ML20002A462

Forwards Draft Guidance for Proposed License Amends Re Refueling & Refueling Info Request to Improve NRC Efficacy & Scheduling of License Amends Review.Response Requested within 30 Days.Yearly Info Update Suggested

ML20002A462
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	07/01/1975
From:	Goller K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Andognini G YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO.
References
NUDOCS 8011170252
Download: ML20002A462 (13)

Text

-

~

i

.p

'E 4

_'s*

~ **a

^

3

~3,...

..y

[

-raci:ot rW l50-2e

!JUL1 197 5

{;

3~

m la

?_

i

[

Yankee Atonic Elect ric Cor:pany..

/.TT! :

lir. G. Carl Andopnini g

Assistant to the Vice President

?

20 Turnpike Eoad D

- Ves t boro, l'as scchuset t s 015El

.?

1 fcntlerce:

1_

' {-

is a continuing objective of.'the l'uclear Eerulctory Comission (l;FC) to E

.It

?

q,.

provide conplete. pro:,pt reviews.of all applications f or construction permits,

r operating licenses and~ licence crendrents.

The length of tire necessary to _

cet upon such applicat ions is, to a larre extent, a function of the

.{'s co:pleteness of the information surplied by the licensee in support of its

l-coplicction.

Coepleteness-is particularly iriport ant f or p ropos ed license crecdrents thct relate to recctor ref uelings since they of ten include a y

vide rante of proposed technical specification channes thct rust be developed cnd. spproved before the facility eco return to operction.

ihe iT.C has developed prelie.inary guidance (Enclosure 1) f or use in prepsrieg proposed license e-endrents that relate to-refuelings that zny help to cssure that your subrit tois vi11 include 'all recuired inf orr_at ion.

' Arot h*r relsted problen is thet of Ictoness of licensee subnit t als which -

ns',- it di t ticult and soretires impossible for the staf f to cceplete its revi w ir. t ine to :cccorr.odote. scheduled dates for resunpt ion of operat ion.

This proble: beconos particulcrly dif ficult f or license a tendesnts that relate to retuolings that involve an ent ensive r.uceer et Lecnnicci -

g4cificction chenpen.

Moreover, the provinr. number'of operotinn f acil it ie's reruestinn eech license c~erdront s. is ta::ing the stsif 's ci ility t o acce rodete individual schedules, unless the recuests are sebritted with cdecutte t ime for review.

?- ercer to. irip rove the etticacy and schedulint of eur reviews of proposed licerse amendnents that relate to refuelings ue have prepared c list of the ir.forret ion tiut se oced to'torecast the requirercat s for such revicus.

(refuelis Inforaat ion hequest, Enclosure 2).

please subm it this in f orr:s t ion ic r vour Tenv ae-iotte Atoc ic pouer Stat ion vitnic 30 dcys of reccipt ot is let t er ard update this inforection annually thereafter. or core of ten

t c;Sroprictc.

Lc suppert that'this inforrction be rade a recular part cf yavr' arect drcrat ing r@ ort.

t

-801:1170

/

k k

l>

+

Ys.

L+

. Ycnkee Atomic Electric Company gy j

M It.is our hope thct with this inforn ation we can assess your plans for

{

refueling and schedule subnittal dates which realistically reflect our f

review requiresents and your need for. ticely licensing action.

7T Tr.is recuest for reneric inforvation was approved by CAO under a blenket j

cleercnce nut-ber E-10-0225 (R0072); this clearance expires July 31, 1977.

A 4

Sincerely, 5k Original si;ned by

[

Kn:l Golkr 4'

Earl R. Coller, Assistent Director h

for Operat ing heactors y

Division of Reactor Licensing C

Ecclosures:

, s.

P 1.

Guidance for Frc;osed License 1.nendrents II 7.e l a t i n e-to Fefueling i

Fe fuelin;- Infor ation Request

[

v

=c: v/enels 1-ree next pre A-y,-

t D:5TRIBlTTION I

l L Docket File OR3:1 Reading I

.';RC PDR Local PDR FRGoller A

TJCarter

~.

?)3urple AEurger N

5"Sheppard

. I, OELD A

('E OISE(3) y[

ACRS(14)

T3Abernathy 4

? Check

'l

+

3Schemel g,

Dross 2,

hTanderMolen VMoore r

AGiachusso TCDeYoung 3

RSBoyd FSchroeder

,*O t e it0 o Asz[Fe-77,/7J, cce e < MLB encevzb orv ct V

RL:0RB g g _RL:0RB#1

_RL RL.:0R._ g g

^

e e a,-

... u,1 +. DJaffee:F/

ABurger.ke'.' _RAPQrp1e._._ _KRG.o.11er 6/25/.75

.. 6/9/.75

._6/_h/ 75

_T/ff75 Te m AIc.3:* si re. 9 33) AICM C243 W u.s.coudssw in Ma wracts soli.sas.tse.

