ML17037B557
| ML17037B557 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/28/1976 |
| From: | Rhode G Niagara Mohawk Power Corp |
| To: | Goller K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML17037B557 (12) | |
Text
NRC FOAM 195 I2 76)
U.S, NUCLEAR REGULATORV COMMISSION PORC DISTRIBUTION FQR ART 50 DOCI(ET MATERIAL DOCKET NUMOER 50-220 FILE NUMBER To:
C.R. Goller FRoM:Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
- Syracuse, N.Y..
G.K.
Rhode DATE OF DOCUMENT DATE RECEIVED QLETTER QORIGINAL OCOr V
~
0 NOTOR IZED 8 UNC LASS IF I E D PROP INPUT FORM NUMBER OF COPIES RECEIVED DESCRIPTION Ltr. re. our 4-2-76 ltr...
/
f Note: Incorrect Hail Form was inadvertently atta to wrong inclosure,and is now being distributed correctly....
Thank You ENCLOSURE
~ I
'O NOT-REMOVE ACKNOWLEDGED hed Responses to question concerninp the Fuel-Usage gg ygad P7>i6' ui"if'/
(1 Original Received)
A
'I PLANT NAME:
Nine Nile Pt.k' SAFETY SSIGNED AD:
BRANCH CHIEF:
FOR ACTION/INFORMATION ASSIGNED AD:
BRANCH CHIEF
~
ENVIRO ROJECT 11ANAGER:
LIC~
ST.:
Parrish PROJECT MANAGER:
LIC ASST'IL NRC PDR S
E S
INTERNAL0 ISTRI BUTION BENAROYA ERNST ALLARD SPANGLER GOSSICK & STAFF PROJECT HANAGEiilENT BOYD P,
COLLINS HOUSTON PETERSON MELTZ:
11ELTEMES SKOVHOLT LFD
~
swego
~
- TIC NSg ASI,B AGB.!~mMNQL$'
NAC I'OIIM IDS I2 7III ENGINEER N KNIGHT SI1NEIL PAVLICKI REACTOR SAFETY ROSS NOVAK ROSZTOCZY C11ECK AT & I SALTZMAN RUTBERG EXTERNAL DISTIIIBUTION NATL LAB REG V"IE LA PDR CONSULTANTS IPPOLITO OPERATING REACTORS STELLO OPERATING TECH EISENHUT HAO AER SCHICENCER IMES ANALYSIS DENTON & MULLE BROOKIIAVI:N NATL LA13 ULRIKSON (ORNL)
SITE TECH GRILL STEPP HUI2IAN SITE ANALYSIS VOGIE R BUNC11 COLLINS KREGER CONTROL NUMBER 4g 4)93
~
~
I,h lt, I
I I
h
~
h
""II'l'
$',I"'t <<'
1 f
.(II, llh,hg ~
=, j
")
f', I
'I I
II }It Pf fqhh ',, hh l )
~
~
~
~
I'
~
V
~
~
NIAGARAMOHAWKPOWER CORPORATION VI',II~)',,
NIAGARA '~
MOHAWK 300 ERIE BOULEVARD. WEST SYRACUSE. N. Y. 13202 April 2S, l976
)
Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn:
Mr. Karl R. Goller, Assistant Director Zl Division of Operating Reactors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Re:
Nine Mile Point Unit Docket, No. 50-220 DPR-63
Dear Mr. Goller:
Your letter dated April 2l, l976 requested infor-mation concerning fuel usage at Nine Mile Point Unit I.
The enclosed information addresses itself to the questions in your letter.
Si ncerel y, NIAGARA MOHAVK POWER CORPORATION GERALD K. RHODE Vice President Engineering MGM/sz Enclosure
t
,r
/
NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 FUEL USAGE DATA
Nine Mile Point Unit 1
Operating Summary
~Cele Start-Up Shutdown Ave. Reload Enrichment-New 'Fuel MTU Loaded (Bundles)
Reload Enrichments
.Reinserts MTU Loaded (Bundles)
Ave. Exposure (MtJD/MT)
Fuel Cladding Excess Reactivity at EOC Reason for Shutdown Calculation of Discharge Exp.
