ML20031C286
| ML20031C286 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 08/26/1965 |
| From: | Boyd R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8110070024 | |
| Download: ML20031C286 (1) | |
Text
_.
LICENSE AUTHORITY FILE COPY SAF',rY EVALUATION BY_ THE RESEARCH AND POWER REACTOR SAFETY BRANCH DIVISION OF REACTOR LICENSING IN THE MATTER OF D') U i Rem 0VB
0 YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 6Z, DOCKET NO. 50-29 Introduction Pursuant to Section 50.59 of the Commission's regulations, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, in Proposed Change No. 67, dated August 10, 1965, reques ted authorization of a change in the Technical Specifications attacted as Appendix A to License No. DPR-3.
The proposed change would authorize relocation of the two Zirealoy test assemblies specified for use in Core V frem the peripheral region (Region C) to the middle region (Region B).
Region C wi?.1 then contain all fresh fuel assemblies of 4.947. enrichment.
Discussion Results of a thermal analysis for the two Zircaloy test assemblies in the peripheral region of Core V is contained in Yankee's applicatioa dated June 9, 1965, for Proposed Change No. 63.
Final calculations have shown, however, that relocation of the two test assemblies to the middle region of the core will be necessary in order to achieve test conditions which are more repre-sentative of the thermal conditions that would exist in a full Zirealoy core.
Minimum DNB ratio, maximum heat flux, and maximum hot channel coolant outlet temperature are not significantly changed by relocation of the test assemblies.
While the maximum Zircaloy cladding temperature of the relocate d test assemblies 0
could reach 1350 F fro: a loss of coolant flow and 1535 F from a medium (5 inch 0
diameter) coolant line break, there is still a=ple margin Selow the 1800 F temperature at which a Zr-water reaction could begin. The lict.nsee concludes, and we agree, that relocation of the test assemblies as described will not significantly affect the safety of the reactor operation.
Conclusion We have concluded that the Proposed Change does not present significant hazards considerations not described or.mplicit in the hazards summary report, and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of tha public will not be endangered.
04i.nl Qnd by:
F. opt S. kyd 2nger S. Boyd, Chief Research & Power Reactor Safety Branch Division of Reactor Licensing 0N Date:
9110070024 650826' PDR ADOCK 05000029 P
-