ML20066H597

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That Util Anticipates Submitting Tech Spec Changes Associated W/Revised Heatup & Cooldown Curves by 911215 Instead of 910315.Curves & Limits Currently in Tech Specs Should Remain Conservative Through Burnup of 10 EFPY
ML20066H597
Person / Time
Site: North Anna  Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 02/14/1991
From: Stewart W
VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
91-067, 91-67, NUDOCS 9102210202
Download: ML20066H597 (2)


Text

@

+

y L

1 J

VIROINIA Elmcritic ann Powr:n CourANY j

{

11:enxoxu,VanoistA enuoi February 14,1991 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial No.

91 067 Attention: Document Control Desk NL&P/JYR:jdhR3

. ashington, D.C. 20555 Docket Nos.

50-338 W

50 339 License Nos. NPF 4 NPF 7

'a Gentlemen:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RORTH ANNA-POWER-STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 HEATUP AND COOLDOWN -CURVES

'.The current North ~ Anna Unit 1 and Unit 2 heatup and cooldown curves are valid to 10 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY). The Unit 1 curves are estimated to expire in March 1993 and the Unit 2 curves in March 1994. During the latter part of 1989 and early 1990, post-irradiation test _ing and evaluation was performed on the reactor vessel n

> material specimen _s contained in the "U". Unit 2 surveillance capsule. Capsule U had.

been withdrawn from Unit-2 in' March 1989. Revised heatup and cooldown curves applicable to 17 EFPY were developed to account for the additional surveillance data.

In!a letter dated March 8,1990, we committed >to submit technical specification

(=

changes by, March.15,1991 10 implement revised heatup.and cooldown curves and low temperature overpressure protection system (LTOPS) setooints. It was expected

~ hat this interval provided us with sufficient time to complete the analyses, reports, and t

draft documentation changes needed_ to implement revised curves and setpoints applicable to an extended cumulative core burnup..However, two issues-have recently be.en identified which require us to revise the date for submitting the proposed

~ hanges.

c First,'it was expected that ample operating margin would exist in the Unit _2 heatup and cooldown curves after incorporating the Capsule U results to support extending the

(-

applicability of th_e curves to an average core burnup to 17 EFPY. (A revision to 17-

' EFPY-was attempted because 17 EPFY is 2 EFPY beyond the removal date of the next -

Unit 2 surveillance capsule. That additional 2 EFPY period would have provided r

sufficient time for analysis, submittal, and NRC review and approval of needed-technical specification changes without any interim changes to the curves.) However,-

u',

for. core. burnups this far in the future, the form _of the LTOPS setpoints (i.e., step -

function) results in insufficient operating margin at low pressure and-temperature operating conditions, r

1 li 91022102o2 910214

[88/

PDR ADOCK 05o0033e P

PDR f

Y

+

~

v

y p y

,.c j ; p...,

4

[

~

_ Second, the. Unit 1 heatup'and cooldown curves will expire at the same time the next (surveillance capsule is-removed from Unit 1 (approximately March 1993). Thus,-it is necessary to submit revised UnitL1 technical. specifications sufficiently in advance of

[

the next Unit 51: capsule-. analysis to provide adequate timeufor NRC review and I

y approval.

(

L

. Given-these-two. considerations, we now plan to submit technical specification i-

- changes associated with revised heatup and cooldown curves for both North-Anna

).

. units by. December 15,1991. This consolidated technical specification change will be submitted sufficiently in advance to support any changes needed for the Unit 1 curves and still provide us with the additional time necessary to revise-the Unit 2 curves so-

- that sufficient operating-margin is. maintained. Because-fluence data from' recent surveillance capsule dosimetry analyses indicates an excellent comparison between F

measured and predicted vessel fluence values, we are confident that the curves and

' limits currently.in-the Unit:1 and 2 technical specifications remain conservative through

- their core' average burnup of 10 EFPY.

p

Very truly y _

1 e

i

/

{h L

W. L. Ste l rt;

[

Senior Vi e President.*:/ clear p

g cc:

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission i.

. Region Il,

i

[

1101 Marietta Street, N.W.-

E Suite 2900 i

Atlanta, Ga 30323 1

Mr. M. S. Lesser f

NRC Senior Resident inspector North Anna Power Station-1 3