ML12286A018

License Amendment Request - Extended Power Uprate, Enclosure 14a to Attachment 14, Setpoint Calculation for Average Power Range Monitor Simulated Thermal Power - High, PE-0251

ML12286A018
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	07/25/2011
From:	Cujko D Exelon Generation Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
PE-0251, Rev 2
Download: ML12286A018 (99)

Text

ENCLOSURE 14a to Attachment 14 Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 NRC Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278 Setpoint Calculation For Average Power Range Monitor Simulated Thermal Power - High PE-0251

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 2 CC-AA-309-1001 Page 1 Revision 6 ATTACHMENT I Design Analysis Major Revision Cover Sheet Page I of 5 Design Analysis (Major Revision) Last Page No. Attachment 4, page 2 Analysis No.: I PE-0251 Revision: 2 002

Title:

Provide Allowable Values (AV) and Nominal Trip Setpoints (NTSP) for Various Setpoint Functions of the NUMAC PRNM System ECIECR No.: 10-00478 Revision: 1 0 Station(s): Peach Bottom Component(s): "

Unit No.: 2,3 Various (see calculation)

Discipline: PEDE Descrip. CodelKeyword: 10 N/A Safety/QA Class: " SR System Code: 12 60A, 60B, 60F Structure: 13 N/A CONTROLLED DOCUMENT REFERENCES Is Document No.: From/To Document No.: From/To Tech Spec Sections 3.3.1.1 & 3.3.2.1 To Various (see calculation section 6.0) From UFSAR Sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.5, 7.7 To Is this Design Analysis Safeguards Information? 16 Yes RI No Z If yes, see SY-AA-101-106 Does this Design Analysis contain Unverified Assumptions? " Yes E] No 0 If yes, ATI/AR#:

This Design Analysis SUPERCEDES: 11 in its entirety.

Description of Revision (list changed pages when all pages of original analysis were not changed): '9 This revision supersedes Minor Revision 1A entirely and incorporates Minor Revisions 1B, and 1C, as well as:

1) Determines the Allowable Values (AVs) and Nominal Trip Setpoints (NTSPs) for the Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) Simulated Thermal Power (STP) Flow Biased Scram (Two Loop Operation (TLO) and Single Loop Operation (SLO)) and APRM STP Flow Biased Rod block (TLO and SLO), in support of Extended Power Uprate (EPU). This includes both reactor recirculation drive flow dependent functions (APRM STP Flow Biased Scram and Rod Block) and "Clamp" functions (APRM STP Flow Biased Clamp Scram and Rod Block).

2) Determines As Left Tolerances (ALT) and As Found Tolerances (AFT) associated with the above-listed APRM STP Flow Biased functions for use in instrument performance trending.

(Continued on Page IA)

Preparer: 10 D.J. Cujko (S&L)

Date Print Name Sian Name Method of Review: 21 Detailed Review 0 Alternate Calculations (attached) LI Testing El Reviewer: 12 A.S. Luthra (S&L) 1tfL, AIFc..S.. LAar. 7'r(

Print Name Sign Name ae Review Notes: 23 Independent review Z Peer review L]

(For Extrnal Anlyses Only) O External Approver: 24 W.A. Barasa (S&L)__, ____.,__ -

Print Name Sign Name Date Exelon Reviewer: 51 c..e C',k r( i C-v- 9_-I_11 Print Name Sign Name Date Independent 3rd Party Review Reqd?26 Yes L NoA. ,,

Exelon Approver: 11 e 'A 4. txa'0_ __"_

Print Name Sign Nmete

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 2 Page lA (Continued from Page 1)

The calculation Excel file for the base revision was not available for incorporating the changes for this revision. Therefore, the values determined by this revision have been performed by hand-calculations. R2 This analysis was originally performed via spreadsheet calculations, and computation of resulting values were not shown. To provide additional clarity, the computations for the entire calculation are shown in this revision.

The LER and spurious trip avoidance sections were not previously applied to the determination of NTSP.

Therefore, these sections are being deleted. However, LER Avoidance Criteria was applied by GEH for functions impacted due to EPU. In order to maintain consistency with the results of this calculation and Reference 6.5.6, the LER Avoidance Criteria was applied in this calculation with steps shown in the applicable section where the NTSP is calculated.

This revision also addresses the revised Analytical Limit for the "Neutron Flux Upscale Trip-Setdown" function as provided by GE. This change has no impact on the calculated NTSP and AV values.

The following affected pages have been replaced/added: 1, lA, lB, IC, ID, IE, 2, 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, 5A, 7, 8, 8A, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12A, 13, 14, 14A, 14B, 14C, 15-44, Attachment 3, Attachment 4. In addition, the Rev. 1 cover sheet was deleted.

