ML19354D843
| ML19354D843 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 01/16/1990 |
| From: | Frizzle C Maine Yankee |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19354D844 | List: |
| References | |
| CDF-90-05, CDF-90-5, MN-90-03, MN-90-3, NUDOCS 9001220254 | |
| Download: ML19354D843 (6) | |
Text
-
e L
MaineVankee atuAlst tLtcia cny aon uAiNt 9Nct ie72 EDISON DRIVE e AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333.(207) 622 4868 10 CFR 50.90 January 16, 1990 MN-90-03 CDF-90-05 Proposed Change 152 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Attn:
Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555
Reference:
(a)
License No. DPR-36 (Docket No. 50-309)
Subject:
Proposed Change 152 - Cycle 12 Technica1 Specifications 5
Gentlemen:
Maine Yankee's twelfth operating cycle is expected to begin as early as June 2,
- 1990, in support of Cycle 12 operation, the following documentation is being submitted for your review and approval.
Attachment A: Description of Proposed Changes and Significant Hazards Evaluation for Cycle 12 Attachment B:
Summary Description of Cycle 12 Technical Specification Changes Attachment C:
Proposed Cycle 12 Technical Specification Changes
'In accordance with 10 CFR 50.90, Maine Yankee proposes several changes to Technical Specifications which reflect the operating parameters for Cycle 12. These changes are as follows:-
Replace Page 2.1-1 of Specification 2.1 with the enclosed revised page.
Replace the Figures on Pages 2.1-4 and 2.1-5 with the enclosed revised pages.
h CDF9005.LTR
/
9001220254 900116 ADOCK0500g9
/
(}
MaineYankee United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page two Attention: Document Control Desk MN-90-03 Replace Page 2.2-1 of Specification 2.2 with the enclosed revised page.
Replace the Pages 3.10-1 through 3.10-5 and Page 3.10-7 and the Figures on Pages 3.10-12, 3.10-13, 3.10-15, and 3.10-19 of Specification 3.10 with the enclosed revised pages.
A table which summarizes the changes is provided in Attachment B.
The Cycle 12 Core Performance Analysis Report is also attached (Attachment D) for your information'. This report presents the core design and the results of the design analysis for Cycle 12.
These include core fuel loading, fuel description, reactor power distributions, control rod worths, reactivity coefficients, the results of the safety analyses performed to define and justify plant operational limits, and the Reactor Protective System (RPS) setpoints assumed in the safety analysis. The startup test program for Cycle 12 is also described in the report.
The analysis results, in conjunction with the startup test results, RPS setpoints and Technical Specifications, serve as a basis for ensuring safe operation of Maine Yankee during Cycle 12.
Maine Yankee has evaluated the proposed changes and has determined that they do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Therefore, these proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration as defined in 10 CFR 50.92.
The evaluation is included in Attachment A. The proposed change has been reviewed by the Plant Operations and Review Committee and the Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Committee.
The Plant Operations and Review Committee has concluded that the proposed Technical Specification changes do not constitute an unreviewed safety question.
CDF9005.LTR
n MaineYankee n
t L
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page three Attention:
Document Control Desk MN-90-03 I
[
A State of Maine representative is being notified of this proposed change by a copy of this letter.
Very truly yours, s,l Charles D. Frizzle President CDr:SJJ
Attachment:
A.
Description of Proposed Changes and Significant Hazards Evaluation B.
Summary of Cycle 12 Technical Specification Changes C.
Proposed Cycle 12 Technical Specifications D.
Cycle 12 Core Performance Analysis Report c:
Mr. William T. Russell Mr. Cornelius F. Holden Mr. Eric J. Leeds
'Mr. Clough Toppan
. STATE OF MAINE Then personally appeared before me, Charles D. Frizzle, who being duly sworn did state the he is President of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, that he is duly authorized to execute and file the foregoing request in the name and on behalf of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, and that the statements therein are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.
