ML20039G376

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That Fuels Section & Nuclear Design Section of Facility PSAR Is Acceptable for Review.Info Re Fuel Swelling Conductivity,Surveillance Testing & Cycling Limits Can Be Obtained in Q1 Questions
ML20039G376
Person / Time
Site: Palo Verde Arizona Public Service icon.png
Issue date: 06/20/1974
From: Ross D
US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
To: Kniel K
US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
Shared Package
ML111090060 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-80-515, FOIA-80-555 NUDOCS 8201180120
Download: ML20039G376 (1)


Text

{

JUN @ 01974 Docket No.: 50-S28 K. Kniel, Chief. Light Water Reactors Group 2-2. L ACCEPTANCE REVIEW OF D,WIS-BESSE UilTS 2 & 3 Plant Name:

Davis-Besse Units 2 & 3 Licensing Stage:

PSAR

~

Docket Hos.:

50-528 Responsible Cranch LUR 2-2 and Project !!anager:

R. A. Benedict Technical Review Branch Involved:

Core Perfornance Branch Requested Corapletion Date:

June 21,1974 Description of Review:

Acceptance Review A review of the fuels section (Section 4.2.1) and'of the nuclear design section (Section 4.3) of the Davis Besse (B&W) PSAR has been completed.

Section 4.2.1 follows the " Standard Fonut" (October 1972) and contains the necessary infomation required for review with the exception of the following:

Section 4.2.1.1: Discussion of fuel swelling, fuel conductivity, fuel melting point, cycling limits, and surveillance testing.

Section 4.2.1.2: Dimensions and tolerances, design features to prevent improper orientation, burnable poison content, description of axial power shaping rods and assmbly, and description of burnable poison rods and assemblies.

Section 4.2.1.4: Testing and inspection plan for axial power shaping and burnable poison rod assemblies.

These data can be obtained in Q1 questions, therefore, section 4.2.1 is h acceptable for review.

The new (draft) " Standard Review Plan" differs from the " Standard Fonnat". \\

and several important itms that have not been covered will be required under' c

present and future review procedures. The most notable of these omitted s

topics are; (a) predicted tice-to-collapse for the cladddng. (b) analysis of

(

l fuel densification effects, and (c) evaluation of maximum allowable power.

DISTRIBUTION: Docket File CPB Reading l

L Reading l

B. Siegel D. F. Ross Chief CPS:L Core Performnce Branch LKopp 6/ /74 Directorate of Licensing V. Stello cc:

S. Hanauer W. MdDonald CPB:L CPB:L CPS:L CPS:L J. Hendrie L. RubensteiDLSiegel:dsm LSRubenstein PCheck DFRoss 0:MP@U55' L. Kopp 6/ /74 6/ /74 6/ /74 6/ /74 h g 20 810403 MADDEN 80-515 PDR

~