ML20072P677

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 154 & 135 to Licenses DPR-70 & DPR-75,respectively
ML20072P677
Person / Time
Site: Salem  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 08/22/1994
From:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20072P673 List:
References
NUDOCS 9409080154
Download: ML20072P677 (3)


Text

.

f*

'f 3

UNITED STATES o

?

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4

,/

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NVCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N05. 154 AND 135 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NVCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated March 4, 1994, as supplemented by letter dated June 14, 1994, the Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Salem Nuclear Generating Station (SNGS), Unit Nos.1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS)-,

The changes modify Section 5.3.1.of the TS to allow the use of Westinghouse Electric Corporation's (Westinghouse) Vantage +

fuel with ZIRLO cladding. The previous TS required the fuel cladding.to be Zircaloy-4, which is used in the Westinghouse Standard and Vantage 5H fuel designs.

The licensee's June 14, 1994 letter, and phone call July 22, 1994, provided additional information that did not alter the staff's original no significant hazards consideration determination.

The licensee's original submittal also requested a revision'to TS Section 5.6.1.

However, this revision was contingent on the staff not approving the licensee's April 28, 1993 amendment request prior to issuing this amendment.

By a May 4, 1994 letter, the staff issued Amendments 151-(SNGS, Unit 1) and 131 (SNGS, Unit 2), which granted the licensee's April 28, 1993 amendment request.

Therefore, this safety evaluation will have no further discussion of the proposed revision to TS Section 5.6.1, and TS Page 5-5'will not be modified.

2.0 BACKGROUND

The NRC issued Generic letter (GL) 90-02 on January 29, 1990, to implement a line-item improvement to plant TS by providing alternate requirements for fuel assemblies in the design features section of the TS.

The GL states that, on a plant-specific basis, "the staff has approved changes to these requirements that provide flexibility for improved fuel performance by permitting timely removal of fuel rods that are found to be leaking during a refueling outage or 9409000154 940822

.PDR ADOCK 05000272 p

PDR

0

  • are determined to be probable sources of future leakage " The NRC issued Supplement 1 to GL 90-02 on July 31, 1992, to clarify the limitations on the application of NRC-approved analytical methods related to fuel assembly reconstitution.

Supplement I also withdrew and replaced the model TS recommended in the initial GL 90-02 to be consistent with realistic reconstitution configurations.

The model TS change in GL 90-02, Supplement 1, is also reflected in NUREG-1431, Revision 0 (September 1992), which is the standard TS for plants of Westinghouse design.

Separately, a March 30, 1993, letter from A. C. Thadani, NRC, to S. R. Tritch, Westinghouse, approved the use of Westinghouse topical report WCAP-13060,

" Westinghouse Fuel Assembly Reconstitution Evaluation Methodology," as a basis for fuel assembly reconstitution.

The staff's approval is only applicable for those reconstituted assemblies with mixing vane grid design. Westinghouse reconstituted assemblies without mixing vane grid design will require a separate review.

In addition, the approval is contingent upon analytical confirmation that the exact configuration and associated core power distribution of proposed reconstituted assemblies does not introduce a change in radial gradients in the flow and enthalpy distribution that could invalidate the applicability of the critical heat flux correlation used for departure.from nucleate boiling predictions.

3.0 EVALUATION The licensee's proposed change to TS 5.3.1 is a line item change and is essentially consistent with the guidance contained in GL 90-02, Supplement 1 (with one minor exception discussed below), and with NUREG-1431, Revision 0.

In a telephone call on July 22, 1994, the licensee agreed to clarify its request by replacing the words " zirconium alloy" with the words "zircaloy or ZIRLO." This clarification is within the scope of the action noticed in the Federal Reaister on March 30, 1994, and does not alter the staff's initial determination of no significant hazards determination.

This clarification is necessary because 10 CFR 50.46, " Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light water nuclear power reactors,"

specifies "zircaloy or ZIRLO" cladding material in the core. ZIRLO is the trade name for a specific zirconium alloy and was incorporated into the NRC's regulations on August 31, 1992.

The licensee's amendment request used the words " zirconium alloy" to describe the cladding material.

The NRC staff's position is that the design description of fuel rods ia TS 5.3.1 should state "zircaloy or ZlRLO" instead of " zirconium alloy" to be consistent with 10 CFR 50.46.

With the clarification discussed above and incorporated into the proposed TS revision, the staff finds that the licensee's request complies with the guidance provided in GL 90-02, Supplement 1 and is therefore acceptable. The use of NRC-approved methodology will limit the substitutions of zirconium alloy filler rods and will ensure that the filler rods are compatible with other fuel rods.

. Regarding the use of Vantage + fuel, in letters from A. C. Thadani, NRC, to S.

R. Tritch, Westinghouse, dated July 1,1991, and October 9,1991, the staff previously approved the ZIRLO fuel design discussed in Westinghouse topical report WCAP-12610, " VANTAGE + Fuel Assembly Reference Core Report." However, the licensee's original letter did not explicitly state that the generic analyses referenced by the licensee applied at SNGS.

In a May 19, 1994, telephone call, the staff asked the licensee to demonstrate that the generic analyses applied to SNGS.

In it's June 14, 1994 letter, the licensee provided the applicability statements that the staff requested. Specifically, the licensee stated that the same approved code methodologies used by Westinghouse for the reference plant are also applicable at SNGS. Therefore, the licensee's proposal to use Vantage + fuel is acceptable and will ensure that plant operation meets applicable safety criteria.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.

The State official had no comments.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.

The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 14896). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.

I

6.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor:

S. Dembek I

Date: August 22, 1994 i