PLA-6076, Proposed License Amendment No. 285 for Unit 1 and Proposed License Amendment No. 253 for Unit 2, Extended Power Uprate Application - Supplement

Proposed License Amendment No. 285 for Unit 1 and Proposed License Amendment No. 253 for Unit 2, Extended Power Uprate Application - Supplement

ML072900642
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	10/05/2007
From:	Mckinney B Susquehanna
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
PLA-6076, PLA-6189, PLA-6194, PLA-6290
Download: ML072900642 (18)

Text

Britt T. McKinney PPL Susquehanna, LLC I

I j Sr. Vice President & Chief Nuclear Officer 769 Salem Boulevard Berwick, PA 18603 ~ I r~2o 0 Tel. 570.542.3149 Fax 570.542.1504 ~ -

btmckinney@pplweb.com flfl E1D~ -

IJIJ &

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Mail Stop OP 1-17 Washington, DC 20555 SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 285 FOR UNIT 1 OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-14 AND PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 253 FOR UNIT 2 OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-22 EXTENDED POWER UPRATE APPLICATION - SUPPLEMENT Docket Nos. 50-387 PLA-6290 and 50-388

References:

1) PLA-6076, B. T. McKinney (PPL) to USNRC, "ProposedLicense Amendment Numbers 285for Unit 1 Operating License No. NPF-14and 253 for Unit 2 OperatingLicense No. NPF-22 Constant PressurePower Uprate," dated October11, 2006.

2) PLA-6194, B. T. McKinney (PPL) to USNRC, "ProposedLicense Amendment Numbers 285for Unit 1 Operating License No. NPF-14 and 253for Unit 2 OperatingLicense No. NPF-22 Extended Power UprateApplication RE: Health Physics Technical Review Requestfor Additional Information Responses, " dated May 9, 2007.

3) PLA-6189, B. T. McKinney (PPL) to USNRC, "ProposedLicense Amendment Numbers 285 for Unit 1 Operating License No. NPF-14 and 253for Unit 2 OperatingLicense No. NPF-22 Extended Power UprateApplication RE: OperatorLicensing and Human Performance Technical Review Request for Additional InformationResponses,"

dated May 3, 2007.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90, PPL Susquehanna LLC (PPL) requested in Reference 1 approval of amendments to the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES) Unit 1 and Unit 2 Operating Licenses (OLs) and Technical Specifications (TSs) to increase the maximum power level authorized from 3489 Megawatts Thermal (MWt) to 3952 MWt, an approximate 13% increase in thermal power. The proposed Constant Pressure Power Uprate (CPPU) represents an increase of approximately 20% above the Original Licensed Thermal Power (OLTP).

Document Control Desk PLA-6290 The purpose of this letter is to provide a supplement to Reference 1. The Supplement is provided in the Enclosure.

There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this submittal.

PPL has reviewed the "No Significant Hazards Consideration" and the "Environmental Consideration" submitted with Reference 1 relative to the Enclosure. We have determined that there are no changes required to either of these documents.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Michael H. Crowthers at (610) 774-7766.

I declare under perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on: /o -:-c7

-4 B.T. McKinney

Enclosure:

Supplemental Information Attachment 1: Plant Layout Maps Attachment 2: Condensate Pump Trip Test Proposed License Conditions Copy: NRC Region I Mr. R. V. Guzman, NRC Sr. Project Manager Mr. R. R. Janati, DEP/BRP Mr. F. W. Jaxheimer, NRC Sr. Resident Inspector

Enclosure 1 to PLA-6290 Supplemental Information

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 1 of 10 Introduction Based on analyses recently concluded, it has been determined that five changes originally envisioned to be required to support the Constant Pressure Power Uprate (CPPU) are not required and therefore will not be implemented.

The basis for each determination is provided below:

Emergency Service Water (ESW) Fuel Pool Check Valve Modification:

A. Summary of Previously Submitted Information:

Reference 1, Attachments 4, 6 (PUSAR), 7 (List of Planned Modifications) and 8 (Startup Testing) identified that PPL would install a modification to eliminate an operator vital mission.

The relevant portion of Reference 1 Attachments 4 and 6 Table 8-1 is provided below:

Location Function(RM CLTP Dose (REM) j CPPU(E) Dose (REM)

ViaMssions-Maintenance of Provide adequate cooling of Spent Fuel Pool SFP.

(SFP) Cooling - Mission (1) to control ESW 1.4112.13 2.2612.13 Emergency makeup flow.

