ML15075A091

Issuance of Amendment Concerning Safety Limit Critical Power Ratio Values (TAC No. MF5007)(L-14-325)

ML15075A091
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	03/27/2015
From:	Ellen Brown Plant Licensing Branch III
To:	Harkness E FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
Brown E, NRR/DORL/LPL3-2, 415-2315
References
L-14-325, TAC MF5007
Download: ML15075A091 (14)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 March 27, 2015 Mr. Ernest J. Harkness Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Mail Stop A-PY-A290 P.O. Box 97, 10 Center Road Perry, OH 44081-0097

SUBJECT:

PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 1 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT CONCERNING SAFETY LIMIT CRITICAL POWER RATIO VALUES (TAC NO. MF5007)(L-14-325)

Dear Mr. Harkness:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 165 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-58 for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1. This amendment revises the technical specifications (TS) in response to your application dated October 8, 2014, as supplemented by a letter dated February 12, 2015 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Nos. ML14289A117 and ML15043A478, respectively). This amendment revises the TS safety limit minimum critical power ratio (SLMCPR) value during single-recirculation-loop operation to support the use of Global Nuclear Fuel-2 fuel starting at the next operating cycle.

A copy of the Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. The Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next biweekly Federal Register notice.

Sincerely,

!RAJ Eva A Brown, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing 111-2 and Planning and Analysis Branch Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-440

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 165 to NPF-58

2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Listserv

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR GENERATION CORP.

OHIO EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-440 PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 165 License No. NPF-58

1. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for license filed by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, et al., (the licensee, FENOC) dated October 8, 2014, as supplemented by a letter dated February 12, 2015, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of Facility Operating License No. NPF-58 is hereby amended to read as follows:

Enclosure 1

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, as revised through Amendment No. 165 are hereby incorporated into this license. FENOC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of its issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of the date of issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Travis L. Tate, Chief Plant Licensing 111-2 and Planning and Analysis Branch Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Technical Specifications and Facility Operating License Date of Issuance: Mm::h 27, 2015 Enclosure 1

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 165 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-58 DOCKET NO. 50-440 Replace the following pages of the Facility Operating License and Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.

Remove License NPF-58 License NPF-58 Page 4 Page 4 TSs 2.0-1 2.0-1

renewal. Such sale and leaseback transactions are subject to the representations and conditions set forth in the above mentioned application of January 23, 1987, as supplemented on March 3, 1987, as well as the letter of the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation dated March 16, 1987, consenting to such transactions. Specifically, a lessor and anyone else who may acquire an interest under these transactions are prohibited from exercising directly or indirectly any control over the licenses of PNPP Unit 1. For purposes of this condition the limitations of 10 CFR 50.81, as now in effect and as may be subsequently amended, are fully applicable to the lessor and any successor in interest to that lessor as long as the license for PNPP Unit 1 remains in effect; these financial transactions shall have no effect on the license for the Perry Nuclear facility throughout the term of the license.

(b) Further, the licensees are also required to notify the NRC in writing prior to any change in: (i) the terms or conditions of any lease agreements executed as part of these transactions; (ii) the PNPP Operating Agreement; (iii) the existing property insurance coverage for PNPP Unit 1; and (iv) any action by a lessor or others that may have an adverse effect on the safe operation of the facility.

C. This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now and hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:

(1) Maximum Power Level FENOC is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 3758 megawatts thermal (100% power) in accordance with the conditions specified herein.

(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, as revised through Amendment No. 165 are hereby incorporated into the license. FENOC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

(3) Antitrust Conditions

a. FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation Corp. and Ohio Edison Company Amendment No.165

SLs 2.0 2.0 SAFETY LIMITS (SLs) 2.1 SLs 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs 2.1.1.1 With the reactor steam dome pressure< 785 psig or core flow < 10% rated core flow:

THERMAL POWER shall be~ 23.8% RTP.

