ML17158A896
| ML17158A896 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1995 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17158A894 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9509190342 | |
| Download: ML17158A896 (2) | |
Text
~p,R AEONS~ ~o Cy 0O IVl 0
/f
~O
+a**+
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-OM1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.125TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
NPF-22 PENNSYLVANIA POWER
& LIGHT COMPANY ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC.
SUS UEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-388
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By letter dated March 31,
- 1995, Pennsylvania Power
& Light Company (PP&L) (the licensee) submitted a request for the Technical Specification (TS) change to allow four GE demonstration assemblies to be loaded into Susquehanna Unit 2, Cycle 8 core.
The TS change involves adding the reference NEDE-24011-P-A-10, "General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel," February 1991, to TS Section 6.9.3.2.
This reference is the methodology for GE-12 type lead use assemblies approved by the NRC in letters dated March 17, 1989 and July 23, 1990.
The four demonstration assemblies are manufactured by General Electric and will be of the GE-12 fuel design.
.The GE-12 fuel design includes many features of the accepted GE-10 and GE-ll/13 fuel designs, such as two large central water rods, high performance
- spacers, part length rod, etc.
- 2. 0 EVALUATION The licensee analyzed the demonstration assemblies in all aspects of safety concerns including neutronic, mechanical, thermal hydraulic, transient, and accident analyses based on the approved fuel licensing acceptance criteria.
Because the analyses resulting from the use of the demonstration assemblies are bounded by those done for the remaining fuel in the reactor, the licensee concluded that the use of the GE-12 assemblies will not result in a change in safety margin and the use of GE methodology will ensure to maintain the safety margin for Unit 2, Cycle 8 core.
The staff agrees with this conclusion.
Inasmuch as these assemblies are test assemblies and the data from these assemblies will be used to achieve improved performance for future fuel design applications, we conclude that the licensee has provided adequate justification for the proposed use of these assemblies in Susquehanna Unit 2, Cycle 8.
The staff considers these demonstration assemblies as lead test assemblies (LTAs).
In general, there are two criteria governing the use of LTAs:
(1) the total number of demonstration assemblies in one core should be 9509i90342 9509i3 PDR ADQCK 05000388 P
~
~
- limited, and (2) the demonstration assemblies should not be loaded in limiting positions.
The staff concludes that the licensee's demonstration program conforms to these criteria, and that these demonstration assemblies are acceptable for Susquehanna Unit 2, Cycle 8.
The licensee has added reference
¹18 to Section 6.9.3.2.
Reference
¹18 is described as "NEDE-24011-P-A-10, General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel, dated February 1991."
Since this document describes the approved methodology used for safety analyses of the demonstration assemblies, we conclude that the reference
¹18 is acceptable for Section 6.9.3.2.
The staff has reviewed the licensee submittal of a Technical Specification change associated with the use of four demonstration assemblies for Susquehanna Unit 2, Cycle 8.
Based on its evaluation, The staff approves the revised Technical Specification for the use of the four demonstration assemblies for Susquehanna Unit 2, Cycle 8.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
- 4. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The 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 effluents 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 the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (60 FR 20523).
Accordingly, the 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 the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission 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) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
S.
Wu Date:
September i3, i995