ML19210A400
| ML19210A400 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/05/1976 |
| From: | Arnold R METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. |
| To: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| GQL-0821, GQL-821, NUDOCS 7910290624 | |
| Download: ML19210A400 (4) | |
Text
i:n.c r ;n.a 1%
v.c. nucu no not.w i v o. w.w. m.'c,ccctir.,.....
50-289
,,.ic' NRC DISTRIBUTION.
PART 50 DOCKET f.* ATERI AL To.
r act.t o4 rc cr cocur.itNT Metropolitan Edison Company 6/5/76 l
Mr. R. W. Reid Reading, Pa.
oATE ntecivt o i
R. C. Arnold 6/9/76 Mcuta OnoTom:co ence mevT r on.i nue.tutn or conic a u ct., -
i MUNC L A;;in c o
[.. jiifo ru c 6N ^ L One Typed Signed Cccry t octocu o r.
lccscmeTicN i Ltr. re conversations on 6/4/76* between their Mr. Grace & our Mr. Nelson concerning improper incorporation of fuel densification penalties into both their TNI-1 cycle 2 reload report &
the resultant TMI-1 tech Spec.
~
p A f' }) j]'$;Y {h j g h j\\_ b.1.9 U't h n
(3-P)
Plant Name:
a,.
LV-'--
Three Mile Island #1 F OR ACTIO:Ul:J F O R:.' Ai lG
6/16/76 RJL l
~
I ASSIy_ RED AP-
]
A.1 3 : ': D A N f
ERA.':Cli Cr '.'-
Reid (6)
I
_ 31.
'7 C:i:-~F-4 --
- FRO.. u.,...u.-2 :
FE02'" "l '. A" 7,3-
. h LIC. A'3T.:
1 Ingram LIC. /.30'.:
l INTE RN AL DIST Rii'Ul:0.'l
~~~
[R!53 :"'ILE 3 SYCT.F.i 'L' -ZTY l FIA' L tcTr:3 '
I t-"
pa
- c. -
i
- n. m, r2a HE "-";::
l r ---
n n.x-.~,.,.
=
I f.: E
[M CCIT.Ovr ~
'"~" T&iA r.'. 7,' ?. : "
OEL" r f. -- a. q e-,.--.--
GOSIJCK '. ST.U-'
rEoT':c, pp-)L:70 E", ~.I "_ n i
a '
r,..
I
- 1 L
- .v.~
w om". nn EEt.C os c;_ 7 LL i
cs rrr M -:a sT 2Lo I
ca p i
-_nr.-
En u _ip' r,a PA'..Lic c l
m-r.
L i
orst,T ": Tsce i
i_ _p.w3 r ~p.....f.m..---
i
- n. :.f.~7.e n e a rrv.-
IXi T.r..g,r, m.
.m...
- 9..ry v. :. --
~
u--.
_! _.w n soca i i ese,o vn.
- cu L
r cort. s
- avAs i
=f.ca
.c a.... _, ~.
.e
.a.-
i
.p.
u m.
L_ _n,,..,<~.,,
.m c
i pp--- n en" C U.. ~.".. '.
n i ' ".1 C.
T' J
bl s
.. e :.. -., mi i
~
v c.
qir r
~g cr. *.-
- ""~
b l~
[
l,'l
'l l ~
l r
--.y AM*
- 7' g.
I i
i 4 l EXTE rl:: it. '12..:!N ilC.
CNZ..
i 1.FO: Harrisburg, pa.
! Y. ' i. 's I
' ~'~~~"~I
~ "'
.o
.! t,. m- - - --
, - 'P r c',
I dLa '
d.'
P.s.
pr/ /
...re G CD Q u.',..
t a
i
._ { f3Yb.1_.__ 6 _.M } @4rfMF1 N.
__ i _
.i i
/
../..
Eh c r oc.
R,*,*n
/
ruwon sco roocess
/
l METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY surme:mesvem m-I'nunc ccu m ncv f
p E
POST OFFICE box 542 READING, PENNSYLVANIA 19603 TELEPHONE 215 - 929-3601 x_
June 5, 1976 ~
GQ,L 0821 J,,
. {l>,
^
Li av y
'cr
,y. /
W u:.~
i
'*$o t.x i
C Director of Nuclear Reacter Regulation Y
Attn: Mr. R. W. Reid, Chief 6s
"'e Cperating Reacters Branch No. h D'/'
gg/
U. S. Nuclear Regulatery Cen=issien f-Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Sir:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1 (TMI-1)
Docket No. 50-289 Operating License No. DPR-50 On June k, 1976, ccnversatiens were conducted between our Mr. D. Grace and your Mr. C. Nelson concerning improper incorporation of fuel densifi-cation penalties into both our TMI-l Cycle 2 Reload Report and the resultant TMI-1 Technical Specifications.