Service Water Makeup flow.

(ESW) Valve Mission (2) to tie-in ESW 4.80'+ NA1 Actuation11 system to SFP.

Table Notes:

11 For CLTP, two separate operator missions are required to provide ESW makeup to the spent fuel pool under LOCA conditions. One mission is to Elevation 749' of the reactor building to control ESW System makeup flow. The second'mission is to Elevation 670' of the reactor building to tie-in the ESW system to the spent fuel pool. With CPPU, a modification is made which eliminates the requirement for the ESW tie-in mission.

12 Mission involves ingress to reactor building at Elevation 749', check skimmer surge tank water level at control panel in corridor outside Room 1-514, perform operator actions inside Room 1-514 to control flow, and egress for a total duration of approximately 8 minutes.

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 2 of 10 13 The total mission dose was calculated at 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> post-LOCA.

14 The total mission dose was calculated at 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> post-LOCA."

In addition, Reference 2, PPL response to NRC Question 10, stated:

"SFP Cooling ESW Valve Actuation The Susquehanna specific analysis of the mission to provide ESW makeup to the SFP under LOCA conditions as provided in Table 8-1 of the PUSAR is conservatively based on adjusting the operator access dose to the fuel pool cooling heat exchanger pump room to control ESW flow in three operator steps. The previously calculated CLTP doses are adjusted via scaling factors to reflect CPPU conditions. A breakdown of the mission dose for each of the three steps is presented below.

1. Ingress/Egress dose:

I{Stairwell dose + RB 749 dose } x 2 (for ingress and egress)

S{(10.1 R/hr x I min/60 min/hr) + (0.5 R/hr x 1.3 min. + 7.75 R/hr x 0.175 min)/60 min/hr} x 2

=(0.168 R + 0.033 R) x 2 = 0.403 R

2. Access to Panel 1C206 to check skimmer surge tank water level:

= Access to Panel 1C206 + Operator Dose at 1C206 Panel

= Access to Panel 1C206 + 49.0 R/hr x 1 min/60 min/hr AcceSs to PanelIC206 Ingress/Egress'Dose Estimate;'.'-"'

Travel Time Dose Rate Dose (sec) (R/hr) (R) 4.3 10.5 0.0126 3.0 13.0 0.0108 3.0 18.2 0.0151 3.0 26.0 0.0216 3.0 39.0 0.0325 Total 0.0927 Ingress/Egress x 2 0.185

=0.185 R + 0.817 R = 1.002 R

3. Dose in heat exchanger pump room to open valves:

= normal + contained source dose rate x stay time

= (0.04 R/hr + 0.0484 R/hr) x 2 min x 1 hr/60 min = 0.0029 R Total CLTP dose = 0.403 + 1.002 + 0.0029 = 1.41 R

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 3 of 10 The CLTP dose of 1.41 R was increased by a factor of 1.067 to account for a suppression volume input correction in the source term adjusting this dose to 1.505 R.

CPPU dose = 1.505 R x 1.5 = 2.26 R The 1.5 factor is the CLTP to CPPU scaling factor discussed in the response to Question 8.

Mark-ups of plant layout maps showing the access route are provided in Attachment 1."

B. Basis Decision to Not Implement the Modification:

The purpose of this modification was to eliminate the need to perform a required post LOCA manual action/vital mission (mission (2) to tie-in ESW system to SFP). PPL has determined that a modification is not required to support CPPU.

Currently (CLTP), two separate operator access missions are planned in order to provide Emergency Service Water (ESW) make-up to the spent fuel storage pools (SFSPs) under post LOCA conditions.

One mission is to Elevation 670' of the Unit 1 reactor building to tie-in the ESW system to the SFSPs. The second mission is to Elevation 749' to control ESW system make-up flow.

In Unit 2, the ESW system tie-in mission is performed on Elevation 683' and the flow control mission is to Elevation 749', similar to Unit 1.

Under CLTP conditions, the Unit 1 mission dose assessments were determined to be bounding (due to the differences in the mission pathway between Unit 1 & 2) with a previously calculated mission dose to tie-in the ESW system estimated at 4.8 Rem. The Unit 1 mission to control ESW make-up flow was estimated at 1.4 Rem.

In preparing the CPPU application, it was conservatively estimated that the Unit 1 mission dose would increase and result in a value in excess of the GDC 19 Acceptance Criteria of 5 Rem. Therefore, a modification to install check valves (in lieu of the existing manually operated valves) was planned to eliminate the need to perform this mission.

