ML20116F046
| ML20116F046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20116F038 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8504300535 | |
| Download: ML20116F046 (3) | |
Text
.-
parato
~%
UNITED STATES
+
[
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
-j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.ll6 TO LICENSE NO. DPR-49 IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY CENTRAL IOWA POWER COOPERATIVE
~' CORN BELT POWER COOPERATIVE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER DOCKET NO. 50-331 1.0 Introduction By a letter dated December 7, 1984, the Iowa Electric Light and Power Company (the licensee /IELP) requested changes to the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) Technical Specifications regarding the spent and new fuel storage racks. The proposed revisions are intended to clarify the existing Technical Specifications and the bases related to spent and new fuel storage.
The current fuel storage rack Technical Specifications for reactivity ).
control are written in terms of effective multiplication factors (K ff In the past, because there has been a substantial margin between thI maximum permissible reactivity and the fuel bundle reactivity, the compliance based on K measure has not been of concern. However, as fuel designs are improved Ib# permit longer fuel cycles, the available margins are reduced to a point where a simpler method for determining compliance with the Technical Specifications (than complex calculations of K
) is needed to readily detennine compliance with the Technical Specifi8$(ions.
The proposed changes will specify fuel bundle k{9ffn{ty values which correspond to the fuel rack Technical Specifica limits. By using k
values,whicharereadilyavailable,thepr8Nssofchecking j
cbhTd IEe with the reactivity Technical Specifications is made simpler.
For General Electric Company (GE) designed fuel racks, the equivalent bundle k is 1.31 as described in the GE Standard Application for Reactorh0bEhEDE-24011-P-A). The following specific changes are requested in the proposed amendment request:
1)
Add bundle k limit to the new fuel rack specification; infinity 2)
Replace the current axial enrichment requirement with an equivalent bundle k value in the spent fuel storage rack specification; infinity and 3)
Add bases and references describing the basis for arriving at the storage rack specifications and methods for performing the compliance checks.
8504300535 850411 PDR ADOCK 05000331 P
.--l
. 2.0 Evaluation The new fuel storage racks at DAEC are of the regular General Electric design with 11.875 inch interrack spacing. Such racks have been approved for storage of fuel whose k " N Y value is less than or equal to 1.31 (seeGESTARIISection3.3.k The value of k is calculated at ambientconditionsinpurewaterwiththeuncontrodb"$Nembliesinthe core geometry. Storage of such fuel will not violate the acceptance criterion of 0.95 for the K value of the racks when flooded with pure f
We conclude that th$ feplacement of the current storage criterion, water.
which is expressed in terms of the linear assembly U-235 loading (gms/cm),
with the k criterion is acceptable.
infinity The spent fuel racks at DAEC were not designed and built by General Electric. They have been approved for storage of 8X8 assemblies having a uniform enrichment of 3.1 weight percent U-235 enrichment or less. General Electric has performed an analysis using its approved method to calculate a value of k in core geometry for that assembly. The resulting k
h E b. N.s 1.358
.007.
It is thus concluded that assemblies E
hdOUB4Y values less than or equal to 1.35 may be safely stored in therackdnf3n,ty Since the proposed Technical Specification change merely changes the method of assuring compliance with the storage reactivity criterion and the revised method is based on approved calculational methods, we find the change to be acceptable.
3.0 Environmental Considerations This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 this amendment involves no,
significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets 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 this amendment.
4.0 Conclusion We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
, s i
5.0 Reference Letter, B. F. Rubin (GE) to D. L. Wilson (DAEC), " Fuel Storage Rack Technical Specifications to Apply to LTAs," dated October 25, 1984.
Principal Contributor:
W. Brooks Dated: April 11,1985 l
+
f