2.1.1.2 With the reactor steam dome pressure~ 785 psig and core flow ~ 10% rated core flow:

The Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR) shall be~ 1.10 for two recirculation loop operation or~ 1.13 for single recirculation loop operation.

2.1.1.3 Reactor vessel water level shall be greater.than the top of active irradiated fuel.

2.1.2 Reactor Coolant System Pressure SL Reactor steam dome pressure shall be~ 1325 psig.

2.2 SL Violations With any SL violation. the following actions shall be completed within 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />s:

2.2.1 Restore compliance with all Sls: and 2.2.2 Insert all insertable control rods.

PERRY - UN IT 1 2.0-1 Amendment Nn. 165

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 165 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-58 FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR GENERATION CORP.

OHIO EDISON COMPANY PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-440

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) dated October 8, 2014, as supplemented by a letter dated February 12, 2015 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Nos. ML14289A117 and ML15043A478, respectively). FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee or FENOC) requested changes to the technical specifications (TSs) for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (PNPP or Perry). The amendment request proposes to revise the TS safety limit minimum critical power ratio (SLMCPR) values to reflect the change to Global Nuclear Fuel (GNF)-2 fuel. More specifically, the licensee proposes to change the SLMCPR value in TS 2.1.1.2 from 1.11 to 1.13 for single-recirculation-loop operation (SLO).

The February 12, 2015, supplement, contained clarifying information and did not change the NRC staff's initial proposed finding of no significant hazards consideration.

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

2.1 Background Perry is a boiling-water reactor (BWR)/6 with a Mark Ill containment design which has two recirculation loops. Perry Cycle 16 core loading consists of 280 fresh GNF-2 fuel bundles, 280 once-burnt General Electric (GE)14 fuel bundles, 184 twice-burnt GE14 fuel bundles, and 4 thrice-burnt GE14 fuel bundles. The SLMCPR value for two recirculation loop operation (TLO) is not changing. This amendment supports the Perry Operating Cycle 16 core design.

Enclosure 2

2.1.1 Methodology The Perry Cycle 16 SLMCPR values were developed using the following NRG-approved methodologies and uncertainties:

• NEDC-32601 P-A "Methodology and Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR [minimum critical power ratio] Evaluations,"

• NEDC-32694P-A "Power distribution Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations,"

• NEDE-24011-P-A "General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel," and

• NEDC-32505P-A "A-Factor Calculation Method for GE11, GE12 and GE13 Fuel."

No departures from NRG-approved methodologies were identified in the Perry Cycle 16 SLMCPR calculations. Plant-specific use of these methodologies must adhere to certain restrictions. Based on a review of the applicable topical reports (i.e., NEDC-32601 P-A, NEDC-32694P-A) as well as the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Amendment 25 to NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), the following guidance should be considered when using the associated topical reports:

1. The TGBLA (lattice physics code) fuel rod power calculational uncertainty should be verified when applied to fuel designs not included in the benchmark comparisons of Table 3.1 of NEDC-32601 P, since changes in fuel design can have a significant effect on calculation accuracy.

2. The effect of the correlation of rod power calculation uncertainties should be reevaluated to ensure the accuracy of A-Factor uncertainty when the methodology is applied to a new fuel lattice.

3. In view of the importance of MIP (MCPR Importance Parameter) criterion and its potential sensitivity to changes in fuel bundle designs, core loading and operating strategies, the MIP criterion should be reviewed periodically as part of the procedural review process to ensure that the specific value recommended in NEDC-32601-P is applicable to future designs and operating strategies.

2.2 Regulatory Requirements and Guidance Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act requires applicants for nuclear power plant operating licenses to include TSs as part of the license. In Section 50.36, "Technical specifications," of Title 1O of the Code of Federal Regulations (1 O CFR), the NRC established its regulatory requirements related to the content of TSs. TSs are required to include items in the following five specific categories related to station operation: (1) safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting control settings, (2) limiting conditions for operation (LCOs), (3) surveillance requirements (SRs), (4) design features, and (5) administrative controls. Section 50.36(c)(1 )(i)(A) requires that the licensee establish safety limits for important process variables necessary for an appropriate level of protection to maintain the integrity of certain physical barriers that guard against the uncontrolled release of radioactive material. The SLMCPR is

calculated on a cycle-specific basis because it is necessary to account for the core configuration-specific neutronic and thermal-hydraulic response.

