ML042090104
| ML042090104 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 07/28/2004 |
| From: | Jabbour K NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD2 |
| To: | Marshall M NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD2 |
| Jabbour K, NRR/DLPM, 415-1496 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML042090104 (5) | |
Text
July 30, 2004 MEMORANDUM TO: Pat Milano, Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Licensing Project Management FROM:
Frank Akstulewicz, Chief /RA/
BWR Reactor Systems & Nuclear Performance Section Reactor Systems Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR JAMES A FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (TAC NO. MC3391)
Plant Name:
James A FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Utility:
New York Power Authority TAC No(s).:
MC3391 Docket No(s).:
50-333 Operating License:
DPR-59 Project Directorate:
Project Directorate I-1 Project Manager:
Pat Milano Review Branch:
SRXB/DSSA Review Status:
Incomplete The Reactor Systems Branch has reviewed the AmerGen Energy Corporations submittal, dated June 4, 2004, to request for technical specification (TS) change. The staff has found that a further justification on the licensees request for TS change is necessary to complete the review. The attached is the staffs request for additional information. Please transmit to the licensee.
Attachment:
As stated cc: S. Black T. Marsh CONTACT:
T. Huang, SRXB/DSSA 415-2867
MEMORANDUM TO: Pat Milano, Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Licensing Project Management FROM:
Frank Akstulewicz, Chief BWR Reactor Systems & Nuclear Performance Section Reactor Systems Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR JAMES A FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (TAC NO. MC3391)
Plant Name:
James A FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Utility:
New York Power Authority TAC No(s).:
MC3391 Docket No(s).:
50-333 Operating License:
DPR-59 Project Directorate:
Project Directorate I-1 Project Manager:
Pat Milano Review Branch:
SRXB/DSSA Review Status:
Incomplete The Reactor Systems Branch has reviewed the AmerGen Energy Corporations submittal, dated June 4, 2004, to request for technical specification (TS) change. The staff has found that a further justification on the licensees request for TS change is necessary to complete the review. The attached is the staffs request for additional information. Please transmit to the licensee.
Attachment:
As stated cc: S. Black T. Marsh CONTACT:
T. Huang, SRXB/DSSA 415-2867 DISTRIBUTION:
JWermiel FAkstulewicz THuang Accession Number: ML042120342 DSSA:SRXB DSSA:SRXB THUANG FAKSTULEWICZ 07/29/04 07/30/04 DOCUMENT: G:\\DSSA\\SRXB\\CPRFZPATRICKC17_RAI.WPD
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATING TO AMENDMENT NO. TO LICENSE NO. DPR-59 ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NPP DOCKET NO. 50-333 1.
Please provide uncertainty values for power distribution uncertainties shown in Table 1 of Attachment 4. Justify that the proposed reduction of the SLMCPR value is still providing enough margin for Cycle 17 operation with respect to the results shown in Table 4.1 of NEDC-32601P-A. Explain why the reduction in the calculated SLMCPR value due to using the improved/revised methodology is greater for Cycle 17 than the reduction shown in Table 4.1 of NEDO-32601P-A.
2.
Provide the relationship (in terms of the product of bundle-by-bundle MCPR distribution and the bundle pin-by-pin power/R-factor distribution) between the calculated SLMCPR and the power distribution uncertainty methodology and values that were used. Explain how these influenced the calculated SLMCPR and why a higher product number in Cycle 17 results with a lower calculated SLMCPR value than that in Cycle 16 as shown in Table 1 of Attachment 4. Also, explain the reason for obtaining a lower bundle-by-bundle MCPR distribution for Cycle 17 under revised Bases with respect to a higher number for Cycle 17 under GETAB Bases.
3.
Please describe the core monitoring methods to be used in Cycle 17 operation at JAFNPP and its interface with reduced power distribution uncertainties and other related input parameters as given in Table 2a of Attachment 4. Also, describe how the GEXL R-factor uncertainty shown in Table 2b is generated and explain whether this uncertainty is a constant or a fuel dependent and justify that the proposed value is conservative for this calculation.
4.
Please describe the issue related to outlet-peaked power shapes at any exposure in the cycle and its SLMCPR penalty associated with a top-peaked power shape in GE14 bundles for Cycle 17 operation.
ATTACHMENT