ML19319B095
| ML19319B095 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 03/29/1973 |
| From: | Peltier I US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Deyoung R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001070647 | |
| Download: ML19319B095 (3) | |
Text
-
\\
MAR 2 9 rgt3 Docket.No. 50-269 R. C. DeYoung, Assistant Director for Pressurized Water Reactors, L A. Schwencer, Chief, Pressurized Water Reactors Br. No. 4 L THRU:
7U21 DENSIFICATION MEETING - MARCH 21, 1973 - OCONEE 1 - CERMAlff0WN
& BETHESDA I attended the technical meeting held by the Oconee 1 fuel densification review group with Duke and MW (an attendance list is enclosed). Most of the discussion centered around the power spika model, axial power shapes GAPCON and TAFY calculations.
Af ter the morning meeting the group split up into several smaller disciplines for more technical discussion so it was not possible to attend all sessions. However, there was morne non-technical discussion which I will note below.
B&W probably will revise its generic topical reports 1.
(BAW IG054 prop. and 10055 non-prop.) as a consequence of the staff's comunents but probably will respond to the staff's comunents on the Oconee reports (BAW 1381 prop. and 1388 non-prop.)
by supplement to the FSAR. MW plans to accomplish this by April 13, 1973 in time for the staff to complete its Oconee 1 review by May 1,1973.
The dilema regarding fuel densification review based on 2.
one or more fuel cycles depending on the results of clad collapse analysis still exists. The question appears to be "How far out in time should MW seek approval of its clad collapse model for the lead plant, Oconce 17" Duke and MW were advised that tech specs would contain 3.
a fuel surveillance program regardless of the fuel collapse model which probably would consist of underwater inspection of 2 fuel assemblies out of each region of the core for each t
1
\\
8 6
4 jh e ) 9 % jn g
y
.g 25
-IQ *'
'3*% I $,'W
%g p
8001070[h[
J
d 4
MAR 2_9_1973 R. C.-DeYoung
-2 n :_ _.
fuel cycle. Ocones 1 has a surveillance program but it may require some changes.
B&W was mildly concerned abrut! tho position we have taken with
'~
4, regard to vent valve assumptions and SER = 1.3 for fuel damage assensment.
r 5.
Duke and B&W were concerned about our schedule which calls for all input from the applicant by May 1, 1973 for Units 2/3 in order to meet a July ACRS meeting. They were infomed that the purpose of the letter was to alert them to our schedule requirements and to solicite their reaction. The critical area is fuel densification.
1
. The best Duke can do is give us an interim report on fuel densification for Unit 2 which, if natisfactory, we can use as the basis for an c
interim position in our June 26,1973 SER supplement. They will t-provide this interim report by May 1,1973.
- 1. A. Peltier, Project Marvger Pressurised Water Reactors Br. No. 4 Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
1.
Attendance List DISTRIBUTION Docket File PWR-4 Rdg RP Rdg PWR Branch Chiefs RWKlecker IAPeltier (2)
ASchwencer
_ llSchierling Dross
-DKDavis i
?
JG);39 omet >
..fR.4.
...L.*.C]PWR-4 i
summe > IAPelti f..AS.chwencer
.out> 3/... 1$.....l7 3/._
/73 3
- wwq' Form AECats (Rev.9 33) AECM 0240 a.e
.es-se-assas-a e<s-e7s
p s
s h
ATTENDANCE LIST MARCH 21, 1973 k
Atomic Energy Commission DVSavis IAPeltier HESchierling DFRoss RLobel 11Richings Babcock & Wilco:t Company RNEdwards RVStraub SCuacfield RATurner JSTulenko JFScott JBAndrews SHDuerson LLLosh kTBrunson Duke Power Company JKortheuer TLCotton i
-