ML19316A498
| ML19316A498 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 06/20/1975 |
| From: | Stello V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Goller K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912300004 | |
| Download: ML19316A498 (3) | |
Text
-
s Wl
)
W aug 2 0 i
i K. Goller, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors, RL REVISION TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION, OCONEF NUCLEAR STATION (TAR-1631)
Plant Name:
ee clear station, Units 1, 2.' 3 Docket Numbers:
50-269, 0-270 and 50-287 i
l t
Responsible Branch RB-l and Project Manager:
C. M. Tramel
~
Technical Review Branch Involved:
Core Performance Branch - Physics Section Review Status:
Complete i
Duke Power Company has proposed to change the Technical Specifications for Units 2 and 3 of the Oconee Nuclear Station in order to assure that the md insertion limits are consistent with the requirement that the potential ejected rod worth be less than 1.0% k/k at HIP. The Physics i
Section of the Core Performance Branch has reviewed the pmposed changes in the Technical Specifications. On the basis of our review, which is enclosed, we find the proposed changes to be acceptable.
i l
1 Victor Stello, Jr., Assistant Director i
for Reactor Safety Division of Technical Review i
l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j
i
)
Enclosure:
i As Stated'
)
cc:. S. Hanauer j
A. Giambusso Distribution:
F. Schroeder Docket Files l
R. Purple CPB Reading C. Tramel NRR Reading i
i D. F. Ross P. Fling P. Check V. Stello W. Brooks i
./
M
_CPB:TR MCPBhTR Ch)
C/R
.,,,c.
., Bro.oks:sd PCheck DR $
VS f
l W
.v.....
_.6/,3/.75 _,_
6/jl/75 6
5 6/M75 L
<1 oar = 0-
}
Perus ABC 318 (Rev. 9 53) ABOf 9240 W v. s. novenmasswv Paturene orricas sers.sae see 3912300CDy g
O
/~,*
e
(
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGTON. D.
C. 20555 jg 2 g $7$
K. Goller, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors, RL REVISION TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION, OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION (TAR-1631)
Plant Name:
Oconee Nuclear station, Units 1, 2, 3 Docket Numbers:
50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 Responsible Branch ORB-1 and Project Manager:
C. M. Tramel Technical Review Branch Involved:
Core Performance Branch - Physics Section Review Status:
Complete Duke Power Company has proposed to change the Technical Specifications for Units 2 and 3 of the Oconee Nuclear Station in order to assure that the rod insertion limits are consistent with the requirement that the potential ejected rod worth be less than 1.0% ak/k at HZP.
The Physics Section of the Core Performance Branch has reviewed the proposed changes in the Technical Specifications. On the basis of our review, which is enclosed, we find the proposed changes to be acceptable.
N(f,%
Victo tel'Io, Jr., Assis ant Director for Reactor Safety Division of Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
j As Stated i
cc:
S. Hanauer A. Giambusso F. Schroeder R. Purple C. Tramel D. F. Ross P. Check W. Brooks 1
'#rs.W1*
o wh
=
Review of Proposed Technical Specification Changes Historically, for B&W reactors, rod insertion limits have been derived on the basis of the LOCA - limited power peaking criterion.
Shutdown marnin and potential ejected rod worth values have been addressed
.n separate Technical Specifications.
However, utilities having operating B&W reactors have been requested (Letter, Goller to Utilities March 31, 1975) to evaluate the ejected rod worth following the next rod interchange and, if necessary, to change the rod withdrawal limit specification to reflect any restrictions required by this evaluation.
Duke Power Company has complied with the request and has submitted (Letter, Thies to Giambusso dated May 9,1975) proposed Technical Specification changes for Oconee i
Units 2 and 3.
The evaluation showed that no change in withdrawal limits was necessary for Unit 1.
The Physics Section of the Core Performance Branch har reviewed the proposed changes in the Technical Specifications. The revised rod in-4 sertion limits for Units 2 and 3 are established so that the potential ejected rod worth is less than 1% AK/K (including calculational uncer-tainties) at zero power and is reduced linearly as power increases to a value of 0.65% AK/K at fo'.~. power. We find the proposed insertion limits to be acceptable.
a
o, t--
The separate requirement for a potential ejected rod worth has been included in the rod insertion limit Spec'fication. This Speci-fication grants a two-hour exception (relief) which will now apply both to the LOCA - limited power distributions and to the potent lal ejected rod worth. The exception is allowed for the LOCA limit in view of the exceedingly low probability that a LOCA would occur during a given 2-hr.
]
period and the fact that a deliberate (careful) return to the normal insertion limi.ts provides less occasion for further operating error or system malfunction than would alternative responses (e.g., shutdown and startup). The same argument holds for the potential ejected rod worth.
1 Therefore, we find the two-hour exc ption to be acceptable.
j e
l i
i 4
l l
?
I l
4 c_,
e
.w_-_
-