ML20040D897
| ML20040D897 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 01/25/1982 |
| From: | Fay C WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| To: | Clark R, Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202020371 | |
| Download: ML20040D897 (2) | |
Text
.
/*
l l%sconsin Bectre amcoum 231 W. MICHIGAN, P.O. BOX 2046, MILWAUKEE, WI 53201 January 25, 1982 9
hr
\\
Mr. H.
R.
Denton, Director Q
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation g
6/ ppg
?.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
Washington, D. C.
20555 Ilg
~~
y IS8gf k'.3 Attention:
Mr. Robert A. Clark, Chief EI Operating Reactors, Branch 3
\\/
Gentlemen:
g3 gg DOCKET NO. 50-301 CYCLE 9 RELOAD POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 2 As you are aware, Point Beach Unit 2 is currently in its eighth cycle of operation.
The refueling shut-down at the end of Cycle 8 is planned to begin mid-April 1982 at a burnup of approximately 9700 MWD /T within a range of +500 MWD /T.
During the refueling, the four demonstration assemblies of Westinghouse 14x14 optimized design will be loaded into the core for their second cycle of irradiation along with 32 fresh standard design 14x14 reload assemblies.
The remainder of the core will be of standard 14x14 design Westinghouse fuel.
Our letter of July 1, 1980 advised you of our plans in respect to the demonstration program and utilization of the four 14x14 Optimized Fuel Assemblies (OFA's).
The performance of Westinghouse OFA fuel, as demonstrated by recent experiences at Point Beach Unit 2, Farley Unit 1, and Salem Unit 1, has been favorable and no indication of behaviour different from that anticipated has been observed.
During the next Unit 2 refueling, the demonstration assemblies will be visually examined to verify that their condition is as expected.
This letter is to advise you of our plans for the further utilization of the four demonstration assemblies in Unit 2 Cycle 9.
For their Cycle 9 irradiation, the demonstration assemblies will again be placed in core locations that prevent them from becoming lead assemblies during normal operation or from leading to more limiting conditions during transient conditions than analyzed for the standard design fuel assemblies.
l
.co /
l /
// C) 8202020371 820125 PDR ADOCK 05000301 l
P PDR
l
,/*
,,i Mr. H. R. Denton ' January 25, 1982 The Unit 2 Cycle 9 design was completed as for previous cycles except that the criteria mentioned above governed as to location of the demonstration assemblies in the Cycle 9 reload core.
As with previous cycle designs, core characteristics were found to be less limiting than previously reviewed and accepted or, for those postulated accidents presented in the Final Facility Description and Safety Analysis Report (FFDSAR) which could be adversely affected by the reload core, re-evaluation has demon-strated that the results of postulated events are within allowable limits.
The Reload Safety Evaluation was performed in accordance with WCAP-9272, " Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation Methodology".
A technical review of the Westinghouse Reload Safecy Evaluation for Point Beach Unit 2 Cycle 9 was performed by our Nuclear Engineering Section and Point Beach Nuclear Plant staffs and included an assessment of the impact of the demonstration assemblies on the Cycle 9 core design and safety analyses.
There were no unreviewed safety questions as defined by 10 CPR 50.59; therefore, applications for amendment to the Unit 2 Operating License or for a Technical Specification change are not necessary.
Verification of the core design will, of course, be performed by means of the standard start-up physics tests normally performed at the start of each cycle.
The rod exchange method of performing worth measurements, which has been employed in previous cycles, will be employed in the Unit 2 Cycle 9 start-up physics test program.
Very truly yours, Assistant Vice President C. W. Fay Copy to NRC Resident Inspector
-