ML16125A420: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 15: Line 15:
| document type = Legal-Affidavit, Letter, Report, Technical
| document type = Legal-Affidavit, Letter, Report, Technical
| page count = 338
| page count = 338
| project = TAC:MF7338, TAC:MF7337
| project = TAC:MF7337, TAC:MF7338
| stage = Other
| stage = Supplement
}}
}}


Line 253: Line 253:
F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)F(x,y)=F(x,y)M(x,y)/(UMRTILT)  
F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)F(x,y)=F(x,y)M(x,y)/(UMRTILT)  


(,,) F(x,y,z)  F(x,y,z) NP(x,y,z)(,,)(,)F(x,y,z)F(x,y) Section 6.1.1 Change: -20-15-10-50510152025-40-35-30-25-20-15-10-50510152025303540LOCA FQ Margin (Limit -FQ)/LIMIT*100AFD (%)Figure 1Example LOCA FQ Margin Versus AFDTypicalSteady State AFDOperating RangeNegative HFPAFD LimitPostive HFPAFD Limit FSection 6.3.1 Change: FSection 6.4.1 Change:
(,,) F(x,y,z)  F(x,y,z) NP(x,y,z)(,,)(,)F(x,y,z)F(x,y) Section 6.1.1 Change: 15-10-50510152025-40-35-30-25-20-15-10-50510152025303540LOCA FQ Margin (Limit -FQ)/LIMIT*100AFD (%)Figure 1Example LOCA FQ Margin Versus AFDTypicalSteady State AFDOperating RangeNegative HFPAFD LimitPostive HFPAFD Limit FSection 6.3.1 Change: FSection 6.4.1 Change:
Section 6.4.2 Change: F(x,y,z)F(x,y)(,)F(x,y)F(x,y) RNP(x,y)  
Section 6.4.2 Change: F(x,y,z)F(x,y)(,)F(x,y)F(x,y) RNP(x,y)  


Line 272: Line 272:
* Fz) that yields a MDNBR equal to the DNBR limit defines a single point along a MATP curve. An example MATP curve is shown in Figure 14 of Reference 1. The MATP limits are used to ensure the DNB design basis for Conditions I and II transients is satisfied by comparing calculated total peaking factors from a core nodal simulator (e.g. SIMULATE-3) against the MATP limits for a series of power distributions. Core power distributions are generated (by the core nodal simulator) as a function of rod position, burnup, xenon concentration, inlet temperature, and core power level. The method to generate these power distributions is described in Reference 4. DNBR margin is computed for each fuel assembly to verify positive margin exists for the allowable core power versus axial flux difference (AFD) limit used to establish the F(I) portion of the OTT trip function. The same methodology is used at a different state point condition to develop the core operational AFD limits. The operational AFD limits protect the core against the limiting Condition II DNB transient, typically the Loss of Flow transient. In summary, the Duke Energy MATP methodology is a generic methodology that relies on the NRC-approved VIPRE-01 model, fuel design, CHF correlation, and DNBR limit. It is applicable to any reactor or fuel type provided the NRC approvals for the unit specific methodology components are obtained.
* Fz) that yields a MDNBR equal to the DNBR limit defines a single point along a MATP curve. An example MATP curve is shown in Figure 14 of Reference 1. The MATP limits are used to ensure the DNB design basis for Conditions I and II transients is satisfied by comparing calculated total peaking factors from a core nodal simulator (e.g. SIMULATE-3) against the MATP limits for a series of power distributions. Core power distributions are generated (by the core nodal simulator) as a function of rod position, burnup, xenon concentration, inlet temperature, and core power level. The method to generate these power distributions is described in Reference 4. DNBR margin is computed for each fuel assembly to verify positive margin exists for the allowable core power versus axial flux difference (AFD) limit used to establish the F(I) portion of the OTT trip function. The same methodology is used at a different state point condition to develop the core operational AFD limits. The operational AFD limits protect the core against the limiting Condition II DNB transient, typically the Loss of Flow transient. In summary, the Duke Energy MATP methodology is a generic methodology that relies on the NRC-approved VIPRE-01 model, fuel design, CHF correlation, and DNBR limit. It is applicable to any reactor or fuel type provided the NRC approvals for the unit specific methodology components are obtained.
Since NRC approval has been granted for the VIPRE-01 model, CHF correlation, and DNBR limits in Page 3 References 2 and 3, application of the Duke Energy Core DNB limit and MATP methodology to the Harris and Robinson plants is appropriate. 4.0 Conclusion The methodology described in DPC-NE-2004-P for development of limits to verify the required DNB design basis is satisfied is independent of the Westinghouse unit analyzed. The methodology does require an NRC approved: VIPRE-01 model for the unit being evaluated Critical Heat Flux (CHF) correlation for the fuel type Statistical DNBR limit for the fuel type Satisfying these three criteria allow use of the Duke Energy thermal-hydraulic analysis methodology, including the Core Safety Limit generation and MATP limit approach described in Reference 1 for plants using the Westinghouse reactor control and protection system.
Since NRC approval has been granted for the VIPRE-01 model, CHF correlation, and DNBR limits in Page 3 References 2 and 3, application of the Duke Energy Core DNB limit and MATP methodology to the Harris and Robinson plants is appropriate. 4.0 Conclusion The methodology described in DPC-NE-2004-P for development of limits to verify the required DNB design basis is satisfied is independent of the Westinghouse unit analyzed. The methodology does require an NRC approved: VIPRE-01 model for the unit being evaluated Critical Heat Flux (CHF) correlation for the fuel type Statistical DNBR limit for the fuel type Satisfying these three criteria allow use of the Duke Energy thermal-hydraulic analysis methodology, including the Core Safety Limit generation and MATP limit approach described in Reference 1 for plants using the Westinghouse reactor control and protection system.
5.0 References  1.DPC-NE-2004-PA, Rev. 2a, "Core Thermal-Hydraulic Methodology Using VIPRE-01"  2.DPC-NE-2005-P-A, Rev. 5, "Duke Energy Thermal-Hydraulic Statistical Core Design Methodology"  3.EMF-92-153(P)(A), Rev. 1, "HTP:  Departure from Nucleate Boiling Correlation for High Thermal Performance Fuel"  4.DPC-NE-2011-PA, Rev. 1a, "Nuclear Design Methodology Report For Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors"  
5.0 References  1.DPC-NE-2004-PA, Rev. 2a, "Core Thermal-Hydraulic Methodology Using VIPRE-01"  2.DPC-NE-2005-P-A, Rev. 5, "Duke Energy Thermal-Hydraulic Statistical Core Design Methodology"  3.EMF-92-153(P)(A), Rev. 1, "HTP:  Departure from Nucleate Boiling Correlation for High Thermal Performance Fuel"  4.DPC-NE-2011-PA, Rev. 1a, "Nuclear Design Methodology Report For Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors"}}
 