/f3RA

"))d @u e6 Q E '

. - - ~. -

O j [(7, i

• W

'aj g

~

f I~

h b

j, 1

i ENCLOSURE 1-GUIDANCt. FOR PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENTS

}

RELATING TO REFUELING p-l

~'

a A.

INTRODUCTION i

H l

The refueling of a power reactor represents a change in the 4

facility which may involve a change in the technical specifications or n

6 l

l Title 10, CFR Part 50, Section 50.59(a)

}

an unreviewed safety question.

I L

permits a licensee to make changes in the facility as described in the i

.e l

J SAR, changes in the procedures as described in the SAR and conduct tests or experiments not described in the SAR without prior Commission

i m

i

?

approval unless such changes involve a change in the technical speci-fications or involve an unreviewed safety question. The request for g

NRC authorization for any such change must include an appropriate safety a

analysis report (SAR). The format and content of such a SAR is the subject of this guide.

B.

DISCUSSION

p..

The licensee must demonstrate that safe operation will continue Generally, a refueling will involve only changes in with the new core.

the core loading. Any changes in facility design not associated with w

the refueling (reload) design and its effect on subsequent operation p^6 should be addressed by a separato document. Significant changes in fuel design or reactor control procedures may be addressed by reference 3si

.4 to topical reports.

j 3

Two operating cycles or " loads" are of interest in a reload

/;

w The " reload cycle" is the upcoming cycle, whose safety is submittal.

The " reference cycle" is the cycle to which the proposed to be evaluated.

i

-n.-...-

~-

n.

~ ~ -

1' C

G i

4 u

reload is to be compared.

The appropriate reference cycle is 4

therefore the cycle which has the most up-to-date, inclusive safety g

analysis report approved by the Commission.

In most cases, this will o

c be the "present", currently operating cycle. However, an applicant UL L

may use any cycle or analysis back to the FSAR cycle for reference, if this analysis bounds the parameter, of the proposed reload and uses

$h currently approved analytical methods. The various safety analyses JW n

GL may be expedited by such reference if the reload cycle parameter values by i

are bounded by the reference cycle values.

RW$

The amount of detailed analysis required in any submittal depends 13 v..

on the type of reload.

For equilibrium cycle reloads, where mechanical j7 design and enrichment do not change it is expected that accident fe' t

parameters will remain within their previously analy:cd ranges and

?9 a reanalysis may not be required.

Conversely, for non-equilibrium

$bp cycle reloads, the thermal and nuclear characteristics generally 1r t

require new analysis and a full evaluation.

When a reload involves e

different analytical methods or design concepts, a complete r.eview iir of these changes and their effects is necessary.

iK%

C.

REGULATORY POSITION

$N Changes in design, analysis techniques, and other information gg.

ci y

0?!

relevant to a reload are often generic in nature.

Generic information

]@

vi.

may be provided by reference to generic report rather than giving yf:

$"b explicit. justification in a reload SAR for a specific plant.

"$?

s

.-4.

(

.tc

W[

C C

, A reload submittal should be submitted at least 90 days before the y-planned startup date.

If significant different analytical methods or design concepts are to be incorporated into the reload core and have not I

been justified by generic review or if the changes otherwise entail a significant hazards consideration, a significantly greater time period h

may be required.

In cases where timing is a problem, there may be cases in which the submittal may be provided in sections so that the 1

staff review can be expedited. The submittal should contain the following:

1.

Introduction and Summary s

Give the purposes of the submittal and summarize the contents of the submittal.

}

I' 2.

Operating History Discuss any operating anomalies in the current cycle which may affect the fuel characteristics in the reload cycle.

It is recognized i

that only information from the first part of the cycle will be available.

3.

General Description Provide a core loading map for the planned reload core, shqwing the position, by zone, of nc.w and irradiated fuel.

Include the position s

of any tert assemblies.

Shciw th'e initial enrichment distribution of g

A the fresh fuel, the initial burnup distribution, and the burnable

y 1

a Deviations from pg poison distribution and concentration (if any).

this planned map at actual reload time are acceptable provided the

, r*

finalized reload core's safety parameters are bounded by the safety ll analysis.

+ -

-+,,saw.,w..+..-

1

_y_

a f

4.

Fuel System Design 4.1 Fuel Design The reload fuel submittal she::ld provide a table that presents h-1 the following items for both the proposed and the reference cycle fuel:

fuel assembly type, planned number of reload and. residual assemblies

((

~

2.

in the core, initial fuel enrichment, initial fuel density, initial fill y

,;4 gas pressure, region burnups at BOC, and clad collapse time.