General Design Criteria 10, "Reactor design," of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 states, in part, that the reactor core and associated coolant, control, and protection systems shall be designed to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits (SAFDLs) are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including the effects of anticipated operational occurrences.

Fuel design limits can be exceeded if the core exceeds critical power. Critical power is a term used for the power at which the fuel departs from nucleate boiling and enters a transition to film boiling. For BWRs, the critical power is predicted using a correlation known as the GE critical quality boiling length correlation, or better known as the GEXL correlation. Due to core wide and operational variations, the margin to boiling transition is most easily described in terms of a critical power ratio (CPR), which is defined as the rod critical power as calculated by GEXL divided by the actual rod power. The more a CPR value exceeds 1.0, the greater the margin to boiling transition is. The SLMCPR is calculated using a statistical process that takes into account operating parameters and uncertainties. The operating limit MCPR (OLMCPR) is equal to the SLMCPR plus a CPR margin for transients. At the OLMCPR, at least 99.9 percent of the rods avoid boiling transition during steady state operation and transients (Section 4.4, "Thermal and Hydraulic Design," of NUREG-0800, Revision 3, dated June 1996) caused by a single-operator error or equipment malfunction.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

3.1 Topical Report Guidance As discussed above, the following topical report guidance were identified to apply in support of the licensee's proposed change:

1. The TGBLA {lattice physics code) fuel rod power calculational uncertainty should be verified when applied to fuel designs not included in the benchmark comparisons of Table 3.1 of NEDC-32601 P, since changes in fuel design can have a significant effect on calculation accuracy.

2. The effect of the correlation of rod power calculation uncertainties should be reevaluated to ensure the accuracy of A-Factor uncertainty when the methodology is applied to a new fuel lattice.

3. In view of the importance of MIP (MCPR Importance Parameter) criterion and its potential sensitivity to changes in fuel bundle designs, core loading and operating strategies, the MIP criterion should be reviewed periodically as part of the procedural review process to ensure that the specific value recommended in NEDC-32601-P is applicable to future designs and operating strategies.

3.1.1 Use of GNF-2 Fuel In NEDC-32505P-A, Revision 1, the fuel vendor provided a methodology to address differences which could affect the GEXL correlation from new fuel types approved by the NRC in a letter

dated January 11, 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML060520637). At the time of approval of the topical report, the focus was on R-factor calculation method (used for GE 11, 12, and 13) and the reference *R-factor calculation method (used for GE6, 7, 8, 9 and 10). As discussed in Section 2.5 (Methodology Restrictions) of the attachment to the submittal, when new fuel types were introduced an analysis confirming that the R-factor methodology approved in NEDC-32505P-A remained valid.

In a letter dated September 24, 2001 (ADAMS Accession No. ML012710272), GNF addressed TGBLA fuel rod power calculational uncertainty and the effect of the correlation of rod power calculation uncertainties. The NRC questioned the differences in design and geometrical considerations between GNF-2 and GE 14 fuel. In the supplement dated February 12, 2015, the licensee stated that GNF-2 is an evolutionary fuel product based on GE 14 and that it is not considered a new fuel design as it maintains the previously established 10X10 array.

The licensee states that the rod power calculational uncertainties are dominated by geometrical considerations in which GE 14 is identical to GE 12.

