ML19260A089
| ML19260A089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1977 |
| From: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Arnold R METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910290710 | |
| Download: ML19260A089 (5) | |
Text
'
DISTRIBUTION:
l Docket /
NRC PDR March 23,1977 Local PDR ORB #4 Rdg.
VStello KRGoller TJCarter Docket No.: 50-289 Attorney, OELD OI&E (3)
RWReid GZwetzig RIngram Metropolitan Edison Company DEisenhut ATTN: Mr. R. C. Arnold TBAbernathy i
Vice President - Generation JRBuchanan P. O. Box 542 Gray File Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 ACRS(16)
Gentlemen:
I By letter dated Jaanary 26, 1977, you requested amendment of Appendix A to Facility Operating License DPR-50 for Three Mile Island Unit No.1 to permit operation following refueling for Cycle 3.
Based on our i
review of your request to date we find we need additional infomation in order to complete our review. The specific informationnneeded is l
listed in the enclosure.
i l
In order that we may continue our review on a schedule consistent with your projected restart date, you are requested to submit the requested j
information by March 30, 1977.
I Sincerely, i
Or%- r -,,,,, g,,
Robert W. Reid, Chief arating Reactors Branch #4 l
0 tision of Operating Reactors I
Enclosure:
1 Request for Additional Information 1
j cc w/ enclosure:
See next page j47g g;
V orrice > _ _0,R_B_
j[0Rl l
$URNAME >
___,_,_____4_________
3/')3/ 77 3/23/77 o,7,,
NRC Form 318 (2-76) NRCM 02040 c u.s. co v E stNMEN T A RIN TIN G O F FIC E: 19 76 =6 3 4
- 76 2 7910290 7/ O
Metropolitan Edison Company cc:
G. F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts, & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 GPU Service -Corporation Richard W. Heward, Project Manager Thomas.M. Crimmins, Jr., Safety and Licensing Manager 260 Cherry Hill Road Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Pennsylvania Electric Company Mr. R. W. Conrad Vice President, Generation 1001 Broad Street Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15907 Mr. Weldon B. Arehart, Chaiman Board of Supervisors of Londonderry Township RFD #1, Geyers Church Road Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Miss Mary V. Southard, Chaiman Citizens for a Safe Environment P. O. Box 405 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 Government Publications Section State Library of Pennsylvania Box 1601 (Education Building)
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17126 1479 292
/
THREE MILE ISLAND U.':IT 1 CYCLE 3 RELOAD APPLICATION REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
~
1.
Provide a low and high power XY power map for BOC2.
Both measured and predicted assembly powers should be tabulated.
2.
Provide tabulated values for the outputs of any quarter-core symetric detector strings (i.e. summed axially but not converted to assembly power) er : responding to the two incore maps mentioned above.
3.
Provide a numerical estimate of the uncertainty in the burnup figures given in Fig. 3-2.
4.
Provide the measured and predicted B0C2 rod bank worths, by bank.
5.
What is the maximum credible worth of an ejected APSR for cycle 3?
6.
Provide BOC2 measured values for critical boron concentration end moderator temperature coefficient.
State the power and Xenon condi-tions under which each measurement was taken.
7.
Table 5-2 gives HZP values for the total rod worth at BOC3 and EOC3.
Provide analogous worths for the individual rod banks which total to the values given in Table 5-2.
8.
How do.es this reactor overcome the reactivity addition due to Xenon undershoot following shutdown? Does the scram system initiate boron injection?
9.
Several of the accident discussions in Section 7 take credit for the non-positive moderator temperature coefficient. This is appropriate, since the calculated MTC for Cycle 3 is negative and thus bounded by the FSAR analyses. However, Technical Specification'3.1.7 allows operation with no restrictions on the moderator temperature coefficient at less than 95% power. Some accidents and transients (e.g. ejected rod) are not nacessarily most limiting at 100% power. Therefore, explain how the non-positive moderator temperature coefficient is enforced.
10.
Provide an analysis of operation with a mis-loaded fuel assembly.
If such operation cannot be safely accomodated, would the incore system detect the flux anomaly?
1479
?9T
. 11. How many control rod group worths will be measured in the startup program detailed on p. 9-17 What criteria will be used to evaluate the results?
- 12. State how many zero power moderator temperature measurements are scheduled for the cycle 3 startup program.
State the planned rod configuration for each test.
- 13. State your schedule for submitting to NRC a brief sumary report of
~
physics startup tests. This report shou 1d include both measured and predicted values.
If the difference between measured and predicted values exceeds the acceptance criterion, the report should discuss the actions taken and justify the adequacy of these actions.
- 14. The LOCA analysis described in Section 7.14 refers to BAW 10103.
It is the understanding of the staff that the B&W generic ECCS model was revised to eliminate return to nucleate boiling, as described in BAW 10104A Rev.1.
Provide or reference a new analysis using the currantly approved model, as requested in our letter of December 14, 1976.
- 15. The revision to Technical Specification 1.6.1 eliminates a statement concerning the minimum permissible number of operable excore detectors.
How many excore detectors are needed for the bases of Technical Specification 3.5.2.4c to remain valid?
- 16. Revised Technical Specification 3.5.2.7 states that power maps shall be taken every 30 full power days.
Is it the intant that "30 full power days" will mean "up to 30 effective full power days?" As it stands, this specification would not require a power map to be taken until exactly 30 calendar days of continuous operation at exactly 100% power had passed.
- 17. The proposed revision to Technical Specification 3.5.2.7 requires appropriately that an incore-measured peak linear heat rate (Kw/ft) be periodically compared with the LOCA limits of Fig. 3.5-2J.
1479 294
.. - However, the revision also eliminates the requirement to compare measured with expected power distributions.
Is it the intent not to verify predicted power distributions? If not, how would geometrical changes within the core be detected?
- 18. How is FaH monitored in this reactor?
- 19. Other B&W plants are required to measure power distribution prior to operation above 75% rated thermal power and periodically thereafter. The proposed Technical Specification would allow a month of operation before the first power map is done.
Provide justification for the discrepancy.
- 20. The bases or Technical Specification pp. 3-35 and 3-35a explain that operation in the restricted region of the following figures is permitted for up to four hours. Yet this restriction is not enforced in an actual specification.
Explain how the four hour time limit is enforced.
21.
It is not clear what the value of the power level cutoff is in revised figures 3.5-2 A, B, & C.
What is the numerical value of the power level cutoff?
6 6
e k
1479 795