}}

Revision as of 16:49, 19 May 2018

Shearon Harris, Unit 1 and H.B. Robinson, Unit 2 - Supplemental Information for License Amendment Request Regarding Methodology Report DPC-NE-1008-P
ML16125A420
Person / Time
Site: Harris, Robinson  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 05/04/2016
From: Elnitsky J
Duke Energy Progress
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML16125A444 List:
References
RA-16-0023, TAC MF7337, TAC MF7338 DPC-NE-1008, Rev. 0, DPC-NE-2011, Rev. 2, DPC-NF-2010, Rev. 3
Download: ML16125A420 (338)


Text

JOHN ELNITSKY Senior Vice President Nuclear Engineering 526 South Church Street, EC-07H Charlotte, NC 28202 704-382-4371 John.Elnitsky@duke-energy.com

SUBJECT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST REGARDING METHODOLOGY REPORT DPC-NE-1008-P

REFERENCES:

Application to Revise Technical Specifications for Methodology Report DPC-NE-1008-P Revision 0, "Nuclear Design Methodology Using CASMO-5/SIMULATE-3 for Westinghouse Reactors"Application to Revise Technical Specifications to Adopt Methodology Reports DPC-NF-2010 Revision 3 "Nuclear Physics Methodology for Reload Design" and DPC-NE-2011-P Revision 2, "Nuclear Design Methodology Report for Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors"Withdrawal of License Amendment Request Regarding Methodology Reports DPC-NF-2010 and DPC-NE-2011-PShearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1 and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 - Withdrawal of Requested Licensing Action Regarding Duke Energy Progress, Inc., Application to Revise Technical Specifications to Adopt Methodology Reports Submitted to NRC for Acceptance Review (CAC Nos. MF7337 AND MF7338)

Attachment 1 Affidavit of John Elnitsky

Nuclear Design Methodology Using CASMO-5/SIMULATE-3 for Westinghouse ReactorsNuclear Design Methodology Report for Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors

Nuclear Design Methodology Using CASMO-5/SIMULATE-3 for Westinghouse ReactorsNuclear Design Methodology Report for Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors

EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE

McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Issuance of Amendments Regarding Revision 1 to DPC-NE-1005-P, Nuclear Design Methodology Using CASMO-4/SIMULATE-3 MOX (TAC Nos. MD7409 and MD7410)Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Issuance of Amendments Regarding Revision 1 to DPC-NE-1005-P, Nuclear Design Methodology Using CASMO-4/SIMULATE-3 MOX (TAC Nos. MD7407 and MD7408)Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Issuance of Amendments Regarding the Use of CASMO-4/SIMULATE-3 Methodology for Reactor Cores Containing Gadolinia Bearing Fuel (TAC Nos. ME4646, ME4647, and ME4648)Topical Report on Physics Methodology for Reloads: McGuire and Catawba Nuclear Station, McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Re: Issuance of Amendments (TAC Nos. MB3222 and MB3223)Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Re: Issuance of Amendments (TAC Nos. MB3343 and MB3344)

Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 and McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Re: Topical Report DPC-NF-2010, Nuclear Physics Methodology for Reload Design, Revision 2Acceptance for Referencing of Topical Report DPC-NE-2011-P, "Duke Power Company Nuclear Design Methodology for Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors

Attachment 3 Proposed Technical Specification Changes (Mark-up)

Reporting Requirements 5.6 5.6 Reporting Requirements 5.6.2 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report (continued) In the event that some individual results are not available for inclusion with the report, the report shall be submitted noting and explaining the reasons for the missing results. The missing data shall be submitted in a supplementary report as soon as possible. 5.6.3 Radioactive Effluent Release Report The Radioactive Effluent Release Report covering the operation of the unit shall be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 50.36a. The report shall include a summary of the quantities of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents and solid waste released from the unit. The material provided shall be consistent with the objectives outlined in the ODCM and Process Control Program and in conformance with 10 CFR 50.36a and 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, Section IV.B.1. 5.6.4 DELETED 5.6.5 CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (COLR) a. Core operating limits shall be established prior to each reload cycle, or prior to any remaining portion of a reload cycle, and shall be documented in the COLR for the following: HBRSEP Unit No. 2 1. Shutdown Margin (SOM) for Specification 3.1.1; 2. Moderator Temperature Coefficient limits for Specification 3.1.3; 3. Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits for Specification 3.1.5; 4. Control Bank Insertion Limits for Specification 3.1.6; 5. Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor (Fa(Z)) limit for Specification 3.2.1; 6. Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor limit for Specification 3.2.2; (continued) 5.0-24 Amendment No. 212 No changes to this page. Included for information only. Reporting Requirements 5.6 5.6 Reporting Requirements (continued) 5.6.5 CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (COLR) (continued) 7. Axial Flux Difference (AFD) limits for Specification 3.2.3; and 8. Boron Concentration limit for Specification 3.9.1. b. The analytical methods used to determine the core operating limits shall be those previously reviewed and approved by the NRC. The approved version shall be identified in the COLR. These methods are those specifically described in the following documents: HBRSEP Unit No. 2 1. Deleted 2. XN-NF-84-73(P), "Exxon Nuclear Methodology for Pressurized Water Reactors: Analysis of Chapter 15 Events," approved version as specified in the COLR. 3. XN-NF-82-21 (A), "Application of Exxon Nuclear Company PWR Thermal Margin Methodology to Mixed Core Configurations," approved version as specified in the COLR. 4. Deleted 5. XN-75-32(A), "Computational Procedure for Evaluating Rod Bow," approved version as specified in the COLR. 6. Deleted. 7. Deleted 8. XN-NF-78-44(A), "Generic Control Rod Ejection Analysis," approved version as specified in the COLR 9. XN-NF-621(A), "XNB Critical Heat Flux Correlation," approved version as specified in the COLR. 10. Deleted 11. XN-NF-82-06(A), "Qualification of Exxon Nuclear Fuel for Extended Burnup," approved version as specified in the COLR. 12. Deleted 13. Deleted. (continued) 5.0-25 Amendment No. 227 No changes to this page. Included for information only. Reporting Requirements 5.6 5.6 Reporting Requirements (continued) 5.6.5 CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (COLR) (continued) HBRSEP Unit No. 2 14. Deleted 15. Deleted 16. ANF-88-054(P), "PDC-3: Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation Power Distribution Control for Pressurized Water Reactors and Application of PDC-3 to H.B. Robinson Unit 2," approved version as specified in the COLR. 17. ANF-88-133 (P)(A), "Qualification of Advanced Nuclear Fuels' PWR Design Methodology for Rod Burnups of 62 Gwd/MTU," approved version as specified in the COLR. 18. ANF-89-151(A), "ANF-RELAP Methodology for Pressurized Water Reactors: Analysis of Non-LOCA Chapter 15 Events," approved version as specified in the COLR. 19. EMF-92-081 (A), "Statistical Setpoint/Transient Methodology for Westinghouse Type Reactors," approved version as specified in the COLR. 20. EMF-92-153(P)(A), "HTP: Departure from Nucleate Boiling Correlation for High Thermal Performance Fuel," approved version as specified in the COLR. 21. XN-NF-85-92(P)(A), "Exxon Nuclear Uranium Dioxide/Gadolinia Irradiation Examination and Thermal Conductivity Results," approved version as specified in the COLR. 22. EMF-96-029(P)(A), "Reactor Analysis System for PWRs," approved version as specified in the COLR. 23. EMF-92-116, "Generic Mechanical Design Criteria for PWR Fuel Designs," approved version as specified in the COLR. 24. EMF-2103(P)(A), "Realistic Large Break LOCA Methodology for Pressurized Water Reactors," approved version as specified in the COLR. (continued) 5.0-26 Amendment No. 227 Reporting Requirements 5.6 5.6 Reporting Requirements (continued) 5.6.5 CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT <COLR) (continued) Insert 1 (see next page) 25. EMF-2310(P)(A), "SRP Chapter 15 Non-LOCA Methodology for Pressurized Water approved version as specified in the COLR. 26. BAW-10240(P)(A), "Incorporation of M5 Properties in Framatome ANP Approved Methods," approved version as specified in the COLR. 27. EMF-2328(P)(A), "PWR Small Break LOCA Evaluation Model, S-RELAP5 Based,* approved version as specified in the COLR. DPC-NE-2005-P-A, "Thermal-Hydraulic Statistical Core Design Methodology," approved version as specified in the COLR. c. The core operating limits shall be determined such that all applicable limits (e.g., fuel thermal mechanical limits, core thermal hydraulic limits, Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) limits, nuclear limits such as SOM, transient analysis limits, and accident analysis limits) of the safety analysis are met. d. The COLR, including any midcycle revisions or supplements, shall be provided upon issuance for each reload cycle to the NRC. 5.6.6 Post Accident Monitoring <PAM) Instrumentation Report When a report is required by Condition B or G of LCO 3.3.3, "Post Accident Monitoring (PAM) Instrumentation," a report shall be submitted within the following 14 days. The report shall outline the preplanned alternate method of monitoring, the cause of the inoperability, and the plans and schedule for restoring the instrumentation channels of the Function to OPERABLE status, (continued) HBRSEP Unit No. 2 5.0-27 Amendment No. 2 4 4

