ML19263B236

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Informs of FSAR Review & Plans Re Cycle 2 Reload Core.Finds No Unreviewed Safety Questions Are Involved & Amend to License Is Not Required.Verification of Reload Core Design Will Be Per Standard Physics Tests for PWR Reload Cycles
ML19263B236
Person / Time
Site: Farley Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 01/08/1979
From: Clayton F
ALABAMA POWER CO.
To: Schwencer A
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7901150060
Download: ML19263B236 (2)


Text

.

, AWwa N<we Corm o y cm m me. a

  • hest 0"Le iku 2f41 B? :q sm A;atw..> a%31

. hphor e M5 r3 531i L

F. L CLAYTON. JR.

,emw. < e r : y MilbillTlil POWCT ff M T ' NJ E & ' 0 V 'W N f fl( y 9_')$ ?]

January 8, 1979 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Attn: Mr. A. Schwencer

Dear Mr. Schwencer:

J. M. FARLEY UNIT 1 CYCLE 2 RELOAD NRC DOCKET No. 50-348 Farley Unit 1 is currently in its first cycle of operation with a refueling outage scheduled to commence near the end of February, 1979.

Cycle 1 operation will be terminated within a cycle burnup range of 14,600 to 15,600 MND/MTU. This letter is to advise you of Alabama Power Company's review of and plans regarding the Farley Unit 1, Cycle 2 reload core.

The Farley Unit 1, Cycle 2 reload core was designed to perform under current nominal design paraueters, Technical Specifications and related bases, and current setpoints. A total of fifty (50) region 4 assemblies and two (2) region 4A assemblies will be inserted at the refueling outage.

The region 4 fuel assemblies' mechanical, nuclear and thermal hydraulic desis;n is identical to the region 3 assemblies currently operating in Cycle

1. The region 4A assemblies are special test assemblies of a new Westing-house design as described in the Westinghouse report entitled " Optimized Fuel Assembly Demonstration Program," (WCAP-9286) July, 1978. This new design involves several minor design changes, principally the reduction in fuel rod diameter and the incorporation of Zircalloy spacer grids for all but the top and bottom grid locations. The reload core design places these test assemblics into core locations that prevent them from becoming lead assemblies during normal operation or leading to more limiting conditions during transient conditions than analyzed for the standard design fuel assemblics.

Alabama Power Company performed a detailed review of the Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation Report (RSER) for Farley Unit 1, Cycle 2, including all postulated incidents considered in the FSAR and the fuel densification report. The RSER included a review of the core characteristics to determine those parameters affecting the postulated accident analyses reported in the Farley FSAR. The incidents whose consequences could potentially be affected by the reload core characteristics were reanalyzed. Alabama power Company verified that the reanalyses were performed in accordance with the Westing-house reload safety evaluation methodology as outlined in the March, 1978, Westinghouse topical report entitled " Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation D\

90 7901150060 p

d Mr. A. Schwencer. .

Page Two January 8,1979 Methodology" (WCAP-9272). The results of these reanalyses were verified to be within previously reviewed and accepted limits. Additionally, Alabama Power has verified that the Cycle 2 design precludes the two special test assemblies from becoming more limiting than the standard design assem-blies during both normal operation and transient conditions.

The reload safety evaluation demonstrated that Technical Specification changes are not required for operation of Farley Unit 1 during Cycle 2.

Alabama Power Company's Plant Operations Review Committee and Nuclear Opera-tions Review Board have concluded that nct unreviewed safety questions defined by 10 CFR 50.59 are involved with this reload. Therefore, based on this review, application for amendment to the Farley Unit 1 operating license is not required.

Verification of the reload core design will be performed per the standard startup physics tests normally performed for Uestinghouse PWR reload cycles.

These tests will include, but not be limited to:

(1) Control rod drive tests ai d drop time; (2) Critical boron concentration measurements; (3) Control rod bank worth measurement; (4) Moderator temperature coefficient measurement; (5) Power coefficient measurement; and (6) Startup power distribution measurements using the incore fjux mapping system.

Results of these tests will be reported to the NRC as a Startup Test Report submitted within ninety (90) days of startup of Cycle 2.

Yours very truly, 42 o Jr.

(7'L.Clayton,h FLCJr/THE:bh]

cc: Mr. R. A. Thomas Mr. G. F. Trowbridge