ML20087C256
| ML20087C256 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1984 |
| From: | Fay C WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton, John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8403130005 | |
| Download: ML20087C256 (3) | |
Text
's o
lHsconsin Electnc m coww 231 W. MICHIGAN, P.O. BOX 2046. MILWAUKEE, WI 53201 March 5, 1984 Mr. H.
R.
Denton,, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
.U.
S.; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington, D.
C.
20555 Attention:
Mr.'J.
R. Miller, Chief Operating Reactors, Branch 3 Gentlemen:
DOCKET NO. 50-266 CYCLE 12 RELOAD POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 1 The refueling shutdown at the end of Unit 1 Cycle 11 began on October 1, 1983 at a cycle burnup of 7029 mwd /T.
Startup of Cycle 12 is expected to occur in mid-March 1984 following steam generator replacement.
Licensing items related to the steam generator replacement have been treated in separate correspondence.
This letter is to advise you of our plans regarding the Unit 1 Cycle 12 reload core.
The Unit 1 Cycle 12 reload core is designed to operate under current nominal design parameters, Technical Specifications and related bases, and current setpoints such that:
1.
Core characteristics will be less limiting than previously reviewed and accepted or, 2.
For those postulated accidents presented in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) which could be affected by the reload core, reevaluation has demonstrated that the results of the postulated events are within allowable limits.
Based on the Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation Report for Unit 1 Cycle 12 and discussions with Westinghouse Electric Corporation, safety evaluations will be performed by our Nuclear Systems Engineering and Analyses Section and our Point Beach Nuclear Plant supervisory staff pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59(a) and 10 CFR 50.59(b).
Acol (l wa%
P s
IC Er. H.
R. Denton March 5, 1984 The reload fuel mechanical and thermal-hydraulic design for the Cycle 12 reload core will be unchanged from that of previously reviewed and accepted reload designs.
The reload core meets the F8xP limit of less than 2.32 which is consistent with than1.58ensuresthattheDNBratiowillbegr$H previous reIoad nuclear designs.
The current F limit of less eater than 1.30.
In accordance.with past practice, the reload safety evaluation will rely on previously reviewed and accepted analyses reported in the FSAR and in earlier reload cycle Reload Safety Evaluation Reports.
.A. review will be made of the core characteristics to determine those parameters affecting the postulated accident
-analyses reported in the FSAR.-
The parameter values will be verified to be within the conservatism of the initial assumptions used in the previous applicable safety. analyses and, thus, the conclusions presented in the'FSAR will remain valid.
The reload. safety evaluation will demonstrate that, as far as the reload core is concerned, Technical Specification changes will not be required for operation of Unit 1 at full rated power during Cycle 12.
It will also demonstrate that'unreviewed safety questions, as defined by 10 CFR 50.59, will not be involved and, therefore, application for an amendment to the Unit 1 operating license will not be required for the Cycle 12 reload core.
Verifi-cation of the core design will, of course, be performed by means of the standard startup physics tests normally performed at the start of each cycle.
As. discussed in our letter to you of August 18, 1983, the Unit 1 rod cluster control assemblies (RCCA's) were examined for wear and evaluated using the same techniques as those used on the Unit 2 RCCA's.
The same types of cladding wear were also observed on the Unit 1 RCCA's.
Westinghouse has provided recommenda-tions as to how many RCCA's should be replaced.
Relocation of the RCCA's and positioning the RCCA's at slightly different fully withdrawn positions to restrict further wear at the wear locations is also being considered.
Summary results of the Unit 1 RCCA examination and our decision on-RCCA replacement or relocation will be reported to you in the near future.
During the recent fuel assembly visual examinations a certain amount of small metallic debris was observed in some of the. Unit 1 fuel assemblies.
The quantity and nature of the debris observed in Cycle 11 has been evaluated by Westinghouse and they have concluded that for Cycle 12 there is no concern from
r-p
~ *:
dO 8
^%
,w-L.
. Mr.,H.;;R Denton: March 5,'1984
~
a plant' safety standpoint.- Additional efforts w'ere expended to kj.
. ensure cleanup following.the steam generator replacement.
The bottom-of the, reactor vessel has been inspected and somo additional
- debris was rpcovered.
. '4 1
Very truly yours, a.
.. ';y
?, /
t s.
s f
d' Vice President-Nuclear Power z
.r, C. W. - Fay -
r.
. Copy to:NRC Resident Inspector e
,4.
p.
.s--
b sv s
h?
- s.
t n-"
w 4
-s.*
, y s
Y
~
,f' o
a.4 *
' ~
4 p.
si p 8 b
'.tj
.':r "
9.f
/
i A*
i
~, ).
' l
-k
.,. ;J ;
M 9
S
' ). -._
s..
- 87 I
l'
.[;,--
."y -
ff,#
e s'
4
- r
,s s
j.'
+
t
~'
i e' ll '
A c
=.
i