No changes to this page. Included for information only. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 6.9.l.6 CORE OPERATING LIMITS 6.9.1.6.l Core operating limits shall be established and documented in the CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT CCOLR). plant prncedure PLP-106. prior to each reload cycle. or prior to any remaining portion of a reload cycle. for the fo 11 owing: a. b. c. d. e. SHUTDOWN MARGIN limits for Specification 3/4.1.1.2. Moderator Temperature Coefficient Positive and Negative Limits and 300 ppm surveillance limit for Specification 3/4.1.1.3. Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits for Specification 3/4.1.3.5. Control Bank Insertion Limits for Specification 3/4.1.3.6. Axial Flux Difference Limits for Specification 3/4.2.1. f. Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor. . K(Z). and VCZ) for Specification 3/4.2.2. g. Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor. . and Power Factor Multiplier. PF6H for Specification 3/4.2.3. h. Boron Concentration for Specification 3/4.9.1. 6.9.1.6.2 The analytical methods used to determine the core operating limits shall be those previously reviewed and approved by the NRC at the time the reload analyses are Eerformed. and the approved revision number shall be identified in the CO R. a. XN-75-27(P)(A). "Exxon Nuclear Neutronics Design Methods for Pressurized Water Reactors." approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Sgecification 3.1.1.2 -SHUTDOWN MARGIN -MODES 3. 4 and 5. 3.1.1.3 -Moderator Temperature Coefficient. 3.1.3.5 -Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits. 3.1.3.6 -Control Bank Insertion Limits. 3.2.1 -Axial Flux Difference. 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor. 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor. and 3.9.1 -Boron Concentration). b. ANF-89-151(P)(A). "ANF-RELAP Methodology for Pressurized Water Reactors: Analysis of Non-LOCA Chapter 15 Events." approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Specification 3.1.1.3 -Moderator Temperature Coefficient. 3.1.3.5 -Shutdown Bank Insertion limits. 3.1.3.6 -Control Bank Insertion Limits. 3.2.1 -Axial Plux Difference. 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor. and 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor). c. XN-NF-82-21(P)(A). "Application of Exxon Nuclear Company PWR Thermal Margin Methodology to Mixed Core Configurations." approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Specification 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor). SHEARON HARRIS -UNIT 1 6-24 Amendment No. 94 No changes to this page. Included for information only. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 6.9.1.6 CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT !Continued) d. e. f. g. XN-75-32(P)(A), "Computational Procedure for Evaluating Fuel Rod Bowing,* approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Specification 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor, and 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel. Factor). EMF-84-093(P)(A), "Steam Line Break Methodology for PWRs," approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Specification 3.1.1.3 -Moderator Temperature Coefficient, 3.1.3.5 -Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits, 3.1.3.6 -Control Bank Insertion Limits, and 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor). ANP-3011 (P), "Harris Nuclear Plant Unit 1 Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis,* 1 Revision 1, as approved by NRC Safety Evaluation dated May 30, 2012. (Methodology for Specification 3.2.1

