ML20133G857: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
StriderTol Bot insert
 
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML20133G857
| number = ML20133G857
| issue date = 01/07/1997
| issue date = 01/07/1997
| title = Provides Justification for Comed'S Decision to Increase Commitment for Max Number of Days of Operation of Unit 1 Cycle 8.Increase Will Improve Detection Threshold for Top of Tube Sheet Circumferential Indications
| title = Provides Justification for Comeds Decision to Increase Commitment for Max Number of Days of Operation of Unit 1 Cycle 8.Increase Will Improve Detection Threshold for Top of Tube Sheet Circumferential Indications
| author name = Hosmer J
| author name = Hosmer J
| author affiliation = COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
| author affiliation = COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:-                        -
{{#Wiki_filter:-
    .                Commonwralth likson Company
Commonwralth likson Company I 600 Opus I'larc Downers Grosc. 11.60515 January 7,1997 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C 20555 Attention:
  ,  .              I 600 Opus I'larc
NRC Document Control Desk
            ,        Downers Grosc. 11.60515 1
January 7,1997 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission                                                                     !
Washington, D.C 20555 Attention:         NRC Document Control Desk


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Line 28: Line 25:
==References:==
==References:==
: 1. J. Hosmer letter.to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated December 20,1996, transmitting Information Pertaining to Byron Unit 1 Cycle Length
: 1. J. Hosmer letter.to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated December 20,1996, transmitting Information Pertaining to Byron Unit 1 Cycle Length
: 2. K. Graesser letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated October 18,1996, transmitting the Operating Interval Between Eddy Current Inspections for Circumfereratial Indications in the Byron Unit 1       )
: 2. K. Graesser letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated October 18,1996, transmitting the Operating Interval Between Eddy Current Inspections for Circumfereratial Indications in the Byron Unit 1
;                                        Steam Generators
)
,                Via the reference letter 1, the Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) changed our                         ;
Steam Generators Via the reference letter 1, the Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) changed our commitment for the maximum number of days of operation of Byron Unit I for Cycle 8 l
commitment for the maximum number of days of operation of Byron Unit I for Cycle 8                     l from 448.5 days to 540 days (above T-Hot of 500 F). This timeframe would allow the                     j
from 448.5 days to 540 days (above T-Hot of 500 F). This timeframe would allow the j
(               unit to operate until the steam generators are replaced. The decision to change the commitment was based upon the technicaljustification for operation of the Unit I steam generators for 540 days, which had been transmitted previously via Reference 2, and the expedited availability of the Unit I replacement steam generators. In addition to this quantitative evaluation, Comed believes that the 540 days of operation of Byron Unit 1 is justified given the high quality of the two previous inspections that were performed on Byron I steam generators. Specifically, the 3 coil Plus Point Probe was used during the October 1995 and the April 1996 inspections, Eddy Net 95 software was used during the April 1996 inspection, which provided the analysts with additional tools to facilitate the detection of circumferential indications,
(
                                                                                                                  \ g and l
unit to operate until the steam generators are replaced. The decision to change the commitment was based upon the technicaljustification for operation of the Unit I steam generators for 540 days, which had been transmitted previously via Reference 2, and the expedited availability of the Unit I replacement steam generators. In addition to this quantitative evaluation, Comed believes that the 540 days of operation of Byron Unit 1 is justified given the high quality of the two previous inspections that were performed on Byron I steam generators. Specifically, the 3 coil Plus Point Probe was used during the October 1995 and the April 1996 e
* increase in analyst awareness due to the Fall 1995 pulled tube results at Byron.
inspections, Eddy Net 95 software was used during the April 1996 inspection, which provided the
These actions lead to a significant improvement in the detection threshold for top of tube sheet circumferentialindications; therefore, Comed is confident that the condition of the       [,
\\ g o
Byron Unit i steam generators is not a safety concern at the end of the 540 day cycle 1G0043 9701160190 970107 PDR       ADOCK 05000454 P                           PDR K:nlaibybwd\stgen\bycycle A l'nicom Company
analysts with additional tools to facilitate the detection of circumferential indications, and increase in analyst awareness due to the Fall 1995 pulled tube results at Byron.
l These actions lead to a significant improvement in the detection threshold for top of tube sheet circumferentialindications; therefore, Comed is confident that the condition of the
[,
Byron Unit i steam generators is not a safety concern at the end of the 540 day cycle 1G0043 9701160190 970107 PDR ADOCK 05000454 P
PDR K:nlaibybwd\\stgen\\bycycle A l'nicom Company


