ML18086B305
| ML18086B305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1982 |
| From: | Uderitz R Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18086B306 | List: |
| References | |
| LCR-81-22, NUDOCS 8202160706 | |
| Download: ML18086B305 (4) | |
Text
...... ' '
Public Service Electric and Gas Company Richard A. Uderitz 80 Park Plaza, Newark, NJ 07101 2q1-430-7380 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 570, Newark, NJ 07101 Vice President Nuclear February 8, 1982 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Attention:
Mr. Steven Varga, Chief Operations Reactors Branch #1 Division of Licensing Gentlemen:
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-75 UNIT NO. 2 SALEM GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-311 Ref. LCR 81-22 In accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended and the regulations thereunder, we hereby transmit copies of our request for amendment of the Facility Operating License DPR-75 for Salem Generating Station, Unit No. 2.
This request consists of proposed changes to the Safety Technical Specifications (Appendix A) involving the Power Distribution Limits sedtion.
These exact changes were incorporated in the Salem Unit No. 1 license as part of Amendment 30.
These changes involve a single safety issue and are involve a significant safety hazards consideration.
is determined to be a Class III amendment as defined and a check for the amount of $4,000 is enclosed.
deemed not to Therefore, it by 10CFR170.22 This submittal includes three (3) signed originals and forty (40) copies.
E!i.. 8202160706 820208 PDR ADOCK 05000311 P'
PDR Very truly yours,
,e.C::::~
A
\\O.....,~+.. **"
o
"1 \\ ~ ~'
\\'
Ref. LCR 81-22 STATE OF NEW JERSEYl
)
SS:
COUNTY OF ESSEX
}
RICHARD A. UDERITZ, being duly sworn according to law deposes and says:
I am a Vice President of Public Service Electric and Gas Company, and as such, I signed the request for change to FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-75.
The matters set forth in said change request are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this.,£-f::1l_;
I PROPOSED CHANGE AXIAL FLUX DIFFERENCE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION SALEM UNIT NO. 2 Description of Change Change the axial flux difference target band to +6, -9% about the target flux difference.
Reason for Change Increased flexibility for operating the unit under Constant Axial Offset Control (CAOC), especially during power change maneuvers.
Safety Evaluation An analysis of total peaking factor versus core height for normal plant operation has been performed for Salem Unit 2 cycle 1.
The bases for the analyses included CAOC with +6,
-9%~I control band and that the limit on Fxy at fractional thermal power was modified to include a muitiplier change from 0.2 to 0.3.
The power peaking calulations were performed using the 18 case analysis discussed in the "Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation Methodolgy", WCAP9273, and documented in a Westinghouse letter from C. Eicheldinger to D. B. Vassallo of the NRC (NS-CE-687 dated July 16, 1975).
NRC approval to use the 18 case analysis for A I bandwidening was given in a letter from D. B. Vassallo to C.
Eicheldinger, dated April 15, 1976.
The results of these cal-culations are shown in figure 1.
It can be seen that F x Power xy satisfied the generic FAC boundry with the +6, -9%.6..I target band and the revised multiplier on the F limit at fractional xy thermal power.
Therefore, the peaking factor and DNBR criteria are met with margin for the +6, -9%41 band and revised F limit xy at fractional thermal power.
s...
Q)
~
0 Q..
Z.60 Z.ZD
-.._r IJ w
~
~ " -..
I' I
l.80 l.00 0.0 KEY FAC Eour.dlry Limit 1
Calculated values I -
A t~
FIGURE 1 Salem Unit 2 Cycle l Mode A Only (18 Case FAC Analysis) l
-- r---.
r.1 ;11 x
~ 'V A ~
j
- A t
'If 1
I HEIGHT (FT)
""""' -- --r--.
- """oo 11'" -
I I
A... I j
j
~
A y
J w
8.0 le.O