ML17053A404

Ack Receipt of .Requests Addl Info to Complete Review of Reload 7 Submittal

ML17053A404
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	01/19/1979
From:	Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Dise D NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP.
References
NUDOCS 7902080308
Download: ML17053A404 (8)

Text

Docket No. 50-220 JAN 1S 1979 fir.,Donald P. Disc Vice Pr esident - Engineering

'iagara Mohawk Power Corporation.

300 Erie Boulevard Hest

Syracuse, flew York 13202

Dear ttr. Disc:

Distribution

~Docket ORB iIi3 Local PDR NRC PDR NRR Reading

'Ippol ito SSheppard PPolk

Attorney, OELD OISE '(3)

DEisenhut TERA JRBuchanan ACRS (16)

Your submittal of November 21, 1978, relating to Reload 7 of

~

~

~

~

Nine fHle Point Nuclear Station Unit ho. 1, is being reviewed by our staff.

In order to complete our review, you are requested to provide within 30 days of receipt of this letter, the additional information identified in the enclosure.

Enclosure:

Request for Additional Information Sincerely, Original Sign'ed bg T; A, Ippolito

~

Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 83 Division of Operating Reactors cc w/enclosure:

See next page 7002080~

ornca~

~..,

ORB ini3

- SSheppard:

1//f/79 0

B 83 jf ~PPolk 1/

/79 0

P3

~ pol o.

1/(F/79 WRC PORM 518 (9.76) NRCM 0240 4 U 4 OOVNRNMCNlNINTINOONNICICI ll10 10$

TJS

0 U

Jot> a 9 1srg lf

~

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation cc:

Eugene B. Thomas, Jr., Esquire

LeBoevf, Lamb, Leiby 5 NacRae 1757 N Street, N.

W.

Washington, D.

C.

20036 Anthony Z.

Roisman Natural Resources Defense Council

'917 15th Street, N.

W.

Washington, D.

C.

20005 Oswego County Office Building 46 E. Bridge Street

Oswego, New York 13126

1

RE(EOEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NINE MILE POINT UNIT, RELOAD 7

l. It is stated in your submittal that power coastdown of Nine Mile Point Unit 1

beyond the end=of cycle all rods out condition, is permisable by reference to Section 5.2 of General Electric's approved "Generic Reload Fuel Application," NEDE-24011-P-A.

Although the subject topical report addresses BWR reloads which utilize GE's retrofit SxSR fuel assemblies, the conclusions appearing in Section 5.2 are based on an analysis of a core which involved neither Sx8R fuel nor an exposure history similar to Nine Mile Point during Cycle 6,Thus we 'believe it is inappropriate to reference the subject analyses for your reload application.

Accordingly, we request that either a plant-specific or bounding analyses be sub-mitted which are equivalent to those referenced in Section 5.2 of the LTR and which are applicable to the Cycle 6 core of NMP-l.

2. It is the staff's position that adequate startup physics testing be performed following each plant refueling'n order to assure that the core conforms to the design, i.e. that the actual (measured) reload core configuration is consistent with the analysed reload core configuration.

The staff currently has a study underway for the purpose of generically establishing requirements for minimum BWR startup physics test programs.

Although this effort is not yet

complete, we have concluded at this juncture that, in order to be acceptable, a

BWR startup test program must include the following:

A.

A visual inspection of the core including a photographic or videotape record.

B.

A check of core power symmetry-by checking for mismatches between symmetric detectors.

C.

Withdrawal and insertion of each control rod-to check for criticality and mobility.

D.

A comparison of predicted and measured critical insequence rod pattern for nonvoided conditions.

In view of the importance the staff places on the above four BWR startup physics program elements, we request that you provide a

commitment to include them in the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Cycle 6

startup program.

Additionally, in order that we may adequately assess the characteris-tics of the entire Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Cycle 6 startup test

program, we request that you provide the following information

0 A description of the core loading verification (inspection)

, procedures to be followed for the core refueling including the number of independent checks to be made of the a) core

loading, b) the intended core loading and

3) the consistency between the two.

A description of each startup physics test (including those indicated above).

The acceptance cri teria and basis for each test (including those indicated above) which provides assurance that the actual core conforms to the design.

The ac'tions to be taken for each test (including those indicated above) whenever, the acceptance criteria are not satisfied.

.0

,I