ML20195K048

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Higher Review Priority for WCAP-11394, Methodology for Analysis of Dropped Rod Event, to Allow Licensee to Take Advantage of Methodology to Reduce Number of Turbine Runbacks
ML20195K048
Person / Time
Site: Point Beach  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/29/1988
From: Fay C
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO.
To: Murley T
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-NRC-88-120 VPNPD-88-583, WCAP-11394, NUDOCS 8812050121
Download: ML20195K048 (2)


Text

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

a . .. .

b.

WISC00 Sin Electnc m com, 231 W MICHIGAN.P o Box 2046,MJLWAUKEE.WI 53201 H14 2212345 VPNPD-88-583 NRC 120 November 29, 1988 Dr. Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Mail SJation Pl-13' Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Dr. Murley:

DOCKETS 50-266 AND 50-301 REQUEST FOR HIGHER REVIEW PRIORITY FOR WCAP-11394 hMETHODOLOGY FOR THE ANALYSIS OF THE DROPPED ROD EVENT" POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 The Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) transmitted WCAP-11394 (proprietary) and WCAP-11395 (non-proprietary), "Methodology for the Analysis of the Dropped Rod Event," dated April 1987, to you for review in letter OG-87-26 dated April 22, 1987. The purpose of the associated WOG program is to establish a gentric methodology which could be used by Westinghouse-designed plants to analyze the dropped rod event without requiring a direct reactor trip or automatic power reduction due to the dropped

. rod (s). WCAP-11394 presents the results of the Westinghou e Owners Croup program that supports this objective.

Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) has volunteered to be the lead plant for requesting a Technical Specification change to incorporate this methodology. Analysis using this methodology was submitted as part of our Technical Specification Change Request No. 127, dated August 26, 1988, for increased allowable core power peaking factors.

Incorporation of the WCAP-11394 methodology at PBNP will have a positive safety impact by reducing the number of unnecessary turbine runbacks due to either dropped rods or spurious drupped-rod circuitry actuations. PBNP has had a total of twelve of these in the period from 1985 through 1988, one due to an actual dropped rod and eleven due to spurious circuitry actuations. WOG letter OG-88-40 to you dated November 10, 1988 presents similar data for Westinghouse plants in general. Each runback results in an unnecessary plant transient. Reducing such unnecessary transients is a safety improvement worth achieving. In addi tion, this method-ology would also support implementation of fuel management schemes 8G12050121 831129 g6 d PDR ADOCK 05000266 l g p PDC

Dr. Thomas E. Murley, Director November 29, 1988 Page 2 designed to reduce the fast neutron embrittlement of the reactor vessels at PBNP.

NRC review of WCAP-ll394 has not been completed. We understand its review has been given a low priority. Given the number of turbine runbacks at PBNP, and the number of runbacks and trips at Westinghouse plants as a whole, we believe that the timely review of WCAP-11394 by the NRC is justified. An increased priority for the NRC review is requested so that we may take advantage of the methodology to reduce the number of turbine runbacks, as well as to implement fuel management schemes for reducing neutron embrittlement of the reactor vessels.

We plan to use Technical Specification Change No. 127 including the associated dropped rod analysis to support the reload core to be inserted in Unit 1 during a refueling outage scheduled to begin on March 31, 1989. If the NRC Staff is unable to review this WCAP in time to support the issuance of the requested Technical Specification change, as has been suggested to us, it could result in a significant economic penalty for Wisconsin Electric due to the required core redesign effort. The inability to achieve a timely review would also result in the inefficient utilization of nuclear fuel already being fabricated for that reload.

Therefore, we request that you inform us by December 16, 1988 if your Staff will not be able to review WCAP-ll394 and issue a generic Safety Evaluation report by February 1989 in support of our Technical Specification Change Request.

We would be pleased to answer any questions you have regarding this request.

Very truly yours, j/

['? J C. W. Fay Vice President Nuclear Power Copies to NRC Regional Administrator, Region III NRC Resident Inspector