ML17321A699
| ML17321A699 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1985 |
| From: | Alexich M INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| AEP:NRC:0940, AEP:NRC:940, NUDOCS 8507020534 | |
| Download: ML17321A699 (6) | |
Text
gE I
REGULATOR+INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION TEN (RIBS)
ACCESSION NBR:8507020530 DOC ~ DATE ~ 85/06/27 NOTARI'ZED; NO DOCKEiT FACIL:50-315 Donald C,
Cook Nuclear Power PlantE Unit lE Indiana-8 05000315 AUTH BYNAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION ALEXICHEM~ P, Indiana tl Michigan Electric Co, RECIP ~ NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DENTONEH.RB Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulationz Director
SUBJECT:
Concludes that1al 1 fuel which wil l be placed in feei'lity for Cycle 9 operation in compliance w/10CFR50
~ 06<based on LOCA/ECCS analysis of Exxon Nuclear fueliper 850521 telcons DISTRIBUTION CODE:
AOOID COPIES RECEIVED:LTR
/ENCL ~ SIIE:
TITLE:
OR Submittal:
General Distribution NOTES:
OL+ 10/25/70 05000315 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME NRR ORB1 BC 01 INTERNALe ACRS 09.
ELD/HDS3 NRR/DL DIR NRR/DL/TSRG NRR/DSI/RAG RGN3 COPIES LTTR ENCL RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME ADM/LFMB NRR/DE/MTEB NRR/DL/ORAB NR D I'/METB EG 00 COPIES LTTR ENCL EXTERNAL'4X LPDR NSIC 03 05.
EG8G BRUSKEiS NRC PDR'2 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIREDTTR 28 ENCL 2
'll g<<<<<u I<< lr<<(u n
~ <<ue.r
< ~':, f f r<<I l
I "I'I f
I'l f
Iul'<<<f )lllflf II
I f <fI
- I I'<<,
fu
'<<f I'l
~
~
I
~
il
'Iu< I y 0 f I
<<<<xx l I'l I f<<
.', f
<"I f
- Iry u,
I I
li I
I
~ f
~ 4'II1l <<
<<e m
~
fT i ~
'ufjaf ft glvu<I,,<<r
<<I*
~
~
dl,<<
~ ~
i u II
~ I
INDIANA8 MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY P.O. BOX 16631 COLUMBUS, OHIO 43216 June 27, 1985 AEP:NRC:0940 Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant Unit No.
1 Docket No. 50-315 License No. DPR-58 JUSTIFICATION FOR OPERATING COOK UNIT 1
HITH THE EXISTING LOCA/ECCS ANALYSIS'FOR EXXON FUEL Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Denton:
As a result of a telephone conversation with your staff on May 21, we have reviewed the LOCA/ECCS analysis for Exxon Nuclear fuel which will be placed in D.C.
Cook Plant Unit 1 for Cycle 9 operation.
Our review was based on the information provided by Exxon Nuclear Company (ENC)
, along with the LOCA/ECCS analysis for Mestinghouse fuel.
Based on this review AEPSC has concluded that there is a reasonable assurance that all the fuel in the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 1 is in compliance with the criteria of 10 CFR 50.46.
The information supplied by Exxon Nuclear Company provided comparisons of peak cladding temperature for different fuel types.
AEPSC has reviewed the description of the difference analysis of ENC and Hestinghouse fuel types.
This analysis was submitted to the NRC by ENC with a letter (No. JCC:067:85) to C.O.
Thomas from J.C.
Chandler dated April 4, 1985.
The 01estinghouse fuel used in this study is similar to that used in D.C.
Cook Unit 1 plant.
- However, the fillgas pressure in the D.C.
Cook Unit 1 fuel is somewhat lower than the pressure in the fuel examined in the study.
Exxon Nuclear Company has reviewed the sensitivity to the filling gas pressure and has concluded that this difference will not significantly affect the comparison.
This study indicates that the ENC fuel operates with a peak cladding temperature (PCT) similar to th'e >lestinghouse fuel design.
Allowing for uncertainty, AEPSC considers that it is reasonable to assume that the change in peak cladding temperature resulting from fuel type differences will be within + 50 F.
AEPSC has reviewed the power distribution anticipated during the Cycle 9
operation and determined that the Exxon Nuclear fuel will operate at powers 20%
lower than the Hestinghouse fuel.
Assuming that the Hestinghouse fuel operates at its limiting F~ of 2.1, the corresponding Exxon F~ will be 1.68.
This
>>p7p2psse sspai7 PDR ADQCK pmpppSiS P
(
~ g
~
~
Mr. Harold R. Denton AEP:NRC:0940 difference in p more than compensates for the possiIIle 50 p difference 0
hatween fuel ty es.
Based on the assumption of a 10 P change in peak cladding temperature 1'r each 0.01 change in p, the Exxon fuel has an additional margin " 400 F above that of the Wektinghouse fuel.
Therefore, the revised Westinghouse analysis to be submitted in July, 1985 which has been performed in accordanoe with approved methodology and the Exxon comparative analysis provide reasonable assurance that the operation of the D.C.
Cook Unit 1 plant will be in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46.
Exxon. Nuclear is in the process of revising their LOCA/ECCS evaluation model.
When this revision is complete, AEPSC will be submitting confirmatory calculations of the LOCA response of the Exxon Nuclear fuel as a function of axial power shapes.
The expected submittal date is October 1,
1985.
This document has been prepared following Corporate procedures which incorporate a reasonable set of controls to insure its accuracy and completeness prior to signature by the undersigned.
Very truly yours, M.
. Ale oh
/
Vioe President
/bgs cc: John E. Dolan W.G. Smith, Jr. - Bridgman G. Bruchmann R.C. Callen R. Charnoff NRC Resident Inspector - Bridgman G.F. Owsley, ENC - Richland, Washington
~
'l Vt
~
~
~
~
~
~