ML20032C476
| ML20032C476 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1981 |
| From: | Rausch T COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111100458 | |
| Download: ML20032C476 (7) | |
Text
,
/
'N Commonwealth Edison
[
) On) First National Plaza. Chicago, Illinog u
(
~~J l Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 Chicago. Illinois 60690 s
j November 4, 1981 tn
<s (o
( g..,gU s
~
d2 b!
Mr. Darrell G.
Eisenhut, Director 2
+EQu'dk % [(q U
U Division of Licensing
- d c
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
', /
Washington, DC 20555
%('
y/
$hf%
Subject:
Quad Cities Unit 2 Cycle 6 Barrier Fuel Demonstration Program NRC Docket No. 50-265 References (a):
NEDO-24259-A, " Generic Information for Barrier Fuel Demonstration Bundle Licensing" (Submitted May 1980; Reissued February 1981 as Amended and Approvad).
(b):
R.
L.
Tedesco letter to R. E.
Engle (G.E.), dated November 12, 1980.
(c):
J.
S. Abel letter to D. G.
- Eisenhut, dated January 23, 1981.
(d):
T.
J. Rausch letter to H.
R.
Denton dated August 21, 1981.
(e):
E.
D. Swartz letter to H.
R. Denton dated July 27, 1981.
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
The acceptability of the Reference (a) Generic Licensing Topical Report on Barrier Fuel was documented by the NRC Staf f in Reference (b) and the associated Topical Report Evaluation.
The review concluded that Reference (a) as supplemented in response to Staff questions provides an acceptable generic licensing basis and that the large scale demonstration planned for Quad Cities 2 i.s g) licensable.
Approval was contingent, however, on receipt of adaltional information in the following areas:
l /
WAUL f YOOO.Ob eggiggggReisssjjg o
P
D. G. Eisenhut November 4, 1981 a)
The detailed operating plan for the demonstration; b)
Plans for on-line failure detection monitoring and post-irradiation examinations; and c)
Other information traditionally submitted in fuel reload applications (physics and thermal-hydraulic analytical results).
In January of this year, Commonwealth Edison Company's intentions with respect to providing these items were described in Reference (c),'where we indicated that the requested information could be provided as it became available.
More recently, however, during an unrelated meeting in Bethesda, it became obvious that the Staff now desires additional information prior to the Quad Cities 2 Cycle 6 startup.
Each of these areas is addressed in the three attachments to this letter.
As stated therein, we believe that further details on the EOC-6 ramp test procedures and the post-irradiation examination (PIE) plans must await final definition until mid-cycle when the Ectual EOC conditions and outage critical oath are better known.
Furthermore, the acceptability of the reloaded core for initial startup and normal operation does not appear to be in any way dependent on the EOC test and PIE details.
As described in Attachment C, Commonwealth Edison provided the Reload Licensing Submittal for Quad Cities 2 Cycle 6 in Reference (d).
In discussions with the NRC Project Manager, we were informed that the review of the Reload Submittal would require the appropriate fee per 10 CFR 170.
We believe that a fee is not appropriate in this case, because the require' fee for the Technical Specification changes associated with the forthcoming cycle was submitted in Reference (e).
In the past, separate fees for both the proposed Technical Specifica-tion changes and the Reload Licensing Submittal were not required.
Nevertheless, to avoid any possible delay in the receipt of your approval, we have enclosed a Class III fee remittance in the amount of
$4,000.
Since separate fees are being provided for the Technical Specification changes and the Reload Licensing Submittal, we request that you document your reviews by preparing separate SERs for these two issues.
This has the advantage of separating any concerns your staff may have with our proposed barrier demonstration tests from the Technical Spec' fications changes needed to support Cycle 6 operation.
Please direct any questions you may have concerning this matter to this office, i
9 O
D. G. Eisenhut November 4, 1981 One (1) signed original and thirty-nine (39) copies of this transmittal are provided for your use.
Very truly yours, hk&
Thomas J.
Rausch Nuclear Licensing Administrator Boiling Water Reactors Attachments (3) cc:
Region III Inspector - Quad Cities im 2814N
ATTACitENT A Additional Information Concerning the Detailed Operating Plan for the Barrier Fuel Danonstration The cycle managenent plan for the barrier demonstration will be very siinilar to a standard control cell core operating strategy with the exception that the target control rod patterns have been developed such that the four control rods in the cells to be ramp tested at EOC will not be withdrawn more than ~ 4.5 feet prior to the test.