W/
bb Notary Public comn E.PicHots
$ff Yb ?Y % 'tn'
, ; y ~.
CDF9005.LTR IP
ATTACHMENT A Significant Hazards Evaluation CDF9005.LTR
r Description of Proposed Chance The proposed changes provided in Attachment C would modify the Technical Specifications to reflect the operating limits for the Cycle 12 reload core.
Sionificant Hazards Evaluation The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications for the Cycle 12 operation of the Maine Yankee plant have been evaluated against the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and have been determined to not involve a significant hazards consideration. These proposed changes do not:
1.
Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequence of an accident previously evaluated.
The Cycle 12 refueling will involve the discharge of 73 fuel assemblies and insertion of 72 new assemblies and one previously irradiated assembly.
The new fuel assemblies are fabricated by Combustion Engineering and are not significantly different from those previously used at Maine Yankee.
In previous reload cores at Maine Yankee and other facilities, the NRC has found the fuel design to be acceptable. The Control Element Assembly (CEA) pattern for Cycle 12 is identical to that used in Cycle 11.
Also, the thermal, thermal-hydraulic, and physics characteristics for Cycle 12 are not significantly different from those of Cycle 11 at the 2700 MWth rated power condition. These changes are described in. detail in Attachment D.
The attached proposed Technical Specification changes support the operation of Maine Yankee for Cycle 12 and do not increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The Cycle 12 design has been evaluated to demonstrate the acceptability of events previously evaluated in the Maine Yankee Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
The acceptance criteria for the evaluation are identical to those which were employed for Cycle 11.
Furthermore, the analytical methods used to demonstrate conformance of the Cycle 12 design are identical to those used in Cycle 11.
Section 5 of the analysis in Attachment D summarizes the effects of Cycle 12 operation on the consequence of accidents previously evaluated in the
-Maine Yankee FSAR.
For those transients where the parameters for Cycle 12 are not bounded by previous safety analyses, a new or revised analysis was performed. These transients are:
1)
Boron Dilution 2)
Excess Load 3)
T Other transients that required a partial reanalysis or review included:
1.
Seized RCP Rotor L
2.
CEA Withdrawal 3.
Loss of Feedwater 4.
Loss of Coolant Flow 5.
Steam Line Rupture 6.
Steam Generator Tube Rupture 7.
LOCA 8.
CEA Drop 9.
Loss of Load In each case the reanalysis was done using NRC approval methods, and this reanalysis demonstrated that the applicable acceptance criteria for the accident or transient continue to be met, (See Table 5.3 of Attachment D).
For the remaining transients, the paraineters were bounded by previous safety analyses and therefore are not adversely affected by the reload.
Additional information regarding the effect of the proposed Technical Specification changes is found in Section 5 of the Cycle 12 CPAR (AttachmentD).
In summary, our evaluation of accidents previously analyzed in the FSAR has demonstrated that all applicable acceptance criteria continue to be met.
Thereforc, the proposed Technical Specification changes for Cycle 12 operation do not significantly increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2.
Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
As indicated in item 1 above and the Cycle 12 CPAR, the reload core for Cycle 12 operation is similar in fuel design, CEA placement, thermal, thermal-hydraulic, and physics characteristics to that of Cycle 11 at the 2700 MWth rated power condition. We have concluded that Cycle 12 operation does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3.
Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, i
As indicated in item 1 above, and the Cycle 12 CPAR, the design of Cycle 12 is similar to Cycle 11 at the 2700 MWth rated power condition.
The methods used to analyze Cycle 12 operation are the same as were used for Cycle 11 and they have been previously approved by the NRC staff.
Additionally, the acceptance criteria for Cycle 12 are the same as Cycle 11.
We have demonstrated that these acceptance criteria continue to be met. We have therefore concluded that Cycle 12 operation does not involve any significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Maine Yankee has concluded that the proposed changes to Technical Specifications do not involve a significant hazards consideration as defined by 10 CFR 50.92.
, CDF9005.LTR l