In those conversations we stated that we are confident that we vill be able to shev that the effect of improperly incorporating the fac1 densification penalties could be more than conpensated for by cur taking credit for elimination of a currently assuned vent valve penalty (eliminating this penalty veuld have the effect of increasing the analysis assumed flov through the reactor by h.8).
Further, it was noted that the Nuclear Regulatory Cc==ission (NRC), in a March 10, 1976 letter, states that the B&W report,"3&W Operating Experience of Reactor Internals Vent Valves," had been reviewed; that sufficient evidence had been presented to assure that the vent valves vill re=ain closed during normal operation; and that the flow penalty could be eliminated frc= the analyses at the requect of the affected utilitie:.
With the preceding discussion serving as background, the purpose of this letter is to (a) provide further discussion of why we are ecnfident that elimination of the vent valve penalty vill =cre than compensate for the effects of not having properly incorporated the fuel densification penalties, a.d (b) outline the corrective actions we intend to take to obtain final resolution of this issue.
1469 142 Discussion Proper incorporation of fuel densificaticn penalties vould affect two areas of the current TMI-1 Technical Specifications: the variable low pressure trip set point, and the flux /flev trip set point. Fa: tracts of a report frc=
%_ q u
( '- Q l
J
NiC - Mr. R. W. Reid 2
GQL 0821 our NSSS vandor concerning these two subject areas follows:
1.
Variable low pressure trip set point for Cycle 2 operation is based on the four pump open vent valve pressure-tenperature limit curve presented in figure 8.3 of the Reload Report.
The correspending li=it curve, based on closed vent valves and incorporating the revised densificaticn penalty, vill be approximately 30F less restrictive (=aximum allevable To vill be 30F higher at a given pressure). Thus, no tech spec trip change is required when the vent valve penalty is eliminated.
2.
The flux / flow trip set point for Cycle 2 (1.08) is based on the one pu=p coastdown analysis. When the revised densifica-tion penalty is incorporated and the vent valve penalty is eliminated, the ther=al-hydraulie limiting flux /flov set point is greater than 1.12 (this limit must be at least 1.11 to justify the tech spec set point of 1.08).
It can also be shown that a T-H limit of 1.11 on the flux /flev set point can be justified by taking credit for one-half of the vent valve penalty.
Corrective Actions It should first be noted that we have determined this issue to constitute a 1k-day reportable event pursuant to the requirements of TMI-1 Technical i
Specification 6.9.2A.(8); that a verbal 24-hour notification has been ec==unicated to the Nuclear Regulatory Cr.ission Inspection and Enforce-
=ent Region 1 office (telecopy confirmation to follow); and that further details vill be provided in the final 14-day report. With regard to the affected areas of the TMI-l Technical Specifications (i.e., figures 2.1-1 and 2.1-3), please be advised that :
a.
Surveillance of the reactor vent valves was conducted during the recently ec=pleted refueling outage, and the results indicate that the valves do indeed re=ain shut during cperatien, b.
We anticipate being able to submit by July 7, 1976,* a TMI-1 Technical Specification Change Request, which request--when implemented--vill:
1.
Incorporate into our Technical Specifications the mutually offsettinc effects of proper incorporation of fuel densifica-tion penalties, and elimination of the vent valve penalty (ve anticipate that this vill result in less restrictive operating limits than these presently existing), and
- NOTE: We expect to have ec=plete documentation available for the required safety con =ittee reviews by June 2h,1976, and anticipate bein6 able to schedule and cc=plete these reviews in ti=e for an orderly July 7, 1976, submittal to the NRC.
1469 I43
55C - Mr. R. W. Reid 3
GQL 0821 2.
Include surveillance requirements for the vent valves in accordance with previous NRC guidance, and c.
Until NRC issuance of the subject Technical Specification Change Request, we vill continue to operate within the present Technical Specification operating litits, which limits we have reason to believe are = ore restrictive than those referenced in (b) above.
With this submittal, we trust that we have served to adequately document the status of the subject situation and the corrective actions that we intend to nursue.
Should you, however, have any additional questions or concerns, please contact me.
Sincerely,
.:kgua - M C *:v R. C. Arnold Vice President RCA:DNG:eg r*: Mr. C. Nelson Nuclear Regulatory Commission
}kb9 i
6 s