  • Axial Flux Difference, 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor, and 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor).
  • XN-NF-78-44(NP)(A), "A Generic Analysis of the Control Rod Ejection Transient for Pressurized Water Reactors," approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Specification 3.1.3.5 -Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits, 3.1.3.6 -C.ontrol Bank Insertion Limits, and 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor). SHEARON HARRIS -UNIT 1
  • 6-24a Amendment No.
  • 13e B. 3, 4 3. 4 15 Insert 2 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 6.9.1.6 CORE OPERATING LIMITS REPORT (Continued) (Methodology for Specification 3.1.1.3 -Moderator Temperature Coefficient, 3.1.3.5 -Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits, 3.1.3.6 -Control Bank Insertion Limits, 3.2.1 -Axial Flux Difference, 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor, and 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor). o. Mechanical Design Methodologies XN-NF-81-58(P}(A}, "RODEX2 Fuel Rod Thermal-Mechanical Response Evaluation Model," approved version as specified in the COLR. ANF-81-58(P)(A}, "RODEX2 Fuel Rod Thermal Mechanical Response Evaluation Model," approved version as specified in the COLR. XN-NF-82-06(P}(A}, "Qualification of Exxon Nuclear Fuel for Extended Burn up," approved version as specified in the COLR. ANF-88-133(P}(A}, "Qualification of Advanced Nuclear Fuels' PWR Design Methodology for Rod Bumups of62 GWd/MTU," approved version as specified in the COLR. XN-NF-85-92(P}(A), "Exxon Nuclear Uranium Dioxide/Gadolinia Irradiation Examination and Thermal Conductivity Results," approved version as specified in the COLR. (see next page) EMF-92-116(P)(A), "Generic Mechanical Design Criteria for PWR Fuel Designs," approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodologies for Specification 3.2.1 -Axial Flux Difference, 3.2.2 -Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor, and 3.2.3 -Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor}. DPC-NE-2005-P-A, "Thermal-Hydraulic Statistical Core Design Methodology." approved version as specified in the COLR. (Methodology for Specification 3.2.3-Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor} 6.9.1.6.3 The core operating limits shall be determined so that all applicable limits (e.g., fuel thermal-mechanical limits, core thermal-hydraulic limits, nuclear timits such as shutdown margin, and transient and accident analysis limits) of the safety analysis are met. . 6.9.1.6.4 The CORE OPERA TING LIMITS REPORT, including any mid-cycle revisions or supplements, shall be provided, upon issuance for each reload cycle, to the NRC Document Control Desk, with copies to the Regional Administrator and Resident Inspector. 6.9.1.7 STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTION REPORT A report shaU be submitted within 180 days after the initial entry into HOT SHUTDOWN following completion of an inspection performed in accordance with Specification 6.8.4.1. The report shall include: a. The scope of inspections performed on each SG, b. Degradation mechanisms found, c. Nondestructive examination techniques utilized for each degradation mechanism, SHEARON HARRIS -UNIT 1 6-24c Amendment No.1 4 8

Attachment 5 DPC-NE-1008, "Nuclear Design Methodology Using CASMO-5/SIMULATE-3 for Westinghouse Reactors" (Redacted)

