ML19343A510
| ML19343A510 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1963 |
| From: | Bryan R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343A509 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011140423 | |
| Download: ML19343A510 (2) | |
Text
(
O UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COSNISSION
!!AZARDS ANALYSIS BY THE RE3EARC'l AND POWER REACTOR SAFETY BPANOi DIVISION OF LICENSING AND REGULATION IN THE MATTER OF.
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CC'fPANY PROPOSED OIANCE NO. 45 DOCKET NO. 50-29 Introduction Pursuant to the provisions of Section 50.59 of the Commission's
~
~,
regulations, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, by Proposed Change No. 45,
~
dated September 4,1963, requested authorization of a revision in the
,,, a Technical Specifications attached as Appendix A to License No. DPR-3.
W= 7-:
The Proposed Change would authorize the insertion of stainless steel c, =5 spacer tubes in the channels provided in the reactor fuel assemblies E
for the in-core instrumentation flux wire thimbles.
Discussion Each fuel assembly has one fuel rod omitted in order to form a channel for the insertion of a flux wire thimble.
Ferrules are provided along the length of this channel to guide the thimbles and tc limit lateul movement when the thimbles are in place.
During the first refueling operation, examination of the thimbles disclosed wear on their outer surfaces, apparently caused by flow-induced vibration.
In order to eliminate such wear during future operation, Yankee pro-poses ' to insert stainless steel spacer tubes in the flux wire chan-ncis. These tubes would be positioned between the ferrules and the in-core flux wire thimbles, thereby providing a continuous lateral support cnd bearing surface for the thimbles in order to prevent fur-ther loss of. material from the external surfaces of'the dimbles.
g h'c believe that the proposed installation of the stainle.ss steel spacer tubes will not interfere with the proper functioning of the react or.
Further, the presence of the spacer tubes should contribute to the safety of operation by increasing the probability that the flux wire thinbles will not fail during operation.
Conclusion In view of the above, we have concluded that Proposed Change h
No. 45 does not present significant; hazards considerations not y
a 8011140 D
2-described or irzplicit in the ha:ards su==ary report, and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.
0:1&31 UECO tyh:tertHe D73 Robert 11. Brvan, Chief Research 6 l'ower Reactor Safety Branch Division of Licensing 6 Regulation D^*
S E *: 2 7 1963 e
e
. = a em + eesCe o