U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission                                 January 7,1997 4
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 7,1997 4
As a result of our technicaljustification and to provide additional conservatism, Byron will be submitting to the Staff a request to amend the Technical Specification which would lower the allowable dose equivalent iodine in the reactor coolant from .35 microCuries/ gram to .20 microCuries/ gram for Cycle 8 for Unit 1.
As a result of our technicaljustification and to provide additional conservatism, Byron will be submitting to the Staff a request to amend the Technical Specification which would lower the allowable dose equivalent iodine in the reactor coolant from.35 microCuries/ gram to.20 microCuries/ gram for Cycle 8 for Unit 1.
Byron Station is anxious to finalize the steam generator replacement schedule, and therefore, is requesting a prompt decision from the Staff which concurs that our evaluation is a rational and conservative approach to stay within our current licensing basis, and that 540 days of operation above a T-Hot of 500 F is appropriate.
Byron Station is anxious to finalize the steam generator replacement schedule, and therefore, is requesting a prompt decision from the Staff which concurs that our evaluation is a rational and conservative approach to stay within our current licensing basis, and that 540 days of operation above a T-Hot of 500 F is appropriate.
If you have any questions concerning this correspondence, please contact Denise             I Saccomando, Senior PWR Licensing Administrator at (630) 663-7283.                           l Sincerely,                                                                                   I i
If you have any questions concerning this correspondence, please contact Denise Saccomando, Senior PWR Licensing Administrator at (630) 663-7283.
ki 0 hnq John B. Hosmer                                                                               l Engineering Vice President cc:     M. D. Lynch, Senior Project Manager-NRR G. Dick, Byron Project Manger-NRR                                                   )
Sincerely, i
S. Burgess, Senior Resident Inspector-Byron                                         !
ki 0 hnq John B. Hosmer Engineering Vice President cc:
A.B. Beach, Regional Administrator-Rill                                             l Office of Nuclear Safety-IDNS                                                       l l
M. D. Lynch, Senior Project Manager-NRR G. Dick, Byron Project Manger-NRR
I 1
)
K:nla'bybwdistgen\bycycle}}
S. Burgess, Senior Resident Inspector-Byron A.B. Beach, Regional Administrator-Rill l
Office of Nuclear Safety-IDNS K:nla'bybwdistgen\\bycycle}}

Latest revision as of 08:13, 12 December 2024

Provides Justification for Comeds Decision to Increase Commitment for Max Number of Days of Operation of Unit 1 Cycle 8.Increase Will Improve Detection Threshold for Top of Tube Sheet Circumferential Indications
ML20133G857
Person / Time
Site: Byron 
Issue date: 01/07/1997
From: Hosmer J
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9701160190
Download: ML20133G857 (2)


Text

-

Commonwralth likson Company I 600 Opus I'larc Downers Grosc. 11.60515 January 7,1997 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C 20555 Attention:

NRC Document Control Desk

Subject:

Byron Unit 1 Cycle Length NRC Docket Number 50:454

References:

1. J. Hosmer letter.to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated December 20,1996, transmitting Information Pertaining to Byron Unit 1 Cycle Length
2. K. Graesser letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated October 18,1996, transmitting the Operating Interval Between Eddy Current Inspections for Circumfereratial Indications in the Byron Unit 1

)

Steam Generators Via the reference letter 1, the Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) changed our commitment for the maximum number of days of operation of Byron Unit I for Cycle 8 l

from 448.5 days to 540 days (above T-Hot of 500 F). This timeframe would allow the j

(

unit to operate until the steam generators are replaced. The decision to change the commitment was based upon the technicaljustification for operation of the Unit I steam generators for 540 days, which had been transmitted previously via Reference 2, and the expedited availability of the Unit I replacement steam generators. In addition to this quantitative evaluation, Comed believes that the 540 days of operation of Byron Unit 1 is justified given the high quality of the two previous inspections that were performed on Byron I steam generators. Specifically, the 3 coil Plus Point Probe was used during the October 1995 and the April 1996 e

inspections, Eddy Net 95 software was used during the April 1996 inspection, which provided the

\\ g o

analysts with additional tools to facilitate the detection of circumferential indications, and increase in analyst awareness due to the Fall 1995 pulled tube results at Byron.

l These actions lead to a significant improvement in the detection threshold for top of tube sheet circumferentialindications; therefore, Comed is confident that the condition of the

[,

Byron Unit i steam generators is not a safety concern at the end of the 540 day cycle 1G0043 9701160190 970107 PDR ADOCK 05000454 P

PDR K:nlaibybwd\\stgen\\bycycle A l'nicom Company

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 7,1997 4

As a result of our technicaljustification and to provide additional conservatism, Byron will be submitting to the Staff a request to amend the Technical Specification which would lower the allowable dose equivalent iodine in the reactor coolant from.35 microCuries/ gram to.20 microCuries/ gram for Cycle 8 for Unit 1.

Byron Station is anxious to finalize the steam generator replacement schedule, and therefore, is requesting a prompt decision from the Staff which concurs that our evaluation is a rational and conservative approach to stay within our current licensing basis, and that 540 days of operation above a T-Hot of 500 F is appropriate.

If you have any questions concerning this correspondence, please contact Denise Saccomando, Senior PWR Licensing Administrator at (630) 663-7283.

Sincerely, i

ki 0 hnq John B. Hosmer Engineering Vice President cc:

M. D. Lynch, Senior Project Manager-NRR G. Dick, Byron Project Manger-NRR

)

S. Burgess, Senior Resident Inspector-Byron A.B. Beach, Regional Administrator-Rill l

Office of Nuclear Safety-IDNS K:nla'bybwdistgen\\bycycle