For the i

new core loading in PWRs, the limiting region or fuel assemblies based s

x; on fuel performance considerations should be identified.

k 4.2 Mechanical Desinn Where fuel assemblies are considered new in concept, the following j

N information should be provided, by reference or explicitly, for the reload a

fuel assemblies:

The vibration, flow and structural characteristics including seismic i 4 response should be presented. The dimensions and configuration of fuel b

.ea assembly components should be presented in tables and drawings.

Particular attention should be given to the following items:

(1)

For PWRs, control rod assembly accommodation and associated operational functions (for example, damping and travel limits).

t.-

h4 (2)

Fuel cladding mechanical interaction.

3, l-y (3)

Fuel rod bowing as related to fuel rod axial position and spacer 1,:

grid flexibility.

j[

q.

(4) Steady-state fuel assembly hold-down and lift-off forces.

{

9

<N..,

9

+--m-

~ u

~-...n.-

s..,

e e

5-i (5) Verification techniques for location and orientation of fuel "i

assemblies-in the core.

I i

l.

(6) Specific dimensional or material changes fron present approved 1

assemblies.

i 4

p (7) Design of spacer grids as related to local flow effects, DNB

{

:

censiderations, and mechanical strength and integrity of the k

A

E...

i assembly.

g M

Demonstrate by calculation with approved methods or tests that the new fuel design satisfies such design limits as stress intensity, strain, hI

y deflection, collapse, fretting wear and fatigue for all conditions, 1

steady-state, normal, and abnor=al transients.

Any changes in design 1.

wW limits should b.e identified and justified.

2g1 fe

. Demonstrate by calculation with approved methods or tests that 2

the new fuel design meets the requirements of Appendix K of 10 CFR 50.

$;I

k..

4.3 Thernal Desinn vp-Where fuel assemblies are considered new in concept, fuel thermal

!{

. t.

performance calculations based on the above mechanical design and the 3

p vendorfs approved fuel performance model should be provided.

Fuel cladding 7g

- integrity and collapse considerations should be included. This may 2i be accomplished by suitable reference.

2i y

@d f

l is I h,r q,

4

. t,b W w.

si.

as 4,..m.

p.

-m 4-#.mp-.,

4-1

' i p

I 4.4 Chemical Desien i

Where fuel assemblies are considered new in concept or utilize component c

materials that differ from the present design, chemical compatibility of X%

?I-all possible fuel-cladding-coolant-assembly interactions should be analyzed.

m

.u, This may be accomplished by suitable reference.

en

'h'

• p 4.5 Operatine Excerience

'1 Previous operating experience as related to safety considerations 3$

sa This tv with comparable fuel rod / assembly designs should be presented.

Y f,fk r.ay be accomplished by suitable reference.

adi 5

NUCLEAR DESIGff

4 N-5.1 Physics Characteristics Provide infomation regarding any changes from the reference cycle to

[(y the reload cycle for the following parameters used in the safety analysis:

g nu

^ 55,

.e For BOC, EOC, and any extremum during the cycle:

!a

> ~;

(1) Moderator Coefficients (e.g., temperature, pressure, density, or c:

void.

Give or reference the power distributions used in their q'1 development.)

(2) Doppler Coefficient (3) Maximum Radial and Axial (or Total) Peaking Factors (4)

Ejected Rod Worth (for PWRs) ra'9 (5)

Rod Drop Parameters (for SWRs) m For BOC and EOC:

t:

(1) Delayed Neutron Fraction 4

(2)

Critical Boron Concentration (for PWRs) i a

j y

w= ~

G O

y y

'T x-(3)

Boron Worth (for PWRs) y.

(4) Standby Liquid Control System Worth (for BWRs)

.i (5)

Scram Function (for BFRs)

.X For PWRs, provide, in tabular. form, a detailed calculation of the

?

shutdown margin for the BOC and EOC and any mid-cycle minimum of the f4 This table should also indicate the required k

i i

reference and reload cycles.

.f margin.

For Bims, provide the shutdown margin curve.

So j

For PWRs, specify +he control rod patterns to be used during the reload cycle, including any rod interchanges and any differences from the b

W tw^

e reference cycle.

=

5.2 Analytical Input

?.

Describe briefly the information gathered on the burnup history of the y

exposed fuel, and how it was used in the reload analysis only if required

g

[gg to support reload design changes. This may be done by reference.

Indicate w

how the incore measurement calculation constants (or matrices) to be used I;fh 47 This r}j -

in calculating bundle powers were prepared for the reload cycle.

cay be done by reference, a

fb-5.3 Changes in Nuclear Design e

Describe any changes in co w design features, calculational methods, gy' data or information relevant to determining important nuclear design 4

parameters which depart f, rom prior practice for this reactor, and list f

This should be done by reference where possible.

the affected parameters.

