ML20107A632
Text
,.
Js o
~
=
c
>[j
{,'
yY - transmitted by facsimili 8/24/73 UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
}
f WASHINGTON. D.C. 2 M O e
August 24, 1973 Regional Directors, R0 FURTHER OPERATING LIMITS FOR TEN BOILING WATER REACTORS 5
On August 24, 1973, Licensing issued orders to ten Boiling l
Water Reactors which amended their Technical Specifications by establishing limits on the allowable' linear heat genera-tion rates.
The effect of this may cause a reduction in the allow.-ble reactor power levels at some or all of these reac-tors.
The purpose of this action was to conservatively compensate for the effects of fuel densification.
On November 14, 1972, the Directorate of Licensing issued a i
technical report on UO2 fuel densification which described the phenomena which was first observed at the Ginna Pressur-ized Water Reactor and subsequently observed at other PWR's.
The observed phenomena with an acceptable technical rationale for evaluating the effects of densification were provided in that report.
In response to early questions of the Regulatory staff, the General Electric Company replied that fuel densification effects would be negligible in BWR designed fuel elements and need not limit reactor operations.
The staff, in pursu-ing this matter did require the General Electric Company to develop a model for evaluating fuel densification and
!l provided assumptions for their use in re-analyses.
The General Electric Company in Supplement 6 to NEDM 10735 pro-vided limit curves which, if adhered to in normal operation, would assure that normal operational transients and accident situation would not cause the course of such events to be beyond previously accepted limits.
The following reactors are affected:
Region I Region III
~s Dresden 2 Oyster Creek Dresden 3 Nine Mile Point Vermont Yankee Quad Cities 1 j
Millstone Quad Cities 2 Monticello Pilgrim
()
i1 9604150044 960213 ii i
DEKOK95-258 PDR
(i
}
j d.
1
)'
Regional Directors, R0 August 24, 1973
.The limit curves for each reactor from the revised Technical Specifications will be forwarded to the responsible. Region today.for your use in determining compliance.
As I understand i
the requirement, immediate compliance with the order is required with a telephone report by August 27, 1973, describ-ing'how compliance is being met.
In the event a licensee reports to a Regional office in this matter, please forward the information to Headquarters promptly.
' h a F./4
- C Donald F. Knuth Director of Regulatory Operations i
s I
,4
.._l ;
~
~.,. -
-_n
~
., ~
~
.MO o19 f:
4-f I ~:,f: ~.
.S, r.1
\\ :,\\ e,
3-TABLE 1
\\'
SL? MARY OF DENSIFICATION ANALYSIS RESULTS
^
FUEL TYPE (See Reference 3 for Fuel Type GENERAL ELECTRIC EXION FILF.G Descriptions)
TYPE I*
TYPE II TYPE III
' TrPE IIII.
' ANALYSIS
.A.
_ Steady State
- 1. -Power Spike
~
3.8%
~
32%
k 6%
- 1. 67.
2.
Net Effect on IJER O
O C
O
- D.
Transient 1.
All Transients Minimal Effect (See Sections Finimal Eftect (See Atte.chaent I) 4 and 6 of Reference 2).
C.
Accidents 1.f Accidents Other than LOCA Mininal Effect (See Sections Minimal Effect (See Attach::ent 1) k and 6 of Reference 2) 2.
DBA LOCA at 1930 ht & 2 33 GPF (a) GE Calculations IAC PCT' 2237 2262 95/90 Li=iting Rod FCT 2k15**
2k50**
1 95/90AllRodsPCT 27sO**
, 2730**
s (b) EXXON Calculations IAC PCT.
2230 2225
- 2200 95/90 All Rods PCT 2618
' 2601 2544
- Note tinf, tifo 252 assemblies in Oyster Creek of Fuel Type I have an average exposure of 1k.108 WD/)c' and are incepchle cf befog limiting for IOCA.
- ** Estimated from previously supplied sensitivity information and gap conductance values obtained from Reference 2.
sg+ t s.2, 8 4
f
.