ML17321A295
| ML17321A295 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 11/06/1984 |
| From: | Wigginton D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8411280402 | |
| Download: ML17321A295 (3) | |
Text
Docket No. 50-316 November 6, 1984 LICENSEE: Indiana and Michigan Electric Company FACILITY:
Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit No.
2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 15, 1984, WITH INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY TO DISCUSS THE CYCLE 5 AND CYCLE 6 RELOAD ANALYSES The staff met with the licensee and the Exxon Nuclear Corporation in Bethesda to discuss the outstanding analyses for the Cycle 5 and 6 reloads.
Enclosure 1 is a list of attendees.
The licensee's presentation was made from the veiwgraphs attached as Enclosure 2.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the schedule of required submittals and content and activities for Cycle 5 and Cycle 6.
The Cycle 6 startup is currently scheduled for December 15, 1985; Generic Letter 84-20 would require the reload analysis be submittal by June 15, 1985.
The licensee's activities were proposed for a four month review period rather than the required six month period.
After some discussion, it was proposed that the August 1985 submittal would be a "final" and that a "partial" submittal would be made in July 1985.
In regards to the review of SLOTRAX, ENC will consider a November 30th submittal rather than February 15th so that the NRC might be able to complete the review in early 1985.
For Cycle 5, the licensee was also to perform a revised plant transients analysis using PTSPWR2 revised methodology.
The staff's SER for Cycle 5 is sufficient until Cycle 6 and the revised Cycle 5 transient analysis was not deemed necessary in view of the other improvements in schedules sought by the staff.
In regards to the ECCS analysis, the staff has under review the revised heat transfer correlations based on Exxon data.
This revision does not appear to be a problem at this time.
However, in the Cycle 5 analysis, the staff accepted the licensee review of the K sub Z curve on the basis of similarity of ENC to Westinghouse fuel.
As a result of the Robinson reload review, this K sub Z curve is now questionable for use for the full cycle.
In order to adequately explore the K sub Z question, the licensee committed to meet with the NRC on or about November 13, 1984.
This should provide ample time to resolve the issue or define a burnup dependent K sub Z for Cycle 5.
/s/DWhgginton 84i.f280402 84i<06 PDR ADOCK 050003i6 PDR
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosures:
See next e
, David L. Wigginton, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch ¹1 Division of Licensing ORB¹l: D DWigginton;ps 11/g/84
1 M
wr I(
kp "I
WR M
'k/II Ml 4 ht I
'r Ff I'
I>>
>>4 w,i "I h,lf i I 4
V I
fj
",.lh lr W
'I (1>>tt k)1'I I II )
I k I'
gr vt'j h
1 1 IMMW')tg 1l 1
'I
)
II.I
'>> "l
'('
4f F II (4 ~,
I,>> I" off w '
Pf hhi>>)f )
1 1
~ I )4) k ') 4'I hl $
'fk I I
'=.lI I
)kh ') i;"(II.'I
,i I, I, I I 't. lI ~
wit I vi) 1
, ")
'I"..
Whf+
+
lt i,t
-...1 1
<<1 I
I v
1 1
1 I
lk' 1
t kj;,. l F
k',
I
)I" *
~
WII 1
4 4
1-M w
I r
)
'1) I )
(v
)
kt I
I'
- v h
lf IM
'4, 14
<<f ),1 P',"
I rd I )
'>I)c r I' I
."II )
wi.v I8 1 jf
'\\'I(
I' FM>>>>* 1 4 F>> )>>'I WA I ',I
,'I
'Mhk, I
c
MEETIHG
SUMMARY
DISTRIBUTION
~
1 Docket or Centra File NRC PDR Local PRD ORB¹1 Rdg J. Partlow (Emergency Preparedness only)
Steve Varga Project Manager OELD E. Jordan J.
N. Grace ACRS (10)
HSIC Gray File Plant Service List CParrish NRC Partici ants