ML20079L995
| ML20079L995 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079L993 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9111070226 | |
| Download: ML20079L995 (2) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _
- (*%q%'j y
UNITED STATES E ' 3..w NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
WASHINoTON D, C. 20555 g
,p SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLFAR REACTOR REGULATinH RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-9 AND AMENDMENT NO.109 TO FAClllTY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-17 DllKE POWER COMPANY PCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-369 AND 50-370
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated April 18, 1991, the Duke Power Company (licensee) submitted a request for changes to the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and ?, Technical Specifications !TS). The requested changes would revise TS 5.3.1 to enable the use of two demonstration assemblies during McGuire Unit 1 Cycles 8, 9, and 10.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee analyzed the advanced alloy cladding material properties and performance. The licensee concluded that the results of testing and evalua-tions support the safety of the planned irradiations of the two demonstration assemblies in reactor service.
Inasmuch as these two assemblies are test assemblies and the data from these assemblies will be used to achieve improved performance for future fuel rod material, we conclude that the licensee has provided adequate assurance for these two assemblies in McGuire Cycle 8 reload.
The staff considers these two demonstration assemblies as lead test assemblies (LTAs).
In general, there are two criteria governing the use of LTAs:
(1) the total number of der.onstration as tablics in one core should be limited, and (?) the demonstration a n c blies ;nould not be loaded in limiting positions. The licensee's demo %tration program conforms to these criteria.
We conclude that these two demonstration assemblies are acceptable for McGuire Cycle 8 and future cycles.
The licensee reruested an exemption to 10 CFR 50.46 since the two demonstration assemblies contain cladding material which is not Zircaloy, but has similar chemical proparties. The staff, on its own initiative, issued an exemption to 10 CFR 50 Appendix K, 10 CFR 50.44, and 50.46 on September 27, 1991. The basis for t'ne exemption is that calculations performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50 46, 10 CFR 50 Appendix K, and 10 CFR 50.44 are conservative and bounding for the two demonstration assemblies. The chemical similarity between the advanced claddings and Zircolay, in conjunction with the small number of advanced clad fuel rods present in the two demonstration assemblies, ensures that previous consideration o' the metal-water reaction and subsequent hydrogen production will not significantly change. Additionally, the demr.:tration assemblies meet the same design bases, setpoints, and safety limits as the fuel currently in the McGuire Unit I reactor.
l 9111070226 911031 l
D9 ADOCK 05000 9
4.
, - - - ~
- - ~ - - -
.o 2
Secticn 5.3 Reactor Core, fuel Assemblies was revised to include a footnote that would allot: the use of two demonstration asscrtlies which centain at least CC fuel rods of advanced alloy in eact assen4bly. Basco on the above evaluation, we conclude that the change is acccp+able.
The f:RC staff has reviewed the licensee's TS change submittal for McGuire Cycle 8 and future cycles.
Based on the stef1's evaluation of the advanced alloy requirements, the ute of two denonstration assemblie? cnd TS changes for McGuire Cycle C ard future cycles are approved.
3.0 FTATE C0hSULTATION In accordance with the Connistion's regulations, the North Caro! ira State official was retified of the proposed issuance of the anendnents.
The State of ficial had no ccrr.erts.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change requirerrnts with respect to installation or use of a facility cerrcr.ent located within the restricted crea as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The NRC staff has c'ctermined that the amendments insc1ve no significant increase in the amounts, and rc significant change in the types, oi any effluents that r,ay be released offsite, and that thcre is no significant increase in irdividual or cumulative occupational rcdiation exposure.
The Commissier has previously issued a proposed finding that the anenements involve no significant ha:ards consideration, and there has been no public comntnt on such finding (56 FR 27041). Acccrdingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set fcrth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuent to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no envirormer.tal impact staten.ent or environmental assessment r. red be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
5.0 CCFCLUS10N The Commissicr has concluded, based or, the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public vill not be endangered by operaticr. in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliacco with the Conmission's regulation;.
and (3) the issuance of the artrdments will not be inimical to the ccmmon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Frincipal Contributor:
S. Wu, SRXB/ CST Date:
October 31, 1991
,