ML022660608

Draft Request for Additional Information (Rai), Regarding Amendment Request to Increase Enrichment Limits for New Fuel Storage Racks

ML022660608
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	09/23/2002
From:	Dan Collins NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
To:	Richard Laufer NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
Collins D S, NRR/DLPM, 415-1427
References
TAC MB5301
Download: ML022660608 (3)

Text

September 23, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard J. Laufer, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Daniel S. Collins, Project Manager, Section 1 /RA/

Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO 2 - DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI), REGARDING AMENDMENT REQUEST TO INCREASE ENRICHMENT LIMITS FOR NEW FUEL STORAGE RACKS (TAC MB5301)

The attached revision to a draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on September 19, 2002, to Mr. Brian Sepelak of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company in preparation for an upcoming conference call. Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to identify areas where clarification may be needed, as well as determine and agree upon a schedule for responding to the RAI.

This memorandum and its attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent a Nuclear Regulatory Commission position.

Docket No. 50-412

Attachment:

As stated CONTACT: D. Collins, NRR 301-415-1427 September 23, 2002

MEMORANDUM TO: Richard J. Laufer, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM: Daniel S. Collins, Project Manager, Section 1 /RA/

Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO 2 - DRAFT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI), REGARDING AMENDMENT REQUEST TO INCREASE ENRICHMENT LIMITS FOR NEW FUEL STORAGE RACKS (TAC MB5301)

The attached revision to a draft RAI was transmitted by facsimile on September 19, 2002, to Mr. Brian Sepelak of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company in preparation for an upcoming conference call. Review of the RAI would allow the licensee to identify areas where clarification may be needed, as well as determine and agree upon a schedule for responding to the RAI.

This memorandum and its attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent a Nuclear Regulatory Commission position.

Docket No. 50-412

Attachment:

As stated CONTACT: D. Collins, NRR 301-415-1427 DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC PDI-1 R/F D. Collins M. OBrien Accession No: ML022660608 Office PDI-2/LA PDI-1/PM PDI-1/SC Name MOBrien DCollins RLaufer Date 09/23/2002 09/23/2002 09/23/2002 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 2

DRAFT DOCKET NO. 50-412 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is reviewing FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Companys (FENOC) May 31, 2002, application (L-02-070), and supplement dated September 11, 2002 (L-02-093), for an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-73 for the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No 2 (BVPS2), which would allow new fuel with an enrichment of 5.00 weight percent (w/o) U-235 to be placed into and stored in the BVPS2 new fuel storage racks.

The NRC staff has determined that additional clarification of FENOCs response to the staffs second question addressed in the September 11, 2002, supplement is needed in order to complete the NRC review of the amendment request. The following is a revision of the staffs previous question #2, and refers to the May 31, 2002, applications Attachment C, Criticality Analysis of the Beaver Valley Unit 2 Fresh Fuel Racks, April 2002:

1. The application references WCAP-14416 benchmark experiments. By letter dated July 27, 2001, the NRC notified Westinghouse that the methodology of WCAP-14416-NP-A is no longer considered to be a suitable reference to support license amendments. As such, the statement that No trends or biases as a function of lattice parameters was observed in the KENO-Va benchmarks, must be clarified. That could mean that speculation on enrichment trends is inconclusive and, therefore, not supportive of your application.

The enrichment values in the benchmark experiments of WCAP-14416 are as high as 4.31%. However the requested amendment is for 5.05w/o (including the tolerance).

Demonstrate whether the bias and uncertainty from the topical report is appropriate by showing how keff would change at this higher enrichment and what impact that has on meeting the keff acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.68.

Critical benchmark experiments using higher enrichments can be found in the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments, Volume IV, Low Enriched Uranium Systems.

DRAFT