This estimate was based on assuming a minimum time of 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> to reach the Technical Specification limit of 22 feet of water above top of active fuel following loss of spent fuel pool cooling and pool boiling. For this estimate, the spent fuel pools are isolated and maximum heat loads are used based on conservative assumptions for refueling times and

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 4 of 10 fuel batch offloads. No limits for heat loads for the spent fuel pools were assumed for this estimate.

Subsequently, design basis mission dose calculations were performed to update the CPPU

'estimate with the following changes:

" change to Alternative Source Term (in lieu of TID) methods, and

" the time required to provide ESW make-up to the SFP.

The calculation determined a CPPU Unit 1 ESW System tie-in mission dose of < 3.7 Rem TEDE and <1 Rem TEDE for the Unit 1 ESW system flow control mission. The Unit 2 mission can be accomplished with mission doses that are < 1 Rem TEDE.

The revised results demonstrate compliance with the 10 CFR 50.67 of 5 Rem TEDE.

Accordingly, the planned modification was found to be unnecessary and is being eliminated.

C. Revision to Previously Submitted Information:

The previously submitted information is revised as described below:

Modify Table 8-1 under Vital Missions as follows:

Table 8.1 Post Accident Vital Occupancy / Mission Dose Summary (3) for NUREG 0737 H.B.2 Design Review of Plant Shielding Location Function CLTP CPPU Dose Dose (REM) (REM)

Maintenance of Spent Provide adequate cooling of Fuel Pool (SFP) SFP.

Cooling 1,2 -Emergency Service Water (ESW) Mission (1) to control ESW 1.41 12,13 0.6412,13 Valve Actuation 11 makeup flow Mission (2) to tie-in ESW 4.8014,15 3.61 14,15 system to SFP Revise Reference 1 Table 8-1 Notes to read as follows:

2 CPPU doses (Rem TEDE) are calculated based on AST Source Term for the DBA-LOCA.

Two separate operator access missions are required to provide ESW makeup to the spent fuel pool under LOCA conditions. One mission is to access Elevation 749' of the reactor building to control ESW system makeup flow. The second

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 5 of 10 mission is to Elevation 670' of the reactor building to tie-in the ESW system to the spent fuel pool.

13 The total mission dose was calculated at 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> post-LOCA for CLTP and CPPU.

14 The total mission dose calculated for CLTP post LOCA was 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />. The time was dictated by the decay heat assumed to be in the fuel pools. The SSES administrative isolated fuel pool decay heat load limits are specified in the SSES Technical Requirements Manual. The CPPU calculation is based on these limits (which were not used for the CLTP analysis) which result in a required time of 66 hours7.638889e-4 days <br />0.0183 hours <br />1.09127e-4 weeks <br />2.5113e-5 months <br /> to provide ESW make-up instead of 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />.

15 Mission involves ingress into the reactor building at elevation 670' to tie-in ESW to SFP (via actuation of valves 153500 and 153501) and egress with a total exposure duration to contained sources of approximately 1.5 minutes.

Reference 1 Attachment 7 List of Modification Delete the following Modification and Description ESW to Fuel Pool Check Valve

• Valve change to reduce mission (Non-Outage) dose for post-LOCA manual action Revise Reference 2 PLA 6194 NRC question 10 PPL response as follows:

SFP Cooling ESW Valve Actuation The mission doses to provide ESW makeup to the SFP under LOCA conditions are evaluated using CPPU DBA-LOCA activity sources, an operator access time of 66 hours7.638889e-4 days <br />0.0183 hours <br />1.09127e-4 weeks <br />2.5113e-5 months <br /> post-accident and AST methodology. Currently two separate operator missions are planned in order to provide Emergency Service Water (ESW) make-up to the spent fuel storage pools (SFSPs) under post LOCA conditions.

Under CPPU conditions, the Unit 1 mission dose assessments were determined to be bounding due to the differences in the mission pathway between Unit 1 & 2.

Therefore, only the Unit 1 mission doses are provided in the PUSAR.

A mark-up of the plant layout map showing the access route for the ESW System tie-in to SPF cooling is provided in Attachment 1. Reference 2 provides a markup for the mission to control ESW makeup flow.