DD

D

D

DDD

  • D

DD

~~~ ~

~~

!"#$!"#$!"#$

!"#$D D

D

Cycle Table3-5 BOC, HZP Individual Control Bank Worth Comparisons Control Rod Bank CBD CBC CBB CBA SBE SBD 3-21 SBC SBB Total SBA Worth a-c DDDD%&'&D

~

!"!!"#$%"&'# (

)"*$++","!-./,-&""!!"0""

)"*$."++","!.),""!!"0""

)"*$1&"++","!.),""!!"0""

)"*$2+!3"++","!.),""!!"0""

)"*$""".),""!!"0""

)"*$4++","!0"" 5!"

)"*$6%""" "0"70""

)"*$66,!"!" "0"7

Figure 3-12 cont'd Harris Unit 1Cycle18 Assembly Average Power Distribution Comparisons 100.0% FP, 192 EFPD, Control D at 218 SWD 3-32 a-c

Figure 3-12 cont'd Harris Unit 1 Cycle 18 Assembly Average Power Distribution Comparisons 100.0% FP, 485 EFPD, Control D at 218 SWD 3-35 a-c

!

!~~~ ~

~~

((((((~~~ ~~~

)*+,!-.0,1222

2

340567!)*80,19(:;99<(:(:<=;99<(:(:<=

Figure 4-10 Theoretical 2x2 Colorset Case Matrix a,c 4-27

3+0~>~~< ~?@ ~?@3+0~ ~?@>~~< ~?@~~~~~~

3+0(;<((<((((((

3+0(A;<(A(A<(A(A(A(A(A

s

DD

D

D

Attachment 6 DPC-NF-2010, Revision 3, "Nuclear Physics Methodology for Reload Design" and Technical Justification of Changes

K1K2

T1K1T2K2

=( )10= (/°)

,,=( )10= (/°)

=( )10= (/%)

=+

=( )10= (/%)

( )=( )10= ()

Available Rod Worth Required Rod Worth

=1+Bias+UC+Ux1+Ux2+

l

== ==()(1)xin

=

= ()

=1+

=1() Kaa

=1 Emthmth=BiasEmthn

=

DthCthMth

=

=()÷=()÷=()÷OSUTLX()=+

=1=[(())÷(1)]KPKPP OSUTLD ()=+()

()=+()()=++()()=++()()=+()

UL(C) =UL(C) ()=++()

UL(C=()=+()

Incore instrument at corelocation L-05 is used for RVLIS

Technical Justification of Changes for Revision 3

Identification of the report location of each change refers back to the Revision 2a page numbering.

Attachment 8 DPC-NE-2011, Revision 2, "Nuclear Design Methodology Report for Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors" and Technical Justification of Changes (Redacted)

=1+Bias+(UC+Ux1+Ux2+...)

DNBM=MinMARP(x,y)RPP(x,y)MARP(x,y)100

CFMM=MinMAXLHRLHR(x,y,z)MAXLHR

LOCA LIMIT KW/FT CORE HEIGHT FT

% MARGIN % OFFSET LEGEND Bank D (swd) LOCA MARGIN VS. AXIAL OFFSET

% MARGIN % OFFSET LOFA MARGIN VS. AXIAL OFFSET

F(x,y,z) K(Z)F(x,y,z) .K(Z)F F(x,y,z)UMTMTTILT[F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)NP(x,y,z)NP(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)

(,,)F(x,y,z)F F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)

FFM(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)FF F(x,y,z)UMTMTTILT[F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)]

F(x,y)MARP(x,y)1.0+1RRH(1.0P)

FFF(x,y)UMRTILT[F(x,y)M(x,y)] F(x,y)F

(,)F(x,y)F(x,y)

F(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)

F(x,y)

F FM(x,y)F

F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F (x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F (x,y,z)F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)F (x,y,z)MBLP=(,,)F (x,y,z)100%F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F (x,y,z) F(x,y)F(x,y,z)F(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)F (x,y)

F(x,y)F (x,y)F(x,y)M(x,y)F(x,y,z),F(x,y,z)F (x,y,z)F(x,y)F (x,y)

K(Z) Core Height, ft

MAX. ALLOWABLE TOTAL PEAK AXIAL PEAK LOCATION, X/L

% OF RATED THERMAL POWER FLUX DIFFERECE ( I) %

ROD BANK POSITION (STEPS WITHDRAWN) PERCENT OF RATED THERMAL POWER

Technical Justification of Changes for Revision 2 (Redacted)

refers back to the Revision 1a page numbering.

Section 1.3, Applicability of the Method:

Section 7,

References:

Appendix A:

Section 4.1 Change:

Section 4.5 Change:

Section 4.6 Change:

Appendix B Addition:

FF,F, (,)

Section 6.1 Change: Section 6.3 Change: Section 6.3.1 Change:

Section 6.1, equation on page 6-1 and removal of TILT definition: F(x,y,z)UMTMTTILT[F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z) Section 6.1, text and equation on page 6-3: FF(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)Section 6.2, equation on page 6-4: F(x,y,z)UMTMTTILT[F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)]Section 6.2, text and equation on page 6-5: FF(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)Section 6.3, equation on page 6-6 and removal of TILT definition: F(x,y)UMRTILT[F(x,y)M(x,y)]Section 6.3, text and equation on page 6-7: FM(x,y)F(x,y)F(x,y)=F(x,y)M(x,y)/(UMRTILT)

F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)F(x,y,z)=F(x,y,z)M(x,y,z)/(UMTMTTILT)F(x,y)=F(x,y)M(x,y)/(UMRTILT)

