ML20214N958
| ML20214N958 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1986 |
| From: | SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214N955 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8609170190 | |
| Download: ML20214N958 (3) | |
Text
.
A rr ac.am" l f
DESIGN FEATURES
(
5.3 REACTOR CORE FUEL ASSEMBLIES 5.3.1 The reactor core shall contain 157 fuel assemblies with each fuel
(
assembly containing 264 fuel rods clad with (Zircaloy -4).
Each fuel rod shall have a nominal active fuel length of 144 inches. and cc.t:1a 2 - M u-u t:1 utight :f 1755 gr:= uren!"-
The initial core loading shall have a maximum enrichment of 3.2 weight percent U-235.
Reload fuel shall be similar in physical design to the initial core loading and shall have a maximum enrichment of 4.3 weight percent U-235.
CONTROL ROD ASSEMBLIES 5.3.2 The reactor core shall contain 48 full length control rod assemblies.
The full length control rod assemblies shall contain'a nominal 142 inches of absorber material.
The nominal values of absorber material shall be 80 percent silver, 15 percent indium and 5 percent cadmium.
All control rods shall be clad with stainless steel tubing.
5.4 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM DESIGN PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE 5.4.1 The reactor coolant system is designed and shall be maintained:
a.
In accordance with the code requirements specified in Section 5.2 of the FSAR,-with allowance for normal degradation pursuant to the applicable Surveillance Requirements, b.
For a pressure of 2485 psig, and
[For~atemperatureof650'F,exceptforthepressurizerwhichis c.
^
l
- 680ey,
.. ~
VOLUM6 I
i 5.4.2 The total water and steam volume of ihe reactor coolant system is 9407 i 100 cubic feet at a nominal T f 586.8 F.
avg 5.5 METEOROLOGICAL TOWER LOCATION l
l 5.5.1 The meteorological tower shall be located as shown on Figure 5.1-1.
l l
NN I.
P SUMMER - UNIT 1 5-6 Amendment No.t?-
_,v
--e w
,-,,g m
w
i ATTACHMENTll NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS DETERMINATION Design Features Section 5.3.1, " Fuel Assemblies," of the Technicai 5pecifications identifies a maximum total fuel rod weight of 1766 grams of uranium for the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station. Recent improvements to the fuel design, in~cluding an as-built density increase and chamfered pellets with a reduced dish, have increased fuel weight slightly.
The proposed change to Design Features Section 5.3.1 of the V. C. Summer Technical Specification deletes the maximum fuel rod weicIht limit of 1766 grams of uranium.
2 The purpose of the change is to permit the use o assemblies with fuel rods over this weight limit in subsequent fuel cycles. Other Technical Specifications cover more important fuel related parameters, and therefore deletion of the Design Features fuel rod weicjht limit is not significant to the safe o seration of the plant. Based on this and the ollowing evaluation, SCE&G has conc uded that the proposed change t
involves a no significant hazards determination.
1.
Will operation of the facility in accordance with this proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? No The deletion of the fuel rod uranium weight limit does not significantly increase the probability or consequences of previously evaluated accidents.
The variation in fuel rod weight that can occur even without a Technical Specification limit is small based on other fuel design constraints, for example, rod diameter, gap size, UO-2 density and active fuel length; all of t
which provide some limit on the variation in rod weight. The current safety i
analyses are not based directly on fuel rod weight, but rather on design parameters such as power and fuel dimensions. These parameters are either not affected at all by fuel rod weight or only slightly affected. However, a review of design parameters which may be affected indicates that a change in fuel weight does not cause other design parameters to exceed the values assumed in the various safety analyses or to cause acceptance criteria to be exceeded. The effects are not significant with respect to measured nuclear parameters such as power, power distribution, and nuclear coefficients as they remain within their Technical Specification limits. Thus, it is concluded that the Technical Specification modification does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of a previously evaluated accident.
2.
Will operation of the facility in accordance with this proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident i
previously evaluated? No The creation of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated accidentis not considered a possibility. All of the fuel contained in the fuel rod is similar to, and designed te function similar to, previous fuel.
Thus, the existing new and spent fuel storage criticality analyses are bounded. This change is considered as administrative in nature and does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
4
ATTACHMENTil--Continued 3.
Will operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? No
~
The margin of safety is maintained by adherence to other fuel related Technical Specification limits and the Final Safety Analysis Report design bases. The deletion of fuel rod weight limits in the Technical Specification Design Features Section 5.3.1 does not directly affect any safety system or the safety limits, and thus does not affect the plant margin of safety.
s 1
2
-. -.