The NRC staff determined that GNF-2 fuel is designed for mechanical, nuclear, and thermal-hydraulic compatibility with the other 1OX10 GNF fuel designs. The design has features of the currently operating GE10, GE11/13 and GE12/14 fuel including pellet-cladding interaction resistant barrier cladding, high performance spacers, part length rods, interactive thick corner/thin wall channel, and axial enrichment loading. The GNF-2 design is a 10X10 array with 92 fuel rods and two large central water rods, and 14 part length fuel rods. The part length rod configuration improves efficiency and reactivity margins. Table 3.1 of NEDC-32601 P provides GE 12 1Ox10 lattices. The values given in Table 3.1 for GE 12 are representative of the values being calculated for GE14 and GNF-2.

Based on the rod power calculational uncertainties used by GNF to develop the Perry Cycle 16 SLMCPR values being valid for GNF-2 fuel, the NRC staff determined that confirmation of the applicability of the approved R-factor methodology is not required for Perry's use of GNF-2 fuel.

3.1.2 MCPR Importance Parameter In Section 2.2.2 (Core Flow Rate and Randon Effective TIP [transverse core proble] Training) of Enclosure B to the submittal the licensee indicates that for Cycle 16, the minimum core flow SLMCPR calculation performed at 81 percent core flow and rated core power condition was limiting as compared to the rated core flow and rated core power condition. The analysis indicates that, at low core flows, the limiting rod pattern and the nominal rod pattern are essentially the same. In its application, the licensee determined that the rod pattern used to calculate the SLMCPR at 100 percent rated power and 81 percent rated flow reasonably assures that at least 99.9 percent of fuel rods in the core would not be expected to experience boiling transition during normal operation or anticipated operational occurrences during the operation of Cycle 16.

The NRC staff determined that the rod patterns used to calculate the SLMCPR at 81 percent of rated core flow and 100 percent of rated core power produce a limiting MCPR distribution that reasonably bounds the MCPR distributions that would be expected during the operation of the Perry core throughout Cycle 16. Therefore, the staff concludes that the licensee's submittal

follows guidance for GNF-2 fuel and the minimum core flow condition.

3.1.3 Conclusion In summary, the NRC staff concludes that the licensee has adequately addressed the guidance of Topical Reports NEDC-32601 P-A, NEDC-32694P-A, Amendment 25 to NEDE-24011-P-A (GESTAR II), and NEDC-32505P-A, and that the use of these reports to evaluate the Cycle 16 SLMCPR is acceptable.

3.2 Deviations from the NRG-Approved Calculational Uncertainties 3.2.1 Channel Bow The R-factor is an input into the GEXL correlation used to describe the local pin-by-pin power distribution and the fuel assembly and channel geometry on the fuel assembly critical power.

The R-factor uncertainty analysis includes an allowance for power peaking modeling uncertainty, manufacturing uncertainty and channel bow uncertainty. GNF has increased this uncertainty for all SLMCPR calculations to account for the potential impact of control blade shadow corrosion induced bow. As discussed in NEDC-32505P-A, GNF has generically increased the GEXL R-Factor uncertainty to account for an increase in channel bow due to the emerging unforeseen phenomenon called control blade shadow corrosion-induced channel bow, which is not accounted for in the channel bow uncertainty component of the approved R-Factor uncertainty. As discussed in Section 2.2.1 of the submittal, the Cycle 16 analysis shows an expected channel bow which is bounded by a GEXL R-Factor uncertainty that accounts for channel bow uncertainty. Thus, the NRC staff finds that the use of a GEXL R-Factor uncertainty bounds the expected control blade shadow corrosion-induced channel bow for Cycle 16.

3.2.2 Core Flow Rate and Random Effective TIP Reading In a letter dated August 24, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML042720293), GNF committed to the expansion of the state points used in the determination of the SLMCPR. Consistent with those commitments, analyses were performed at the rated core power and minimum licensed core flow point in addition to analyses at the rated core power and rated core flow point. The NRG-approved SLMCPR methodology was applied at each statepoint that was analyzed.