A breakdown of the dose rates used to arrive at the Unit 1 ESW mission doses is provided below for each mission:

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 6 of 10 Mission Doses - SFP Cooling Control of ESW System Make-up Flow

1. Ingress/Egress dose:

= { Stairwell dose + RB 749 dose } x 2 (for ingress and egress)

={(5.46 R/hr x I min/60 min/hr) + (0.32 R/hr x 1.3 min. + 3.54 R/hr x 0.175 min)/60 min/hr} x 2

=(0.091 R + 0.017) x 2 = 0.216 R

2. Access to Panel 1C206 to check skimmer surge tank water level:

= Access to Panel 1C206 + Operator Dose at 1C206 Panel

= Access to Panel 1C206 + 20.7 R/hr x 1 min/60 min/hr

Access to Pa2nel C206 J,.Igress/ýEgre'ss 'Dose -Esti'ma'te-Travel Time Dose Rate Dose (sec) (R/hr) (R) 4.3 4.49 0.0054 3.0 5.53 0.0046 3.0 7.62 0.0064 3.0 11.0 0.0092 3.0 16.6 0.0138 Total 0.0394 Ingress/Egress x 2 0.0788

= 0.0788 R + 0.345 R = 0.424 R

3. Dose in heat exchanger pump room to open valves =

= normal + contained source dose rate x stay time

= (0.04 R/hr + 0.026 R/hr) x 2 min x 1 hr/60 min = 0.0022 R Total CPPU dose = 0.216 + 0.424 + 0.0022 = 0.64 R

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 7 of 10 Mission Doses - SFP Cooling - ESW System Tie-In CALCULATED OPERATOR DOSES FOR ACCESS TO ROOM 1-105 ON RB ELEV. 670' - INGRESS -UNIT 1 ESW SYSTEM TIE-IN Operator Travel Access Step Distance (ft) Time (hr) DR (R/hr) Dose (Rem) 1 10.9 1.14E-03 8.77E-01 1.00E-03 2 9.5 9.90E-04 1.86E+00 1.84E-03 3 8.8 9.17E-04 4.35E+00 3.99E-03 4 8.8 9.17E-04 5.52E+00 5.06E-03 5 7.3 7.60E-04 1.1OE+02 8.38E-02 6 4.2 3.OOE-04 3.30E+02 9.90E-02 7 5.1 3.64E-04 1.64E+03 5.96E-01 8 4.8 3.42E-04 6.02E+02 2.06E-01 9 10 7.13E-04 1.30E+02 9.26E-02 10 10 7.13E-04 4.34E+01 3.10E-02 11 10 7.13E-04 5.54E+01 3.95E-02 12 8.8 6.28E-04 1.89E+02 1.19E-01 13 5.5 3.92E-04 1.21 E+03 4.73E-01 14 10.1 5.98E-04 2.57E+02 1.54E-01 15 10.1 5.98E-04 6.08E+01 3.63E-02 16 10.1 5.98E-04 2.59E+01 1.55E-02 17 6.6 9.83E-04 1.14E+01 1.12E-02 18 13 1.17E-03 6.27E+00 7.34E-03 19 13 1.17E-03 5.34E+00 6.24E-03 Total Ingress 1.98E+00

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 8 of 10 CALCULATED OPERATOR DOSES FOR ACCESS TO ROOM 1-105 ON RB ELEV. 670' - EGRESS - UNIT 1 ESW SYSTEM TIE-IN Operator Travel Access Step Distance (ft) Time (hr) DR (R/hr) Dose (Rem) 1 10.9 6.17E-04 8.77E-01 5.41 E-04 2 9.5 5.38E-04 1.86E+00 1.OOE-03 3 8.8 4.98E-04 4.35E+00 2.17E-03 4 8.8 4.98E-04 5.52E+00 2.75E-03 5 7.3 4.13E-04 1.1OE+02 4.56E-02 6 4.2 2.38E-04 3.30E+02 7.85E-02 7 5.1 2.89E-04 1.64E+03 4.73E-01 8 4.8 2.72E-04 6.02E+02 1.64E-01 9 10 5.66E-04 1.30E+02 7.35E-02 10 10 5.66E-04 4.34E+01 2.46E-02 11 10 5.66E-04 5.54E+01 3.13E-02 12 8.8 4.98E-04 1.89E+02 9.42E-02 13 5.5 3.11E-04 1.21E+03 3.75E-01 14 10.1 5.72E-04 2.57E+02 1.47E-01 15 10.1 5.72E-04 6.08E+01 3.48E-02 16 10.1 5.72E-04 2.59E+01 1.48E-02 17 6.6 9.40E-04 1.14E+01 1.07E-02 18 13 7.36E-04 6.27E+00 4.62E-03 19 13 7.36E-04 5.34E+00 3.93E-03 Total Egress 1.58E+00 Valve Manipulation Dose Valve 1535010 .... 4.17E-03 4.75E+00 1.98E-02 Valve 153501 j4.17E-03 7.77E+00 .24E-02 TOTAL Unit 1 ESW Tie-In Mission Dose @ 66 hours7.638889e-4 days <br />0.0183 hours <br />1.09127e-4 weeks <br />2.5113e-5 months <br /> Operator Access Dose To Ingress + Egress + Elev 670 Access + Valve station = 1.98 +