(,,) F(x,y,z) F(x,y,z) NP(x,y,z)(,,)(,)F(x,y,z)F(x,y) Section 6.1.1 Change: 15-10-50510152025-40-35-30-25-20-15-10-50510152025303540LOCA FQ Margin (Limit -FQ)/LIMIT*100AFD (%)Figure 1Example LOCA FQ Margin Versus AFDTypicalSteady State AFDOperating RangeNegative HFPAFD LimitPostive HFPAFD Limit FSection 6.3.1 Change: FSection 6.4.1 Change:

Section 6.4.2 Change: F(x,y,z)F(x,y)(,)F(x,y)F(x,y) RNP(x,y)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)F(x,y,z)

F(x,y,z),F(x,y,z)F (x,y,z)F(x,y)F (x,y)

Change B-1: Appendix B Changes, third paragraph, page B-2:

Attachment 9 Application of the DPC-NE-2004-PA Operating Limits and Maximum Allowable Total Peak Methodology to Harris and Robinson Nuclear Plants

Page 1 Application of the DPC-NE-2004-PA Operating Limits and Maximum Allowable Total Peak Methodology to Harris and Robinson Nuclear Plants 1.0 Background DPC-NE-2004-PA, "Core Thermal-Hydraulic Methodology Using VIPRE-01", Reference 1, describes Duke Energy's NRC-approved steady state thermal hydraulics analysis methodology for McGuire and Catawba Nuclear Stations using the VIPRE-01 computer code. Key elements of the report include a description of the code inputs and correlations used to develop McGuire/Catawba VIPRE-01 models. The methodology used to determine allowable thermal-hydraulic operating limits in terms of core power level, reactor coolant system temperature and pressure, and three dimensional core power distributions is also presented. This methodology is used to determine allowable operating limits that provide DNB protection for nuclear plants that utilize a Westinghouse NSSS control and protection system. This method is described in Section 5 of Reference 1. Section 5 is applicable to the Harris and Robinson nuclear units as well as McGuire and Catawba.

2.0 Applicability The thermal-hydraulic methodology in Reference 1 is intended to interface with a Westinghouse plant reactor protection system (RPS) to ensure the required DNB design basis is satisfied. McGuire, Catawba, Harris and Robinson nuclear units all employ a Westinghouse RPS system to prevent fuel damage from occurring during Condition I and II events. DNB protection is accomplished through the use of the over-temperature delta-temperature (OTT) and over-power delta-temperature (OPT) trip functions, in combination with the following trips which limit the applicable range over which the OTT and OPT trip functions must provide DNB protection. High pressurizer pressure trip Low pressurizer pressure trip Low reactor coolant flow trip Core DNB limits are determined for a range of operating conditions to ensure that the DNB design basis is satisfied. The protected space in terms of power level and pressure is defined by the OTT/OPT trip, high pressurizer pressure trip, and low pressurizer pressure trip. An upper range on temperature is set by a combination of the Hot Leg boiling limit and the steam generator safety valve actuation. The low reactor coolant system (RCS) flow trip provides DNB protection by limiting the reactor coolant flow that must be considered. The methodology described in Reference 1 requires the following three elements to be in place. A NRC-approved VIPRE-01 model for the unit being evaluated A NRC-approved critical heat flux correlation for the fuel type A NRC-approved statistical DNBR limit for the fuel type VIPRE-01 models have been developed to represent the Harris and Robinson core geometry and AREVA's HTP fuel product in current operation. The VIPRE-01 model developed, along with the code inputs and correlations used to the represent AREVA's Advanced W 17x17 HTP and 15x15 HTP fuel products are described in Appendices H and I of DPC-NE-2005-P-A, "Duke Energy Thermal-Hydraulic Statistical Core Design Methodology", Reference 2.

Page 2 The critical heat flux (CHF) correlation applicable to AREVA's Advanced W 15x15 and 17x17 HTP fuel designs is the HTP CHF correlation developed in Reference 3. The applicability of this correlation with the VIPRE-01 computer code was also demonstrated in Appendices H and I of Reference 2. In addition, Reference 2 describes the statistical core design (SCD) DNBR limit for each reactor considering plant specific uncertainties. All three methodology components (VIPRE-01 model, CHF correlation and statistical DNBR limit) in Reference 2 are used to calculate core DNB limits. These limits are determined as a function of power level, reactor coolant system temperature, and reactor coolant system pressure using a reference radial peak power, FH, and the pin-by-pin power distribution specific to the applicable fuel design evaluated in Reference 2 Appendices H and I. Each point along the line corresponds to a constant DNBR value based on the SCD DNBR limit. DNB limit lines are provided in the core safety limits figure presented in Technical Specifications Figure 2.1-1 or provided in the cycle specific Core Operating Limits Report (COLR).

