ML20141E168
| ML20141E168 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 05/16/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20141E164 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9705200352 | |
| Download: ML20141E168 (5) | |
Text
.. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _ _.. _._.. _ _ _._ _ _
c ruau 3
UNITED STATES g
,g NUCLEAR REQULATO'AY COMMISSION
't WASHINGTON, D.C. 300eH001
\\.....,$
^'
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 159 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-19 6 4 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR COP 9ErNWEALTH EDISON COMPANY l
'DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNITS 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-237 AND 50-249 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I By letter dated June 20, 1996, as supplemented, December 30, 1996, and j
March 5, 1997, Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed, the licensee) submitted an application for license amendments requesting changes to the Technical Specifications (TS). The amendments would change the TSs by incorporating an l
NRC-approved thermal limit licensing methodology in the list of approved methodologies used in establishing the fuel cycle-specific thermal limits.
In addition, the proposed amendments would change the TSs to reflect the use of 1-Siemens Power Corporation (SPC) ATRIUM-98 fuel for the first time at Dresden, Units 2 or 3.
The proposed amendments would also correct minor editorial j
items in the TSs.
4 2.0 EVALUATION i
The proposed change to the TSs being evaluated here allows the plant to enter 4
i Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5 with ATRIUM-9B fuel loaded in the reactor core.
Operational Modes 3 and 4 permit increases in the allowable temperatures and l
pressures of the reactor coolant, but would not permit the reactor to become j
critical.
]
Fuel Characteristics Pursuant to the amendments being considered, Dresden, Units 2 and 3, would use SPC ATRIUM-9B fuel which is a 9x9 matrix with 72 fuel rods and a water box.
The mechanical design of this fuel has been analyzed in accordance with SPC 4
i NRC-approved generic mechanical design criteria (References 1 and 2). These references are being added to Section 6.9.A.6.b of the TSs.
4 The description of the~ fuel in TS Section 5.3.A is being changed to provide a i
description of the water rods and zirconium alloy. ATRIUM-98 contains central i
water boxes and the term " zirconium alloy" is peing revised to Zircaloy and ZIRLO which are the only zirconium alloys allowed by 10 CFR 50.46. A footnote is being added to state that the ATRIUM-9B fuel, with the exception of lead j
test assemblies, is only allowed in the reactor core in Operational Modes 3, j-4, and 5 and that the design bases applicable to ATRIUM-9B fuel are those 9705200352 970516 "i
PDR ADOCK 05000237 P
PDR s
i-
- 4. -
- i t
i which are applicable to Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5.
The amendments to allow startup and power operation with ATRIUM-98 will be considered separately prior.to restart of Dresden, Unit 3.
]
With consent from Comed, on May 14, 1997, TS page 5-5 was annotated to indicate that ATRIUM-9B is allowed in the reactor core with the exception of lead test assemblies, in Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5 only.
i Core Loadina Evaluation and Shutdown Marain The ATRIUM-9B fuel weighs essentially the same as the current SPC fuel and is 4
compatible with the refueling platform main grapple. Therefore, the refueling J
i platform main hoist is sufficient to handle the new fuel. The ATRIUM-98 fuel uses a channel design with mechanical and structural design similar to the current SPC fuel.
The staff finds that this new fuel can be safely loaded into the reactor core because it is physically similar to the current fuel.
Support of fuel in Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5 requires consideration of core shutdown margin (SDM) and fuel bundle mechanical integrity.
Core SDM is defined as the amount of shutdown core reactivity with all the control rods I
inserted and with the strongest worth control rod fully withdrawn at 68 degrees Fahrenheit and zero Xenon concentration. The licensee's methodology for calculating SDM is contained in References (3) and (4) and also in the current TS Sections 6.9.A.6.b.(4) and 6.9.A.6.b.(8), both previously approved by the NRC.
Core SDM for beginning of cycle is greater i
1 than 1.00 percent M, which satisfies the TS value of 0.42 percent M.
Therefore, the staff finds that the ATRIUM-98 fuel can be loaded and placed in
-)
its planned Cycle 15 configuration for Dresden, Unit 3, and remain suberitical j
with the strongest worth control rod withdrawn.