Elevation 670' 1.58+ .0198 + .0324 = 3.61 Rem For ESW System Tie-In Reactor Recirculation Runback Limiter Runback Rate Change:

Reference 1 identifies in Attachments 4, 6 (Table 5-2, Sections 7.4 and 10.5) and in that the Reactor Recirculation Runback Limit Runback Rate will be changed. The GE analysis of a reactor feedwater pump (RFP) trip shows that the reactor may SCRAM on low level under certain conditions. Due to analysis conservatisms, it is not expected that a RFP trip will cause a low water level SCRAM. Therefore, it is not necessary to increase the recirculation runback rate to avoid a reactor SCRAM.

Increasing the recirculation runback rate would result in a more rapid reduction in turbine power level during the runback than exists today. Increasing the turbine power reduction rate causes a proportional reduction in the turbine pressures. An increased pressure

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 9 of 10 reduction in the main turbine moisture separators causes an increase in the moisture separator drain tank water level during the runback. SSES Unit 2 has experienced moisture separator drain tank high water level trips in the past. In summary, PPL has determined that increasing the recirculation runback rate does not significantly contribute to margin to a reactor water low water level SCRAM, but does increase the risk of a moisture separator drain tank high water level turbine trip (and subsequent SCRAM).

Therefore, PPL has decided not to increase the recirculation runback rate.

Emergency Operating Procedure Changes Related to Specification of Minimum Steam Cooling Pressure, Minimum Steam Cooling Reactor Water Level, and Maximum Core Uncovery Times:

Reference 2 PPL response to NRC question I a states:

"The Minimum Steam Cooling Pressure, Minimum Steam Cooling Reactor Water Level, Minimum Debris Retention Injection Rate, and Maximum Core Uncovery Time values specified in the EOPs will be revised due to the increased reactor power level and increase in decay heat load."

Upon further review and analysis, the statement should be changed as follows:

"The Minimum Debris Retention Injection Rate, the Decay Heat Removal Pressure, and the RPV pressure reference to "Maximize Use of Bypass Valves" values specified in the EOPs will be revised due to the increased reactor power level and increase in decay heat load."

The Minimum Debris Retention Injection Rate will change due to the increase in decay heat from the CPPU.

The Minimum Steam Cooling Pressure is not changing as the Safety Relief Valve setpoints and rated flows, number of fuel assemblies, and peak linear heat generation rate are not affected by the CPPU.

The Minimum Steam Cooling Reactor Water Level is not changing as the elevation of the bottom of active fuel and the level of the fuel assembly that must be covered to maintain peak cladding temperature are not affected by the CPPU.

The Maximum Core Uncovery Time is not changing as the generic fuel parameters used in the calculation bound the time limits in the EOPs.

The Decay Heat Removal Pressure will change as the rated reactor power level increases for the CPPU.

Enclosure to PLA-6290 Page 10 of 10 The RPV pressure reference to "Maximize Use of Bypass Valves" is changing as the Turbine Throttle Pressure decreases to maintain RPV pressure constant for the CPPU.

Reference 1 Change entitled: "Feedwater Pump / Condensate Pump Trip Change" PPL has determined after further review that the proposed change is no longer required. The request for NRC review of this change is hereby withdrawn. The change was described in Reference 1 as follows:

"Analyses in support of the proposed CPPU indicate that under certain conditions, a trip of one feedwater pump could result in a reactor SCRAM on low water level.

This possibility requires revision of the current statement in the FSAR that a single feedwater or condensate pump trip will not result in a reactor SCRAM on low water level. The trip of a condensate pump will result in the trip of a feedwater pump that will result in a reactor SCRAM. A change to the licensing basis is proposed for CPPU to indicate in the FSAR that a trip of one feedwater pump or one condensate pump may result in a reactor SCRAM."

