ML20062C745

Forwards Safety Evaluation Accepting Response to NRC Bulletin 90-002, Loss of Thermal Margin Caused by Channel Box Bow

ML20062C745
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	10/26/1990
From:	Suh G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Hunger G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
Shared Package
ML20062C748	List: ML20062C745 ML20062C750
References
IEB-90-002, IEB-90-2, TAC-76343, TAC-76344, NUDOCS 9011020103
Download: ML20062C745 (3)

Text

. ..

.. October 26c 1990 Docket Nos. 50-277  : : sN and 50-278 Y.. .

.J NRC SLPDR PDI-2 R/F SVarga BBoger WButler

. Mr. George A. Hunger, Jr. M0'Brien GSuh RClark ,

l Director-Licensing, MC 5-2A-5 OGC EJordan ACRS(10) i Philadelphia Electric Company RJones WLong AAttard Nuclear Group Headquarters RBlough, RI LDoerflein, RI l Correspondence Control Desk P. O. Box No.195 Kayne, Pennsylvania 19087-0195

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO NRC BULLETIN NO. 90-02 FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 2. 3 (TAC NOS. 76343 AND 76344)

The staff has performed a review of the response by Philadelphia Electric Company to NRC Eulletin No. 90-02, titled " Loss of Thermal Margin Caused by Channel Box Bow." The licensee's response was documented in a letter dated April 25, 1990, as supplemented on August 3, 1990, which indicated that 59 channel boxes were being used for a second fuel bundle lifetime in the reactor core for Peach Bottom, Unit 2. The response indicated that no channel boxes were being reused for a second fuel bundle lifetime at Peach Bottom, Unit 3.

The results of our evaluation of your response for Unit 2 are presented in the enclosed safety evaluation. The staff concluded that the licensee's response satisfactorily resolves the issues discussed in tiRC Bulletin 90-02 for the current fuel cycle (Cycle 8). However, the' application of the data and methodology to account for the effects of channel box bowing to any future channel box reuse must be evaluated on a cycle specific basis. With respect to Unit 3, the staff finds that licensee commitments outlined in its April 25, 1990 response addressed the concerns discussed in NRC Bulletin No. 90-02.

Should you have any quer .*ns concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely, DRIUNAI SIGNmjY, Gene Y. Suh, Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation cc w/ enclosure: L06 See next page PDI-2/PM PDI-2/D n GSuh: tic WButler 's 0 to /27/90 .0 /

GSuh] yf/90 B S E. TACS 76343/76344 90l1020103 901026 '

\

PDR ADOCK 05000277 P PDC

/"gD#AICOk

, . UNITED STATES y 4 g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5, .j WASHING TON, D. C. 20555

%,,,,,# October 26. 1990 Docket Hos. 50-277 and 50-278 Mr. George A. Hunger, Jr.

Director-Licensing, MC 5-2A-5 Philadelphia Electric Company Nuclear Group Headquarters Correspondence Control De.sk P. O. Box No. 195 Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-0195

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO NRC BULLETIN NO. 90-02 FOR PEACH' BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER-STATION, UNITS 2 & 3 (TAC NOS. 76343 AND 76344)

The staff has performed a review of the response by Philadelphia Electric Company to NRC Bulletin No. 90-02, titled " Loss of Thermal Margin Caused by Channel Box Bow." 'The licensee's response was documented in a letter dated A)ril 25, 1990, as supplemented on August 3 _1990, which indicated that 59 ciannel boxes were being used for a second fuel bundle lifetime in the reactor core for Peach Bottom, Unit 2. The response indicated that no channel boxes were being reused for a second fuel-bundle lifetime at Peach Bottom, Unit 3.

The results of our evaluation of your response for Unit 2 are_ presented in the enclosed safety evaluation. The staff concluded that the. licensee's res)onse satisfactorily resolves the issues discussed in NRC Bulletin 90-02 for tie current fuel cycle (Cycle 8). However, the application of the data and methodology to account for the effects of channel box bowing to any future channel box reuse must.be evaluated on a cycle specific basis.' With respect to Unit 3, the staff finds that licensee commitments' outlined in_its April 25, 1990 response addressed the concerns discussed in NRC Bulletin No. 90-02.

Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to

. contact us.

Sincerely, Y A Gene'Y. SdM, Project Manager Project Directorate-I 2 Division-of Reactor Projects - I/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation cc w/ enclosure:

See next page

l Mr. George A. Hunger, Jr. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.

Philadelphia Electric Company Units 2 and 3 )

cc: l Troy B. Conner, Jr. , Esq. Single Point of. Contact  :

1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. P. O. Box 11880 Washington, D.C. 20006 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-1880' Philadelphia Electric Company Mr. Thomas M. Gerusky, Director ATTN: Mr. D. B. Miller, Vice President Bureau of Radiation Protection Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Pennsylvania Department of Route 1, Box 208 Environmental Resources Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 P. O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120-Philadelphia Electric Company ATTN: Regulatory Engineer, Al-2S Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Board of Supervisors Route 1. Box 208 Peach Bottom Township Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 R. D. #1 Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Public Service Comission of Maryland Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Engineering Division P.O. Box 399 ATTN: Chief Engineer Delta, Pennsylvania 17314 231 E. Baltimore Street Baltimore, MD 21202-3486~

Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 475 Allendale Road Power Plant Research Program King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Department of Natural Resources B Mr. Roland Fletcher Tawes State Office Building Department of Environment Annapolis, Maryland. 21401 201 West Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 i

t

-. .-.m ._

_ __ , ________.m -