Energy Production MMDe x 105 1A.
. 10/13/69 9/18/71 IC-211 103.39 (532)
Zircaloy Yes (5)
(4) 1.69 IB
'0/24/71 3/19/72 Rl - 2.50 4.65 (24)
. Zircaloy Yes (3)
(4)
.81
.1C 6/12/72 4/17/73 R2 - 2.30 7.75 (40) 1.6 1.349 (7) 5200 Zircaloy Yes (3)
(4) 1.39 6/15/73 3/30/74 R3 - 2.50 26.43 (140) 1.2 3.060 (16) 11000 Zircaloy Yes (3)
(4) 1.43 6/29/74 9/13/75 R4 - 2.58(')
- 17.62 (96) 1.0 9.904 (52) 13000 Zircaloy (3)
(4) 2.04 4
12/4/75 R5 -
.DO 36.70 (200)
Zircaloy (4'1)'0 bundles with 2.62 w/o. average enrichment and 36 bundles with 2.50 w/o average enri.chment.
(2)
Values shown are MTU of the batch as loaded:
Uranium depletion due to previous burnup has been accounted for..
(3)
Reactivity. was not sufficient to reach next refueling window.
(4)
In core power monitoring program used to calculate discharge exposures.
(5)
Extrapolation of stack release rates indicated values might approach 105 of Tech.
Spec. limits prior to the next outage window.
Therefore, the outage date was accelerated.
~+-
0
Nine Nile Point Unit 1
Discharge Fuel Suraaary Discharge Batch No.
Discharge Date 9/18/71 3/19/72 4/17/73 3/30/74 9/13/75 9/13/75 IC IC IC IC IC R2 17 31 104 148
,194 Fuel No. of
~Toe Bundles Initial Enrichment w/o 2.11 F 11 2.1'1 2.11 2.11 2.30 Discharge Exposure
'redicted when fuel 14500 14500 14500 17100 20700 23200 Actual(')
Discharge' Exposure
~@<a EE 5700(2) solo(2) 125so(2) 16800 ls95o(3) 171 3o(2)
~.
Actual
'inal U-235
'~Enrich.
w/n 1.57 1.40 T.lo
.88
.78
.98 Actual
.Final Pu 239
~Enrich.
w n
.30
.34.
.42
.47
.50
.47 NOTES:
(1)
Differences between actual and predicted exposures are partly due to earlier than anticipated discharges to allow for loading sufficient reactivity to meet follow-on cycle requirements.
In addition, changes in the plant operating schedule to meet system requirements effect the discharge dates and discharge exposures. 'hen 18 month cycle effects are accounted for, indications are that the future batch average discharge exposures will be within + lOX of predicted.
(2)
Najor differences between actual and predicted exposures are due to the removal of fuel bundles suspected to be failed.
(3)
Major differences between actual and predicted exposures are due to a change from 12 month to 18 month operating cycles.'"
E
'C Nine Nile Point. Unit 1
Summary of Average In-Core Exposure (NMD/NTU)
I'nitial Core;"',
Bundles BOC Exposure EOC Exposure 1A 532 0
5080 508
'040 7550 1C
. 468 328
..7450' 10680 11570:
14710 3-232 12980 18360 38 15400 Reload 1
8 Bundles-BOC Exposure EOC Exposure Reload 2
8 Bundles BOC Exposure EOC'xposure
~ Reload 3
8 Bundles BOC Exposure EOC Exposure Reload 4
-,". Bundles BOC Exposure EOC Exposure Reload 5
.. Bundles BOC Exposure EOC Exposure
. 240.
1776 24 1776
'6458 40 0
4990 24.
6460
-= 11110 2
40 4990 9910
-140 0
5400 24 11110 15010 40 9910 16180 140 5400 12810 96 0
7850 24 1501 0 34 16020 140 12810 96-7850 200'0
~ 1 I
J