ML041230012
| ML041230012 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/2004 |
| From: | Martin R NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD2 |
| To: | |
| Martin R, NRR/DLPM, 415-1493 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML041230011 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML041230012 (8) | |
Text
April 30, 2004 LICENSEE:
Duke Energy Corporation FACILITY:
Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING ON APRIL 23, 2004, WITH DUKE ENERGY ON MIXED OXIDE FUEL Representatives of the Duke Energy Corporation (Duke), met with members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff at NRC Headquarters on April 23, 2004, in Rockville, Maryland. The meeting addressed issues related to Dukes application dated February 27, 2003, as supplemented, to use mixed oxide (MOX) lead test assemblies (LTAs) at the Catawba Nuclear Station. A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 1. Dukes handouts provided in the meeting are provided in Enclosure 2.
The meeting was held to discuss the issue that was addressed in Dukes letter dated April 16, 2004. Dukes letter discusses the licensees current plans for the reactor core that would, if approved by the NRC, include MOX LTAs in fuel Cycle 16 for Catawba Unit 1 (C1C16). The application, as supplemented, describes the C1C16 core as including 189 fuel assemblies of the Westinghouse Robust Fuel Assembly (RFA) design and four MOX LTAs. As the NRC staff learned on April 12, 2004, and as described in Dukes letter dated April 16, 2004, Dukes current plans are that C1C16 would include 181 RFA fuel assemblies, the four MOX LTAs and eight assemblies of the Westinghouse Next Generation Fuel (NGF) design. The NRC staffs safety evaluation for the MOX LTAs, issued on April 5, 2004, did not explicitly consider the NGF fuel assemblies. Therefore this meeting was held to discuss the degree to which the NGF and RFA designs are similar and thus the extent to which information previously submitted by Duke continues to be bounding for the MOX core.
Dukes slides 1-5, provided in Enclosure 2, provide introductory information. Slide 6 describes a review by Duke to ensure consistency between the planned C1C16 design and all documents associated with its application of February 27, 2003, as supplemented. Duke has committed to provide the NRC with a summary of that review.
Slide 8 states that the goal of the NGF design is to eliminate a grid to rod fretting failure mechanism in 17 x 17 fuel and that the basic geometry of NGF fuel is the geometry of the 17 x 17 RFA with improved features.
A qualitative summary of the differences between RFA and NGF fuel was provided with the statement in slide 9 that the most significant change is in the grid design, location and performance. Slide 9 also states that departure from nucleate boiling (DNB) was calculated with the existing RFA critical heat flux (CHF) correlation, which was identified in the meeting as the WRB-2M correlation and that CHF performance was verified by testing at Columbia University in 2003. The NRC staff expressed interest in verifying the applicability of the WRB-2M correlation to NGF fuel and in the recently developed CHF test data.
Slides 9 and 10 state that the VIPRE-01 code was used for the NGF analyses and that fuel reliability is evaluated by analyzing fuel assembly crossflow velocities. Slides 11 and 12 identify core loading exclusion zones to preclude any local crossflow issues. The NRC staff expressed interest in further information on these issues.
Slide 13 identifies the use of the PAD code for analysis of RFA and NGF fuel and the COPERNIC code for MOX LTAs. The NRC staff expressed interest in the applicability of PAD to NGF fuel.
Slide 14 states that for the fuel rod mechanical analysis, generic analyses demonstrate that the performance of the limiting rod is within the fuel rod design limits and that this is then verified for each reload cycle. Duke stated that a mixed core of NGF, RFA and MOX LTAs would have no impact on the generic fuel rod analyses.
Slides 15 - 20 addressed loss of coolant accident (LOCA) analyses and concluded that introduction of NGF fuel would not significantly impact results for MOX LTAs. It was noted that the previously calculated limiting value of 2056 F would need to be revised to account for recent ECCS code analysis changes.
Slides 21 - 24 addressed non-LOCA analyses, stating that all three fuel types will be explicitly evaluated in the standard reload process.
Summary slide 25 stated that cycle specific reload analysis will explicitly confirm acceptable performance of all three fuel types prior to completion of the reload safety evaluation.
The NRC staff also asked whether the power history information that had been submitted in support of the dose consequence analyses had been impacted by the inclusion of NGF fuel and was advised by Duke that it had not changed.
The NRC staff summarized by stating that it is encouraging to learn that the licensee had previously performed analyses for the three fuel types. The NRC staff indicated that the primary areas of staff interest that could be identified at the time of the meeting include the CHF analysis for NGF fuel, the crossflow calculations and use of the VIPRE code and defined exclusion zones and the vendor fuel design reports for RFA and NGF fuels. The NRC staff indicated that it would consider the most useful way of obtaining this information.