In Section 2.2.2 (Core Flow Rate and Random Effective TIP Reading) of the submittal, the licensee indicated that the core flow and random TIP reading uncertainties used in SLO minimum core flow SLMCPR analysis remain the same as in the rated core flow SLO SLMCPR analysis because these uncertainties (which are substantially larger than used in TLO analysis) already account for the effects of operating at reduced core flow.

For SLO calculations performed at 81 percent core flow, the NRG-approved uncertainty values for the core flow rate (2.5 percent) and the random effective TIP reading (1.2 percent) are adjusted by dividing them by 81/100. The treatment of the core flow and random effective Tl P reading uncertainties is based on the assumption that the signal to noise ratio deteriorates as core flow is reduced. The licensee indicates in the submittal that this increase is conservative based on the expectation that the variability in the absolute flow will decrease as flow

decreases.

Based on this increase in the uncertainty bounding the original non-flow dependent uncertainties, the NRC staff finds the treatment of core flow and random effective TIP reading uncertainties acceptable.

3.5 Core Monitoring System In Section 2.8 (Core Monitoring System) of the attachment to the submittal, the licensee indicates that for Cycle 16, the GNF 3D MONICORE system will be used as the core monitoring system. The 3D MONICORE system is in widespread use throughout the GNF fueled fleet of BWRs, including BWR/6 plants like Perry. Use of a current version of 3D MONICORE provides the plant capability to perform the reactivity anomaly surveillance. Use of 30 MONICORE has been previously evaluated and accepted by the NRC in a letter dated March 11, 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML993140059).

Therefore, the NRC staff finds the use of the GNF 3D MON ICORE system for Cycle 16 to be acceptable.

3.6 Technical Evaluation Conclusion The NRC staff concludes the licensee's proposed Cycle 16 SLMCPR value of 1.13 for SLO acceptable for Cycle 16 because it is developed through the appropriate use of NRG-approved methodologies in accordance with NRC staff guidance. The staff further concludes that the licensee used methods consistent with the regulatory requirements and guidance identified in Section 2.0 above.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Ohio State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluent that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (80 FR 5819; February 3, 2015). Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

6.0 CONCLUSION

The NRC staff 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) there is reasonable assurance that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

7.0 REFERENCES

1. Letter from C. R Pierce (First Energy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) to U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Proposed Change to the PNPP's Technical Specification Concerning the Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio," October 8, 2014.

2. Letter from C. R Pierce (First Energy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) to U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI)

Regarding Proposed Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio License Amendment (SLMCPR)," February 12, 2015 .

3. Global Nuclear Fuels Licensing Topical Report NEDE-24011-P-A-20, "General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel," December 2013 (ADAMS Accession Nos.

ML13352A466 and ML13352A467).

4. General Electric Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report NEDC-32601 P-A, "Methodology and Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations," August 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14093A216).

5. General Electric Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report NEDC-32505P-A, Revision 1, "R-Factor Calculation Method for GE11, GE12, and GE13 Fuel," July 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML060520636).

6. MFN-003-99, Letter, Frank Akstulewicz (NRC) to Glen A Watford (GE), "Acceptance for Referencing of Licensing Topical Reports NEDC-32601 P, Methodology and Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluations, NEDC-32694P, Power Distribution Uncertainties for Safety Limit MCPR Evaluation; and Amendment 25 to NEDE-24011-P-A on Cycle Specific Safety Limit MCPR," March 11, 1999 (ADAMS Accession No. ML993140059).

7. MFN 04-081, Letter from J.S. Post (GE) to NRC, "Part 21 Reportable Condition and 60-Day Interim Report; Notification: Non-Conservative SLMCPR," August 24, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML042720293).

8. NED0-31152 Revision 9, "Global Nuclear Fuels Fuel Bundle Designs", dated May 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML071510287).

9. Confirmation of 1Ox10 Fuel Design Applicability to Improved SLMCPR, Power Distribution and A-Factor Methodologies, dated September 24, 2001 (ADAMS Accession No. ML012710272).

Principal Contributor: F. Forsaty, NRR Dateof Issuance: fv'arch 27, 2015