Discuss in detail or give a reference describing any significant changes yk

..w Qe in operational procedure from the reference cycle with regard to axial

-~-

[@

power shape control, radial power shape control, xenon control, and tilt r

contro1, Ile I

(

I

= g:-

31 In cases whe're different analytical methods are used, detailed information T

on the new analytical methods for evaluating core neutronic behavior should be t'

supplied, and any' interfacing between the new andiold methods should be p

H' described. - This should be done by reference where possible.

6.

Thermal Hvdraulic Desir.n In the event there are changes in the fuel geometry, such as spacer

- grid design, spacer grid axial' separation, fuel pin spacing, or of the fuel pin or control rod guide tube; or if there are changes in the radial or

- axial design power distributions of the core, evaluate the effects of these changes on:

(a) The s ihr.um DNBR/CHFR/CPR values for normal operation and anticipated transients.

(b) The hydraulic stability of the primary coolant system for all ccnditions of steady-state operation, for all operational transients including load following maneuvers, and for partial loop cperation.

This may_be dene by appropriate reference.

In cases where different calculational procedures for thermal hydraulic design are used, these procedures and appropriate calculatio.ns should be described or referenced.

7.

Accident and Transient Analysis The potential effect of any changes in the reload fuel design on each incident listed in the Accident and Transient Analysis section of the reference cycle analysis should be considered.

y

.w 1

O O

. g.

<s Provide a table of the input parameters applicable to all accidents

!):,

y This table of " common" parameters should list two columns gg and transients.

2 the limiting values for the reference cycle and the jr for each parameter:

5 T-limiting values for the reioad cycle.

f v..

L -W*

• A second table should be provided which lists each accident with its accident-specific input parameters.

The table should also list 1.miting values

{

~

sn j9s.

for the reference cycle and the reload cycle,

$5' In case an accident input parameter falls outside of bounds previously jy

)){

?i d

analyzed, provide or reference a re-analysis of th.e accident.

M U+1 4L Justify any changes frc:. the reference cycle in accident analysis

$a

~

If this is 3%

techniques, calculational methods, correlations, and codes.

na 11 not done by reference to a topical report, an appropriately longer time v.s

^T A::c period will te required for approval of the reload submittal.

g.

8.

Preresed !bdifications to Technical Soecifications

<3;.

Present the proposed modifications to the Technical Specifications.

g l?

y Justify the changes,

.t 9

S13 roc-Frceram

' 's*,

List and briefly describe the planned startup tests associated with jg

',t g.

core perfcrmance.

Recommended tests include:

r VA 83

}l1 Fer

_r_,e s :

(1)

Centrol Rod Drive Tests and Drop Time (Hot) q, w

cia

, hx (2)

Critical Boron Concentration y

N'

.dP v

,,-e-=

_m..'

h.,

(3) control Rod Group Werth 4

(4)

Ejected, Rod Worth

(,41 '

uy a

'3 (5)

Dropped Rod Worth

.-ea c6 (6) Moderator Temperature Ccafficient g

(&

(7)

Power Doppler Coefficient

[

(8)

Startup Power Maps Q

A For BWRs:

. t.

Q (1)

Control Rod Drive Tests and Scram Time (Cold and Hot) h idi (2)

Shutdown Margi elith Most Reactive Rod Withdrawn

($

...j

- (3)

Patterns for criticality er.

,M e

w?

'i -

$?W a.

hk

.sg 7ke py7 rgirj*

hh el5.

F5I be V l;K aQ l.+1.

n f

n.

nj w

'.!,t>h L..

.s y

MY

.a 5f$.'.

..W

.vy Yh,.

\\

v:

+

h 9

e e.

)M?-

A

C C

i.

ENCLOSURE 2 REFUELING INFORMATION REQUEST 1.

Name of facility V+

2.

Scheduled date for next refueling shutdown l-Scheduled date for restart following refueling 3.

Will refueling or resumption of operation thereafter require 4.

a technical specification change or other license amendment?

q

.fg If answer is yes, what, in general, will these be?

.;_zt3 If answer is no, has the reload fuel design and core s.

configuration been reviewed by your Plant Safety Review y

Committee to determine whether any unreviewed safety 7-questions are associated with the core reload (Ref.

,i/

10 CFR Section S0.59)?

h If no such review has taken place, when is it scheduled?

g.

2 Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action and y

5.

J:

supporting infonnation 4f{

Important licensing considerations associated with refueling, e.g.,

J 6.

new or different fuel design or supplier, unreviewed design or performance analysis methods, significant changes in fuel design, j

new operating procedures.

ik s_^-

.s 2L Q

kh Y.

keJ

%l

,e

.g '

., p.g o.

e e

e; =_

I

• = ~ ~

... - - -...,, - -.... ~..