Several members of the public asked questions at the conclusion of the meeting. This included a question on how and when the NRC staff first learned of the inclusion of NGF fuel in the C1C16 core. The NRC staff replied that this was in an oral communication with a Duke representative on April 12, 2004. A question was also asked on whether the licensee could determine whether a leaking fuel assembly was a low enriched uranium assembly or a MOX assembly. The answer was that, except for very specific isotopic ratios that can occur at specific times in core life, fuel failures could not be associated during power operation with specific fuel designs in the core.
/RA/
Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Meeting Participants
- 2. Dukes Handouts cc w/encls: See next page Several members of the public asked questions at the conclusion of the meeting. This included a question on how and when the NRC staff first learned of the inclusion of NGF fuel in the C1C16 core. The NRC staff replied that this was in an oral communication with a Duke representative on April 12, 2004. A question was also asked on whether the licensee could determine whether a leaking fuel assembly was a low enriched uranium assembly or a MOX assembly. The answer was that, except for very specific isotopic ratios that can occur at specific times in core life, fuel failures could not be associated during power operation with specific fuel designs in the core.
/RA/
Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Meeting Participants
- 2. Dukes Handouts cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION: See attached list Meeting Notice:ML041070480 Package: ML041230011 Meeting Summary:ML041230012 :
OFC PDII-1/PM PDII-1/LA PDII-1/SC NAME RMartin:as CHawes JNakoski DATE 04/30/04 04/30/04 04/30/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
DISTRIBUTION FOR THE
SUMMARY
OF MEETING ON APRIL 23, 2004, WITH DUKE ENERGY Dated: April 30, 2004 DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC PDII-1 Reading RidsNrrDlpm (TMarsh/ELeeds)
RidsNrrDlpmLpdii (EHackett)
RidsNrrDlpmLpdii-1 (JNakoski)
RidsNrrPMRMartin RidsNrrLACHawes RidsOgcRp RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter TMensah (NRR/PMAS)
RidsEdoMailCenter (SRosenberg)
RidsRgn2MailCenter (LPlisco)
UShoop TAttard RLandry FAkstulewicz SLaVie JVoglewede APersinko RMeyer HScott SPeters RidsNrrDssaSrxb (JWermiel)
RidsNrrPMSPeters SUttal AFernandez MBupp LWert (RGN-II/DRP/RPB3)
RHaag (RGN-II/DRP/RPB5)
TMensah ATTENDEES LIST APRIL 23, 2004 MEETING WITH DUKE ENERGY NAME ORGANIZATION Bob Martin NRC Frank Akstulewicz NRC Zahira Cruz NRC Steve La Vie NRC Marvin Itzkowitz NRC Susan Uttal NRC Antonio Fernandez NRC Ralph Landry NRC Ed Hackett NRC Anne Cottingham Winston & Strawn Ralph Caruso NRC Daniel Horner McGraw Hill Jay Verbos Duke Power Jim Eller Duke Power Michael Scott Duke Power Tom Geer Duke Power Bob Harvey Duke Power Kenny Epperson Duke Power Mike Cash Duke Power Dave Lochbaum UCS
Catawba Nuclear Station cc:
Lee Keller, Manager Regulatory Compliance Duke Energy Corporation 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 Ms. Lisa F. Vaughn Duke Energy Corporation Mail Code - PB05E 422 South Church Street P.O. Box 1244 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1244 Anne Cottingham, Esquire Winston and Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 North Carolina Municipal Power Agency Number 1 1427 Meadowwood Boulevard P. O. Box 29513 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626 County Manager of York County York County Courthouse York, South Carolina 29745 Piedmont Municipal Power Agency 121 Village Drive Greer, South Carolina 29651 Ms. Karen E. Long Assistant Attorney General North Carolina Department of Justice P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 NCEM REP Program Manager 4713 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4713 North Carolina Electric Membership Corp.
P. O. Box 27306 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Senior Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4830 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 Henry Porter, Assistant Director Division of Waste Management Bureau of Land and Waste Management Dept. of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201-1708 Mr. R. L. Gill, Jr., Manager Nuclear Regulatory Issues and Industry Affairs Duke Energy Corporation 526 South Church Street Mail Stop EC05P Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Saluda River Electric P. O. Box 929 Laurens, South Carolina 29360 Mr. Peter R. Harden, IV, Vice President Customer Relations and Sales Westinghouse Electric Company 6000 Fairview Road 12th Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28210 Mary Olson Director of the Southeast Office Nuclear Information and Resource Service 729 Haywood Road, 1-A P. O. Box 7586 Asheville, North Carolina 28802
Catawba Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. T. Richard Puryear Owners Group (NCEMC)
Duke Energy Corporation 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 Richard M. Fry, Director Division of Radiation Protection N. C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Diane Curran Harmon, Curran, Spielberg &
Eisenberg, LLP 1726 M Street, N.W.
Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 D. M. Jamil Vice President Catawba Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745-9635