Proposed Condensate Pump Trip Test:

In Reference 1 PPL proposed performance of the subject test at 3733 MWt on the first unit to reach 3733MWt. Based on discussions with the NRC staff, it was determined that a second test is warranted and that license conditions should be proposed that will provide assurance that the proposed tests will confirm the capability of the feedwater to supply water to the Reactor Pressure Vessel after the condensate pump trip at full CPPU conditions. The second test will be performed at 3733 MWt on the second unit that reaches operation at 3733MWt. Attachment 2 contains the proposed corresponding License Conditions.

i* ,L*,* .'*i¸*.*t* to PLA-6290 Plant Layout Maps

• . TI'HII}EHI411111tlIfHtlIIIIIIIIIII£111flIJHIID 1.-1 1'I I I Y f + jF P*' .fJ '~ '+r l "ý fpm~i "1 I I I I1 I I I: I-1 I ý'1" fr"T ' 1'. 1 1 1 rl*_ I f 1 11 1 tj ...Vý- 11 1:--!ý-;j- 1 1 - :'  ; ý I ME a

__1 Ili.jsr II~~. P.IIIII I I> i ' < I l ~ - IE H

ACCESS PATH REVaROTE eVET+ e~; ISER

+* :V.

F Ptm

v. 4 0. CrV_

&REVSEE D

RErERENCE DRAWINGS.

RECHTEL NO P P L NO, Co ESW SYSTEM TIE-IN TO SFP COOLING M1VWANA POWEllAUE CUMPY EWIPMENTLOCATION A

Q

• E-106333 SH 2 I I k. NI* TI 7 1 I 4

". I [ l ".'

Attachment 2 to PLA-6290 Condensate Pump Trip Test Proposed License Conditions

Attachment 2 to PLA-6290 Page 1 of 2 Proposed License Conditions - Condensate Pump Trip Tests 3.4.2 Transient Testing The following license conditions are discussed in SE Section 2.5.4.4.

3.4.2.1 PPL will demonstrate through performance of transient testing that the loss of one condensate pump will not result in a complete loss of reactor feedwater on both SSES Units 1 and 2. The test shall be performed on each unit during the unit's CPPU power ascension test program and prior to exceeding 336 hours0.00389 days <br />0.0933 hours <br />5.555556e-4 weeks <br />1.27848e-4 months <br /> of plant operation at the nominal power level of 3733 MWt with feedwater and condensate flow rates stabilized. PPL shall confirm that the plant response to the transient is as expected in accordance with the acceptance criteria that were established. Evaluation of the test results shall be completed and all discrepancies resolved in accordance with corrective action program requirements and the provisions of the power ascension test program prior to continued operation of either Susquehanna unit above 3733 MWt. PPL shall present an evaluation that demonstrates the acceptability of not performing the test described in License Condition 3.4.2.2 to the NRC within 30 days of completion of the second units test. NRC will have 90 days to review and approve the evaluation. The test described in License Condition 3.4.2.2 shall only be performed (when the required test conditions are achieved) if NRC approval of the evaluation is not received by SSES within 90 days of submittal of the evaluation.

3.4.2.2.

If the tests specified in License Condition 3.4.2.1 are not sufficient to validate the SSES hydraulic analysis demonstrating that a single condensate pump trip will not result in a loss of all feedwater at full CPPU power level as determined by License Condition 3.4.2.1, SSES shall perform the test at full CPPU conditions (i.e. 98%-100% of 3952MWt). PPL shall perform the test prior to exceeding 336 hours0.00389 days <br />0.0933 hours <br />5.555556e-4 weeks <br />1.27848e-4 months <br /> of operation at the nominal fall CPPU power level (98% to 100% of 3952 MWt) as measured from the determination that License Condition 3.4.2.1 requires the test with feedwater and condensate flow rates stabilized at the nominal CPPU full power level. PPL will demonstrate through performance of transient testing on either Susquehanna Unit 1 or Unit 2 (whichever unit is first to achieve the specified conditions) that the loss of one condensate pump will not result in a complete loss of reactor feedwater. PPL shall confirm that the plant response to the transient is as expected in accordance with the acceptance criteria that were established.

Evaluation of the test results shall be completed and all discrepancies resolved in accordance with corrective action program requirements and the provisions of the power ascension test program prior to continued operation of either Susquehanna unit above the

Attachment 2 to PLA-6290 Page 2 of 2 nominal power level of the prior tested phase (based on PPL' s current implementation schedule, Unit 1 will have completed a Phase 1 transient test at a power level of 3733 MWt for License Condition 3.4.2.1 prior to Unit 2 achieving the nominal full CPPU power level of (98% to, 100% of 3952 MWt)).