ML20054D822

From kanterella
Revision as of 05:19, 9 March 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Addl Info Requested by NRC Re 820302 Proposed Tech Spec Change Reducing Boron Concentration in Boron Injection Tank
ML20054D822
Person / Time
Site: McGuire Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 04/19/1982
From: Parker W
DUKE POWER CO.
To: Adensam E, Harold Denton
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC-48049, NUDOCS 8204230419
Download: ML20054D822 (3)


Text

_

r - -

DuxE POWEH COMPANY Powzu Dun.n:No 422 Sourn Cnunen Srazer, CnAntorre, N. C. asa4a w n.ux,4 o. er a n c a, s a.

April 19, 1982 Vice Passiotut TELEPaout:AntA704 Setaw PaoouCTioN 373-4083

  • Q.

9 Mr. liarold R. Denton, Director , ;g N\

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation /

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission [. .;;y[. M' [ .g Washington, D. C. 20555 -

9- f'? g'^%.# M -

Attention: Ms. E. G. Adensam, Chief '. ",,,'

[1 Licensing Branch No. 4 M' 5.. \d Re: McGuire Nuclear Station 4! j iM \

Docket No. 50-369 Proposed Amendment to License NPF-9 submitted March 2, 1982

Dear Mr. Denton:

In a telecon with Mr. G. A. Copp (DPC/ Licensing) on March 29, 1982, Mr. Vince Leung (NRC/ Reactor Systems Branch) indicated that the Staff had several questions regarding our proposed Technical Specification change reducing boron concentration in the boron injection tank from a nominal 20,000 ppm to 2000 ppm (submitted by my letter dated March 2, 1982).

Attached is the requested information which was provided to us by Westinghouse.

We request that approval of the proposed amendment be completed as soon as possibic.

Should you have any questions concerning the information, please advise. i l

Ve y truly yours

/ N, wa (A d 4- .

William O. Parker, Jr PBN/jfw Attachment cc: Mr. P. R. Bemis Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator Senior Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission McGuire Nuclear Station Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 00 1

J

' I 8204230it'  !

DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION RESPONSE TO NRC QUESTIONS - BIT BORON CONCENTRATION REDUCTION Question 1: Verify that releases are within 10CFR-20 limits. Should this be 10CFR-1007 (p. 1, Attachment 1A).

Response: Since it was demonstrated that there is no fuel damage as a result of the accidental depressurization of the main steam system, the releases set forth in 10CFR-20 as limits could not be violated.

Question 2: What is the minimum DNBR value for accidental depressurization of the secondary transient?

Response: Historically, DNBR vs time plots have never been presented in Chapter 15 of the FSAR. Main steamline depressurization is a condition II event, and consequently must meet the radiological dose release requirements of 10CFR-20 which states that no fuel damage is permitted to occur.

Based on the calculated results presented in the Chapter 15 BIT reduction amendment, it was shown that no fuel damage was found to occur and thus the dose requirement is met. This is shown by the fact the DNBR remained above the limit value.

The evaluation of the DNBR for this accident is done on a state-point basis. The DNBR is not calculated during the transient calculations, nor is it calculated using the code (LOFTRAN) which calculated the transient.

Based on previous results, the minimum DNBR has been found to occur near the point of maximum return to power, therefore, only a few statepoints need to be evaluated in the range of the peak heat flux. The statepoints evaluated show the same general trend as the plot of DNBR vs time in WCAP-9226, the Steamline Break Topical Report. As shown in the topical, only for a small power range does the DNBR approach a minimum value. For all other times the DNBR >> 1.3. Therefore, an evaluation of a large number of statepoints is not necessary and it is sufficient to state that the DNBR remains above the limit value.

Question 3: What is the initial value of DNBR for inadvertant ECCS actuation? (p. 15.2-40, 15.2.14.3)

I l

i

o .

Response: 1.62 Question 4: What is the minimum DNBR value for the main steamline break transient? (p. 15.4-10)

Response: Main Steamline Break is a Condition IV event, and consequently must meet the radiological dose release requirements of 10CFR-100 which states that limited fuel damage is permitted to occur.

(Remainder of answer is the same as Response to Question 2).

<