Clarifications and Exceptions:

The slope of the Flow Control Line (recirculation flow verse power relationship) during EPU operation is changing to 0.55, and the existing calculation revision (Rev. 1) is based on a Flow Control Line with a slope of 0.66. This calculation revision will apply the EPU slope value of 0.55. This will reduce the calculated uncertainty values (i.e., accuracy, drift calibration, PMA, and PEA uncertainties) associated with the APRM channel STP flow biased scram and rod block functions only.

The existing Rev 1 of this calculation is performed by Excel software, and actual computations of resulting values are not shown. In order to implement the EPU changes and revise the appropriate existing values, the existing calculated values were back-calculated to verify the computations used by Excel. All computations impacted by the EPU changes were verified except for the determination of the 0.80 % rated P overall flow drift (RFM) value and the 0.91 % rated P channel instrument drift (LD) value which are both shown on page 18 of Rev 1. It is suspected that the values for these terms should be computed as follows, which results in values that bounds the existing values:

overall flow drift (RFM) = [(0.57 % rated P)2 + (0.70 % rated P)2]0 5

= 0.90 % rated P (not 0.80 % rated P) channel instrument drift (LD) 2 05 (APRM, RFM) (fb) = [(0.90 % rated P) 2 + (0.42 % rated p) ] .

= 0.99 % rated P (not 0.91 % rated P)

Additionally, the computation for the determination of the 1.22 % rated Q channel instrument drift (LD) value, shown on page 18 of Rev 1, could not be verified. However, this value was not applied in any other subsequent computations. It is suspected that the value for this term should be computed as follows, which results in a value that bounds the existing value:

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 2 Page IB channel instrument drift (LD)

(RFM) (flow) = [(0.86 % rated Q)2 + (1.05 % rated Q)2 ]o5 R2

= 1.36 % rated Q (not 1.22 % rated Q)

As such, the EPU related uncertainties for these terms are determined using the same method as shown above.

SLO operation uses a GE proprietary method for calculating certain error terms (LA, CA, and LD). The specific error terms were provided as input from GE and are not derived in this calculation. The error terms are referred to within this calculation revision as LA', CA', and LD'. Note that these error terms are larger and thus more conservative than the error terms used in TLO operation.

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 2 Page IC ATTACHMENT 2 Owner's Acceptance Review Checklist for External Design Analyses R2 Page 1 of 2 No Question Instructions and Guidance Yes I No I N/A I Do assumptions have All Assumptions should be stated in clear terms with enough [

sufficient documented justification to confirm that the assumption is conservative.

rationale?

For example, 1) the exact value of a particular parameter may not be known or that parameter may be known to vary over the range of conditions covered by the Calculation. It is appropriate to represent or bound the parameter with an assumed value. 2) The predicted performance of a specific piece of equipment in lieu of actual test data. Itis appropriate to use the documented opinion/position of a recognized expert on that equipment to represent predicted equipment performance.

Consideration should also be given as to any qualification testing that may be needed to validate the Assumptions. Ask yourself, would you provide more justification ifyou were performing this analysis? If yes, the rationale is likely incomplete.

2 Are assumptions Ensure the documentation for source and rationale for the 5 El [E compatible with the assumption supports the way the plant is currently or will be way the plant is operated post change and they are not in conflict with any operated and with the design parameters. Ifthe Analysis purpose is to establish a licensing basis? new licensing basis, this question can be answered yes, ifthe assumption supports that new basis.

3 Do all unverified If there are unverified assumptions without a tracking 11 El Od assumptions have a mechanism indicated, then create the tracking item either tracking and closure through an ATI or a work order attached to the implementing mechanism in place? WO. Due dates for these actions need to support verification prior to the analysis becoming operational or the resultant plant change being op authorized.

4 Do the design inputs The origin of the input, or the source should be identified and 10 El El have sufficient be readily retrievable within Exelon's documentation system.

rationale? If not, then the source should be attached to the analysis. Ask yourself, would you provide more justification ifyou were performing this analysis? If yes, the rationale is likely incomplete.

5 Are design inputs The expectation is that an Exelon Engineer should be able to [] El correct and reasonable clearly understand which input parameters are critical to the with critical parameters outcome of the analysis. That is, what is the impact of a identified, if change in the parameter to the results of the analysis? Ifthe appropriate? impact is large, then that parameter is critical.

6 Aredesign inputs Ensure the documentation for source and rationale for the compatible with the inputs supports the way the plant is currently or will be way the plant is operated post change and they are not in conflict with any operated and with the design parameters.

