ML20205F094
| ML20205F094 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1987 |
| From: | Gallaghger J PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19292H013 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703310086 | |
| Download: ML20205F094 (6) | |
Text
~
l j
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 2301 M ARKET STREET P.O. BOX 8699 PHILADELPHI A. PA.19101 (21S1 841 5001 JOSEPH W. G ALL.AGHER
. l'.1.".!*.'."I "7...
March 24, 1987 Docket No. 50-277 License No. DPR-44 Mr. Daniel R. Muller, Director BWR Project Directorate #2 Division of BWR Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN:
Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555
SUBJECT:
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2 Reload 7 License Amendment Application
References:
1)
Letter dated March 4, 1987 from J. S. Charnley, General Electric Company, to M. W. Hodges, !!RC 2)
Telephone Conference on March 10, 1987 between Licensee and NRC Staff
Dear Mr. Muller:
The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information pertaining to Philadelphia Electric Company's January 9, 1987 Application for Amendment of Facility Operating License DPR-44 regarding the fuel reload for Cycle 8 of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2.
This additional information was requested by the NRC staff during the referenced telephone conference.
Attachment A provides restatement 3 of the NRC staff's requests followed by Licensee's responses.
During the referenced telephone conference, the NRC staff also requested that Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.5.I (page 133a) from the January 9,
1987 Application be revised in accordance with the referenced letter.
Additionally, the NRC staff requested that Technical Specification Figures 3.5.1.M, 3.5.1.N and 3.5.1.0 (pages 1421, 142m and 142n) from the January 9, 1987 Application be revised to remove the note which references General Electric Company Document NEDE-24081-P.
Licensee agrees with the requested changes and herewith provides revised Technical Specification f7 k0t hDR 0
P
'\\
-Mr.
Daniel R. Muller March 24, 1987
~
Page 2
~
pages 133a, 1421, 142m and 142n incorporating the requested changes. ' The: revisions to these pages are administrative in nature and do not change the operating limits proposed in the January 9, 1987 Application.
Thus, these revisions are bounded by the significant hazards consideration determination in the January 9, 1987 Application.
The. revision to LCO 3.5.I merely:
- 1) replaces the reference to General Electric Company Document NEDE-24081-P, which would be subject to periodic revision upon fuel reloads, with more generic words ("APLHGR limit values which have been approved for the. respective fuel and lattice types"),
and 2) clarifies that when the normal means of ensuring compliance with the APLHGR limits, the process computer, is not available ("when hand calculations are required"), the most.
limiting lattice APLHGR limits for each fuel type will apply to every lattice.of that-fuel type.
Licensee believes that the requested revision of LCO 3.5.I necessitates a change to the Basis for the specification (page 140).
Accordingly, provided herewith is a revised page 140 which incorporates a new paragraph regarding APLHGR operating limits'for multiple lattice fuel types.
During the referenced telephone conference, the NRC staff also requested Licensee to submit a document which identifies the MAPLHGR values for each type of fuel and lattice, the axial location of the lattices, as well as fuel bundle descriptions for the new Cycle 8 fuel.
The NRC staff informed Licensee that this document could be held proprietary to the fuel supplier.. Accordingly, provided herewith is General Electric Company Document NEDE-24081-P-1, Supplement 1, Rev. 1, March 1987.
This document contains information which General Electric Company wishes to maintain in confidence and to be withheld from public disclosure.
The information has been handled and classified as proprietary to General Electric Company, as indicated by the attached affidavit.
Therefore, Licensee hereby requests that this document be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790.
The NRC staff also informed Licensee that this document should be l
available to the operators during Cycle 8 operation.
Because the I
- reactor engineers are the station personnel responsible for using l
the information in this document, the Reactor Engineering Group l
will be in possession of the document during Cycle 8.
P l
~
-narev.-.n.--.
,-,e,,-..m.,
,-n.,...~,.n.
,,n.w,,,.,.
,,,w.___,.~,n,,____
.. ~ -, _ -,,,, _ -..., _ ~,.
- - ~
Mr. Daniel R. Muller March 24, 1987 Page 3 If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours, W #h Attachments cc:
Addressee Dr. T.
E. Murley, Administrator, Region I, USNRC T. P. Johnson, USNRC Resident Site Inspector R. J. Clark, USNRC Peach Bottom Project Manager M. W. Hodges, Chief, Reactor Systems Branch, USNRC J
l
~.g:
n C0bHONWEAL'IH OF PENNSYLVANIA ss.