In summary, the Duke Energy thermal-hydraulic methodology used to provide DNB protection for Westinghouse plant instrumentation systems is not dependent upon the plant where it is applied. As a result, the method is as applicable to the Harris and Robinson nuclear units as well as McGuire and Catawba. It does however, rely on the use of NRC-approved VIPRE-01 model, CHF correlation, and DNBR limit as specified in Reference 2 for each plant.

3.0 Maximum Allowable Peaking Limits The Duke Energy maximum allowable total peaking (MATP) methodology is described in Section 5 of Reference 1. This method is independent of the reactor design or fuel type and consists of DNB calculations performed with an NRC-approved model, fuel design, critical heat flux correlation, and DNBR limit. The methodology is used to develop local fuel peaking limits to prevent DNB for a fixed reactor core operating condition defined by a thermal power level, pressure, RCS flow and reactor coolant temperature. The MATP limits developed are lines of constant MDNBR for a range of axial peak magnitudes with the location of the peak varied from the bottom to the top of the core. For a given axial peak magnitude (Fz) and axial location, the total peak (FH

  • Fz) that yields a MDNBR equal to the DNBR limit defines a single point along a MATP curve. An example MATP curve is shown in Figure 14 of Reference 1. The MATP limits are used to ensure the DNB design basis for Conditions I and II transients is satisfied by comparing calculated total peaking factors from a core nodal simulator (e.g. SIMULATE-3) against the MATP limits for a series of power distributions. Core power distributions are generated (by the core nodal simulator) as a function of rod position, burnup, xenon concentration, inlet temperature, and core power level. The method to generate these power distributions is described in Reference 4. DNBR margin is computed for each fuel assembly to verify positive margin exists for the allowable core power versus axial flux difference (AFD) limit used to establish the F(I) portion of the OTT trip function. The same methodology is used at a different state point condition to develop the core operational AFD limits. The operational AFD limits protect the core against the limiting Condition II DNB transient, typically the Loss of Flow transient. In summary, the Duke Energy MATP methodology is a generic methodology that relies on the NRC-approved VIPRE-01 model, fuel design, CHF correlation, and DNBR limit. It is applicable to any reactor or fuel type provided the NRC approvals for the unit specific methodology components are obtained.

Since NRC approval has been granted for the VIPRE-01 model, CHF correlation, and DNBR limits in Page 3 References 2 and 3, application of the Duke Energy Core DNB limit and MATP methodology to the Harris and Robinson plants is appropriate. 4.0 Conclusion The methodology described in DPC-NE-2004-P for development of limits to verify the required DNB design basis is satisfied is independent of the Westinghouse unit analyzed. The methodology does require an NRC approved: VIPRE-01 model for the unit being evaluated Critical Heat Flux (CHF) correlation for the fuel type Statistical DNBR limit for the fuel type Satisfying these three criteria allow use of the Duke Energy thermal-hydraulic analysis methodology, including the Core Safety Limit generation and MATP limit approach described in Reference 1 for plants using the Westinghouse reactor control and protection system.

5.0 References 1.DPC-NE-2004-PA, Rev. 2a, "Core Thermal-Hydraulic Methodology Using VIPRE-01" 2.DPC-NE-2005-P-A, Rev. 5, "Duke Energy Thermal-Hydraulic Statistical Core Design Methodology" 3.EMF-92-153(P)(A), Rev. 1, "HTP: Departure from Nucleate Boiling Correlation for High Thermal Performance Fuel" 4.DPC-NE-2011-PA, Rev. 1a, "Nuclear Design Methodology Report For Core Operating Limits of Westinghouse Reactors"