ML17254A862

From kanterella
Revision as of 06:06, 4 May 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Proposed Tech Specs,Deleting Pages 2.1-3 & 2.1-4 & Inserting New Page 2.1-3 to Provide Consistency
ML17254A862
Person / Time
Site: Ginna Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 07/17/1984
From:
ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML17254A856 List:
References
NUDOCS 8407240218
Download: ML17254A862 (7)


Text

AttachmentA1.RevisetheTechnicalSpecificationsbyremovingexistingpages2.1-3and2.1-4andinsertingtheenclosedpage2.1-3.84070500PP44188407i7POP>DOCKpDpPI lit'tt!tlttltt-'t'r Sinceitispossibletohavesomewhatgreaterenthalpyrisehotchannelfactorsatpartpowerthanatfullpowerduetothedeepercontrolbankinsertionwhichispermittedatpartpower,aconservativeallowancehasbeenmadeinobtainingthecurvesinFigure2.1-1foranincreaseinFIHwithdecreasingpowerlevels.Rodwithdrawalblockandloadrunbackoccursbeforereactortripsetpointsarereached.TheReactorControlandProtectiveSystemisdesignedtopreventanyanticipatedcombinationoftransientconditionsforreactorcoolantsystemtemperature,pressureandthermalpowerlevelthatwouldresultintherebeinglessthana95%probabilityata95%confidencelevelthatDNBwouldnotoccur.(2)(1)FSAR,Section3.2.2(2)SafetyEvaluationforR.E.GinnaTransitionto14x14OptimizedFuelAssemblies,WestinghouseElectricCorporation,November1983.2.1-3ftleJ'mendmentNo.March30,1976PROPOSED C~4AttachmentBInpreparationoftheproposedTechnicalSpecificationrelatedtotheuseofWestinghouseOptimizedFuelasareloadfuelforGinna,whichwassubmittedonDecember20,1983,itwasintendedthattheinformationpresentedinTechnicalSpecificationpage2.1-3bedeleted.Thisinformation,theidentificationofnuclearhotchannelfactorswhichformedthebasisfortheprevioussafetylimitcurves,wasnolongercorrectandthecorrectbasiswasidentifiedontheproposedpagechanges.Weunderstandthatbecausethisportionofthechangewasnotexplicitlyidentifiedinoursubmittal,theNRCdidnotapprovethischangeinitsissuanceofAmendmentNo.61datedMay1,1984.Theproposedchangeremediesthisinconsistencybydeletingtheincorrectinformation.Inaddition,foradditionalclarifi-cation,arevisedreferencetotheoptimizedfuelanalysis,isprovided.Theproposedchangemerelycorrectsanadministrativeinconsistencyinthebasis.Itdoesnotreviseanyexistinglimitsbutisbasedonpreviouslyapprovedanalyses.,I'IIhJh444hlI'4lL C~1f.IbAIII1t AttachmentCInaccordancewith10CFR50.91,thischangetotheTechnicalSpecificationshasbeenevaluatedagainstthreecriteriatodetermineiftheoperationofthefacilityinaccordancewiththeproposedamendmentwould:1.involveasignificantincreaseintheprobabilityorconsequencesofanaccidentpreviouslyevaluated;or2.createthepossibilityofanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviouslyevaluated;or3.involveasignificantreductioninamarginofsafety.Asoutlinedbelow,RochesterGasandElectricsubmitsthattheissuesassociatedwiththisamendmentrequestareoutsidethecriteriaof10CFR50.91,andtherefore,anosignificanthazardsfindingiswarranted.Thechangesarealladministrativeinnature.AmendmentNo.61approveduseofWestinghouse'ptimizedfuelbasedonthe,analysisandproposedTechnical'pecificationswhichweresub-"mitted.Weunderstandthat'ecausethisportion:ofthe'hangewas'otexplicitlyidentifiedinoursubmittal,theNRCdidnotapprovethischangeinits'issuanceofAmendmentNo.61datedMay1,1984.Theproposedchangeremediesthisinconsistencybydeletingtheincorrectinformation.Inaddition,foradditionalclarifi-cation,arevisedreferencetotheoptimizedfuelanalysis,isprovided.Theproposedchangemerelycorrectsanadministrativeinconsistencyinthebasis.Itdoesnotreviseanyexistinglimitsbutisbasedonpreviouslyapprovedanalyses.TheproposedchangesareconformedtotheCommission'sexample(i)ofchangesthatdonotinvolveasignificanthazardsconsideration.

4~S4Tt~khttftILltPJk