The fuel handling equipment accidents were also considered. The licensee determined that the evaluated fuel bundle drop accident for the ATRIUM-9B fuel assembly is bound by the results of the fuel handling accident presented in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
Mechanical Desian TS Section 6.9.6.b would be revised to include the NRC-approved topical reports ANF-89-98(P)(A), Revision 1, and Revision 1 Supplement 1, " Generic Mechanical Design Criteria for BWR Fuel Designs," (Reference 1) and " Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation Generic Mechanical Design for Advanced Nuclear Fuels 9X9-IX and 9X9-9X BWR Reload fuel," ANF-89-014(P)(A), Revision 1, and Supplements 1 and 2, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, October 1991 (Reference 2), describing the criteria used by SPC to design boiling-water reactor (BWR) fuel assemblies. The reports are appropriate for the Dresden
>1 ant design and are acceptable for use. The ATRIUM-9B mechanical design has
>een analyzed according to this generic mechanical design criteria as applicable to Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5.
SPC mechanical design calculations using the above NRC-approved methodology
. demonstrate that ATRIUM-98 complies with the criteria applicable to Modes 3, 4, and 5.
This plant-specific application of the NRC-approved criteria is acceptable by the staff, along with the proposed TSs reference changes.
In conclusion, the proposed changes to the Dresden, Units 2 and 3, TSs support loading of ATRIUM-9B fuel during Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5.
Approved methodologies are used to analyze SDM and fuel bundle integrity during fuel loading in these modes. The staff has concluded that all applicable limits for Operational Modes 3, 4, and 5, such as nuclear (shutdown margin) and accident analysis limits, are met. Therefore, the changes are acceptable.
Consideration of Hioher Pressures The itcensee has evaluated the potential blowdown at pressures corresponding to Operational Modes 3 and 4, which are higher than that in Operational Mode 5.
The reactor would remain subcritical and no adverse consequences would result. The mechanical fuel design would accommodate both the higher pressure and a potential rapid pressure reduction, and the plant would still remain in a safe condition. The staff has reviewed the licensee's evaluation and finds it acceptable.
Summary Based on the above, the staff has concluded that operatir.g Dresden, Units 2 and 3, with ATRIUM-9B fuel other than lead test assemblies in Modes 3, 4, and 5 is acceptable based on the approved-mechanical design of the fuel, the maintenance of the reactor in a subcritical mode, and the existing SDN.
The outstanding issues concerning the uncertainty of ANFB additive constants used for 9X9 fuels with an internal water channel in the MCPR safety limit i
analysis and the other requested changes to the TSs will be evalNted in j
separate amendments prior to restart of Dresden, Unit 3 (currently scheduled l
for June 8, 1997).
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of i
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 5
exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the i
j
4_
amendments involve no signifit. ant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (62 FR 17227). 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.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) thet a is reasonable assurance thn i.he health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner di such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission't vesulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments would not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: John Stang Date: May 16, 1997
t
~
6.0 REFERENCES
1.
Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, ANF-89-98(P)(A), Revision 1, and Revision 1 Supplement 1, " Generic Mechanical Design Criteria for BWR Fuel Designs," dated May 1995.
i l
2.
Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, ANF-89-014(P)(A), Revision 1 and i
Supplements 1 and 2, " Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation Generic Mec1anical Design for Advanced Nuclear Fuels 9X9-IX and 9X9-9X BWR i
Reload fuel," dated October 1991.
i 3.
Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporacion, XN-NF-80-19 (P)(A), Volume 1, Supplement 3, Supplement 3 Appendix F, and Supplement 4, " Advanced Nuclear Fuels Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors," dated November 1990.
4.
Commonwealth Edison Company Topical Report NFSR-0091, " Benchmark of CASM0/MICR0 BURN BWR NUCLEAR DESIGN METHODS," Revision 0, Supplements 1 and 2, dated December 1991, March 1992 and May 1992, respectively; SER letter dated March 22, 1993.
)
l i
l
)
l 1
- _ _ _