COUNTY OF PflILADELPIIIA J. W. Gallagher, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
That he is Vice President of Philadelphia Electric Company; that he has read the foregoing response to the NRC Staff's request for additional information regarding Licensee's January 9,1987, Application for Amendment of Facility Operating License DPR-44 including.the revisions to such application included in the response and knows the contents thereof; and that the statements and matters set forth therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge information and belief.
bM C/
u Vice President Subscribed and sworn to before me this / I day of Pfarch,' 1987.
./
f Notary Public MELANTE R. CAMPANELLA Notary Public, Philadelphia, Philadefphia Co.
My Commission Espires February 12,1990
. - _,. _, _. _ _, _,.. _ -. ~ ~ _. _. - _ _.. - - - - - -.. _.,,,, _.. - - - -.
Attachm2nt A~
Page 1 of 2 Docket No. 50-277 Additional Information NRC Request 1:
Confirm that the.new Cycle 8 fuel assemblies will satisfy the Technical Specification spent fuel pool requirements.
Response
The new fuel assemblies meet the Technical Specification requirements for the spent fuel pool (Sections 5.5.B and 5.5.D).
The maximum average' fuel assembly loading of the three types of new fuel assemblies is 14.9 grams U-235 per axial centimeter of total active fuel height of the assembly.
This value is less than the Technical Specification limit of 17.3 grams.
Calculations of fuel reactivity demonstrate that the new fuel assemblies fall within the bounds of the spent fuel rack subcriticality analyses.
These analyses, submitted to the NRC in July 1985 as part of the spent fuel rack safety analysis report, show that the nominal Keff calculated for normal storage is 0.9198 and the maximum Keff calculated for postulated accident conditions is 0.9357.
These values are less than the Technical Specification Keff limit of 0.95 for the spent fuel pool.
NRC Request 2:
In Attachment 2 of Licensee's November 12, 1986 submittal concerning plans to load lead test assemblies (LTAs) in the Cycle 8 core, an unsupported statement, Credit is taken for design improvements in the application of the GEXL correlation to the LTAs", infers that the Cycle 8 analysis of LTAs may be non-conservative since the applicability of GEXL to the LTAs has not been reviewed by the NRC staff.
To resolve this concern, Licensee should provide clarification of the analyses to address the LTAs.
Response
Consistent with past, approved practice (e.g., Duane Arnold Reload 7) for licensing LTAs, the LTA bundle R-factor has been concervatively adjusted to reflect the improved spacer design p
y-~m--,
--a->nn-a-s-m-p
,ay,,,p p.
-q-v g yy,gywpwgy-m.>m,p-,g_y4.pg---w,-pg,mng----,--
g myp.-
w, w.,-,,,-mg,-
y,m g,ys-
--w--yg-.,w,-m,m.--
,-y,p-p y +
e a
ra s
w _--
Attachm:nt A-Page 2 of 2 Docket No. 50-277 included in these assemblies.
The bundle R-factor-is a parameter of the GEXL correlation
(" General Electric BWR Thermal Analysis Bases (GETAB) Data, Correlation and Design Application", NEDO-10958-A, January 1977).- The R-factor adjustment was based on full-scale: testing of this improved spacer design at the ATLAS facility.
Use of the Peach Bottom Unit 2 LTA R-factor in the GEXL correlation resulted in critical power predictions that are approximately 5% more conservative than the ATLAS test results of the improved spacer design.
The intentional use of overly conservative R-factors, even though test data supports the use of more realistic R-factors, provides additional assurance that the LTA operating limits are conservative.
NRC Request 3:
Confirm that a 10 CFR 50, Appendix K analysis was performed for each Cycle 8 fuel lattice or provide justification that the analyses performed are bounding for all the lattices.
Response
All of the lattice MAPLHGR limits for the Peach Bottom Unit 2 Reload 7 bundles, standard bundles and LTAs, comply with the peak cladding temperature and oxidation fraction limits of 10 CFR 50.46.
The Peach Bottom Unit 2 Reload 7 analysis was performed at the most limiting combination of peak LHGR versus exposure at a conservatively assumed MAPLHGR value of 14.0 kw/ft, which bounds all lattice MAPLHGRs for each Reload 7 bundle.
The analysis results of 2089 degrees P peak cladding temperature and peak local oxidation fraction of 0.048 comply with the peak cladding temperature and oxidation fraction limits of 10 CFR 50.46.
l Therefore, all lattice MAPLHGR limits for each Reload 7 bundle comply with 10 CFR 50.46 limits for all exposures up to 50 GWD/ST planar exposure.
l I
i 1
_ _ _ _ -.,... _, _ _... _ _ -.. ~ _ _ _. _ _ _.... _ _, _ -, _ _. _ _ ~ _...., _... _ _ _.. _..,. _. -. = - - ~, -