore these proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident.

(2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed.

It has been determined that no new or different kind of accident will be created due to the proposed changes. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kinti of accident from any previously evaluated.

i 4

(3) Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The proposed changes merely incorporate a reference to NRC approved methodologies for conducting core reload and accident analyses, i therefore the proposed changes do not involve a significant-reduction ir, margin _of safety. <

Therefore based on the above considerations, it .is OPPD's position that this -

3roposed amendment does not involve significant hazards considerations as defined '

)y 10 CFR 50.92 and the proposed changes will not result in a condition which significantly alters the impact of the Station on the environment. Thus, the-proposed changes meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set"

• forth in 10- CFR 51.22(e)(9) and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental assessment need be prepared.

10 We' -rt'v=*""upwetHby % +m w-w-w wiryw pr

= vm 'e gywww ww W www-- twm w ywveyw yg t te wwy- g -c Y& M M W*wf wvwamymmdWd M t-p'T'WF1tMvW W e'?" N *q'u'94"NM7 m D-9'treW'W*TWMd'99t"'