The general plans with respect to the EOC test itself have been described (e.g. staggered withdrawals of ~1.5 f t. incrmients etc.) in the program's seni-annual (Reports (GEAP-25163-1 through 4) for Phase 2 which have been previously distributed to the Reactor Fuels Section of the Core Performance Branch, as well as in the Reference (a) LTR.
Specific plant operating procedures for the EOC special test are currently beirg developed. It is expected that the final form of the procedures will have been internally reviewed and approved by both GE and CECO by June,1982. At that time (approximately 8 months prior to the test) the procedures would be available for NRC review, presunably by IE Region III personnel who turmally perform procedural level reviews at the station. Minor changes may be necessary, however, as the actual core conditions expected for the test becune better defined.
ID:5170A4 L
ATTACINENT B Additional Information Concerning On-Line Failure Detection an! Post Irradiation Exaninations.
l.
On-Line Failure Detection Were are three means of detectig; significant fuel failures at Quad Cities:
a)
On-line monitoring of the off-gas activity at the stere jet air ejectors using a gamna detector. Strip chart recorders and alarms are provided in the control roan, b) of f-gas sampling and isotopic analysis at regular intervals.
Sanples are taken at the recombiner inlet of the appented off-gas system and are analyzed based on the sun of seven isotopes.
c)
Coolant samplig; and isotopic analysis based on samples fran the recirculation system or clean-up inlet.
Data acquisition and evaluation fran all three methods will be performed at normal intervals durig; the operatig; months preceding the EOC ramp test.
One to two weeks prior to tiu first control rod withdrawal step of the ramp test, the sampling will be performed on a daily basis to adequately characterize the pre-test concentrations and distribution of fission products in the off-gas and coolant.
As the ramp test is performed, the SJAE control roan monitor will be carefully observed and checked for any unusual behavior several times per shift between rod withdrawal steps.
If any significant activity increase is noted, the freqdency of the isotopic analysis of both off-gas and coolant samples will be increased fran daily to once per shif t.
2.
Post-Irradiation Examinations If the failure detection methods described in Section 1 inlicate that fuel failures have occurred durig; the ramp test or if indicated fission product activity has significantly increased durig; the cycle any suspect assanblies which are scheduled for reinsertion for Cycle 7 will be sipped durirg the EOC6 refuelig; outage. Suspect assanblies which are scheduled for discharge will be sipped off critical path or following the outage.
If no failure inlications occur durig; the ramp test or earlier in the cycle, the extent of sipping will be determined based,in part,on the time available durig; the refuelig; outage. The highest priority
_....s i
Attachment B (Con't)'
a l
assenblies would be the 16 special-barrier deonstration assemblies from the 4 ranp test cells and the buffer region assenblies which are scheduled for reinsertion. Since it is not possible to define the critical path activities and schedule this far in advance of the EOC6 outage (Spring,1983), no further defialtion of sipping plans seems prudent at this time.
Since barrier demonstration fuel is not expected to be finally discharged for at least three operating cycles, additional post-irradiation examinations have not been defined at this time. "Ihe extent of tiie exaninations will be influenced by fuel performance as indicated by:
a.
offgas activity history during the denonstration cycles at Quad Cities 2, b.
examination results on the four Lead Test Assenblies in Qtkd Cities 1, and 4
c.
laboratory studies of barrier fuel ramped in test reactors.
Funding of such tests is also dependent on the future definition and approval of the Phr 3 Work Scope which is subject to future DOE budget uncertainties.
4 ID:5170A6 i
h t
4 l
r a
}
l
Q ATTAONENT C Additional Information Concernire the Reload Licensing Analyses Althotgh CECO's intent was to implenent preparatory Technical Specification charges to allow application of 10CFR50.59, the submittal of reload licensity analyses results was planned for the Staff's information in order to fulfill the request of lieference (b) iten c "other information traditionally subnitted in fuel reload applications".
The preparatory Tech. Spec. charges were docketed via letter of E. D. Schwartz to H. R. Denton, dated July 27, 1981. Subsequently, the Supplerental Reload Licensirg Suhnittal for Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 Reload 5 (Cycle 6) was formally docketed at the request of the Quad Cities project reviewer by letter of T. J. Rausch to H. R. Denton dated Atgust 21, 1981. Althotgh these two subnittals should provide all the information requested, CBCo and GE are prepared to respond to any further needs in the area of reload analyses.
ID:5170A7 l
I f
e
-