ML20024F027
| ML20024F027 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 09/01/1983 |
| From: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Parris H TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8309080132 | |
| Download: ML20024F027 (4) | |
Text
_
~
4m W L.
T.,":L ma}
abzg %
??
m
s
- / Q
' ~;Q September 1,1983 DISTRIBUTION: '
- Docket No. 50-3283 NRC PDR Local PDR Occket No. 50-328 PRC System LB #4 r/f EAdensam Mr. H. G. Parris CStahle Manager of Power MDuncan Tennessee Valley Authority TNovak 500A Chestnut Street, Tower II Attorney, OELD Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 JMTaylor, I&E DLJordan:I&E
Dear Mr. Parris:
ACRS (16)
Subject:
Request for Additional Information Regarding Sequoyah Unit 2 Cycle 2 Fuel Reload Package The hRC staff has prepared the enclosed request for additional information regard-ing the Cycle 2 reload for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2.
Please respond to these questions by September 9,1983, in order to support your October 1983 startup date.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact the project manager, C. Stahle, at (301) 492-7317.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Sincerely, d
Elinor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch Ho. 4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page 8309080132 030901 PDR ADOCK 05000320 P
. L B..#.4......
omer >..D..L..:L..B #4 L A : D)L
- L..B...#.
- 1..
V.f.e........
... MD.u n c.a n,....... E e..am......
.......y.3
===> C.Sy
/h.mc.
om> 8 /.34. /.8. 3........
.. p/. /.. /.8. 3......
.h..
/..../. 8 3.........
nac r;.u tis sio,soinncu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY W u.s. m a.3-m.247 s
. _.. _.~
SEQUOYAH Mr. H. G. Parris Manager of Power Tennessee Valley Authority 500A Chestnut Street, Tower II Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 cc: Herbert S. Sanger, Jr., Esq.
General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue E 11B 33 Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Mr. H. N. Culver Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue, 249A HBB Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Mr. Bob Faas Westinghouse Electric Corp.
P.O. Box 355 4,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. Jerry Wills Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Chestnut Street, Tower II Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 7
i Mr. Donald L. Williams, Jr.
Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive, W10B85 l
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 g
l l
Resident Inspector /Sequoyah NPS c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2600 Igou Ferry Road l
Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379' James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, l
Region 11 f
101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100
.At1anta, Georgia 30303 i
l
g QUESTIONS ON SEQU0YAH UNIT 2 CYCLE 2 RELOAD 1.
Please complete Table 1 of tne Reload Safety Evaluation Report (RSER) by listing the approximate expected end-of-cycle-2 burnup for each of the fuel regions.
2.
It is stated on page 2 of the RSER that Wet Annular Burnable Absorber (WABA) rods are to be used.
It is our understanding that Westinghouse will imple-ment a surveillance program, details of which are described in the NRC safety evaluation of the WABA topical report, for the first two plants to utilize WABAs.
Please confinn whether Sequoyah 2 is subject to and will follow the provisions of that surveillance program.
3.
During a recent refueling of McGuire Unit 1, several broken Non-Fuel Bearin,g C_omponent (NFBC) holddown springs were discovered.
Some of the springs had '
double fractures "such that a... section might move... into the flow of the coolant system" (according to Reportable Occurrence Report No. 369/83-11).
It is our understanding that Sequoyah Unit 2 has 94 NFBC holddown springs of the same design as McGuire's and which, therefore, may be subject to the same failure mode. Aside from the potential effects of loose parts, broken holddown springs could have an impact on UHI flow, with resultant effects on the LOCA peak cladding temperatures.
s, Therefore, with regard to the potential effects on Cycle 2 opera, tion, discuss the results of post irradiation examinations of the NFBC holddown. springs during the current refueling ' outage.
How many broken springs were observed?
How many had double fractures? Discuss the cause and remedy of such failures.
For Cycle 2 operation, either provide reasonable assurance-that broken springs will not occur or show that the potential effects of loose parts, UHI flow restrictions, and increases LOCA peak cladding tenperature are insignificant.
4.
Discuss the " minor grid modifications" and "reconstitutable botton nozzle" design changes for Region 4 (Reload 1) fuel from the standpoint of their origin, rationale, and data supporting their use.
, 5.
Region'4 fuel is said in the RSER to have been designed in accordance with
, the fuel performance model in WCAP-8785.
That model (PAD 3.3) was approved subject to certain restrictions identified in the NRC Staff's SER on the WCAP report.
In an addendum to the report, the restrictions were revised but still apply in areas dealing with gap conductance, fuel / cladding surface roughness, and cladding creep.
Please state whether these restrictions were adhered to in the analysis.of Sequoyah 2 Cycle 2 fuel.
6.
The RSER indicates that the Westinghouse fuel rod internal pressure design basis, as described in WCAP-8964, is satisfied.
As noted in the NRC staff's safety evaluation of that report, however, the proposed revised criterion is not sufficient to assure acceptable consequences for transient and accident conditions, and an amended criterion was eventually approved by th'a,
staff. Please state whether the amended criterion is satisfied for Cycle 2 operation of Sequoyah 2, and if that criterion as provided in a May 19, 1978 letter from J. Stolz (NRC) to T. M. Anderson JW) is not satisfied, provide justification.
9 i
4 l
I s
h i