,licensing basis?

7 Are Engineering See Section 2.13 in CC-AA-309 for the attributes that are O E] El Judgments clearly sufficient to justify Engineering Judgment. Ask yourself, documented and would you provide more justification ifyou were performing justified? this analysis? If yes, the rationale is likely incomplete.

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 2 Page ID ATTACHMENT 2 Owner's Acceptance Review Checklist for External Design Analyses Paae 2 of 2 No Question Instructions and Guidance Yes I No I NIA 8 Are Engineering Ensure the justification for the engineering judgment M 0 0 Judgments compatible supports the way the plant is currently or will be operated with the way the plant is post change and is not in conflict with any design operated and with the parameters. If the Analysis purpose is to establish a new licensing basis? licensing basis, then this question can be answered yes, if the judgment supports that new basis.

9 Do the results and Why was the analysis being performed? Does the stated 0f Efl conclusions satisfy the purpose match the expectation from Exelon on the purpose and objective of proposed application of the results? If yes, then the the Design Analysis? analysis meets the needs of the contract 10 Are the results and Make sure that the results support the UFSAR defined 1:1 0 conclusions compatible system design and operating conditions, or they support a R2 with the way the plant is proposed change to those conditions. If the analysis operated and with thne supports a change, are all of the other changing licening wbasis? documents included on the cover sheet as impacted licensing bdocuments?

11 Have any limitations on Does the analysis support a temporary,condition or U 0 F1 the use of the results procedure change? Make sure that any other documents been identified and needing to be updated are included and clearly delineated transmitted to the in the design analysis. Make sure that the cover sheet appropriate includes the other documents where the results of this organizations? analysis provide the input.

12 Have margin impacts Make sure that the impacts to margin are clearly shown 0 El been identified and within the body of the analysis. If the analysis results in documented reduced margins ensure that this has been appropriately appropriately for any dispositioned in the EC being used to issue the analysis.

negative impacts (Reference ER-AA-2007)?

13 Does the Design Are there sufficient documents included to support the M E]

Analysis include the sources of input, and other reference material that is not applicable design basis readily retrievable in Exelon controlled Documents?

documentation?

14 Have all affected design Determine if sufficient searches have been performed to 51 0 El analyses been identify any related analyses that need to be revised along documented on the with the base analysis. It may be necessary to perform Affected Documents List some basic searches to validate this.

(ADL) for the associated Configuration Change?

15 Do the sources of inputs Compare any referenced codes and standards to the E 0 and analysis current design basis and ensure that any differences are methodology used meet reconciled. If the input sources or analysis methodology committed technical and are based on an out-of-date methodology or code, regulatory additional reconciliation may be required if the site has requirements? since committed to a more recent code 16 Have vendor supporting Based on the risk assessment performed during the pre-job S1 E]

technical documents brief for the analysis (per HU-AA-1212), ensure that and references sufficient reviews of any supporting documents not (including GE DRFs) provided with the final analysis are performed.

been reviewed when necessary?

Calc. # PE-0251 Rev. 2 Page IE I R2 Revision Summary Rev. Description of Revision Names (with Dates No. Preparer Reviewer Approver I ECR PB 99-00012, Rev 0 Revises the maximum RBM LTSP, ITSP, and ME Driscoll D.W. Reigel -Not Known-HTSP NTSP values. Adds RBM LTSP, ITSP, and HTSP values for RBM 02/25/00 02/25/00 10/3/00 fitter time constants <0.1 see. Revises the RBM downscale NTSP.

Provides clarification of assumptions for calc. D.L. Tyson K.E. Cutler 10/3/00 10/3/00 2 This revision supersedes Minor Revision IA entirely and incorporates D.J. Cujko A.S. Luthra W.A. Barasa Minor Revisions 1B, and 1C, as well as 1) determines the Allowable Values (AVs) and Nominal Trip Setpoints (NTSPs) for the Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) Simulated Thermal Power (STP) Flow Biased Scram (Two Loop Operation (TLO) and Single Loop Operation (SLO)) and STP flow Biased Rod block (TL0 and SLO), in support of Extended Power Uprate (EPU); 2) determines As Left Tolerances (ALT) R2 and As Found Tolerances (AFT) for non-clamped APRM STP Flow Biased Scram and Rod Block related functions for use in instrument performance tr'ending. This revision also addresses the revised Analytical Limit for the "Neutron Flux Upscale Trip-Setdown" function as provided by GE. To provide additional clarity, the computations for the entire calculation are shown in this revision.

i Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Sub-Page Cover Sheet R2 Owner's Acceptance Review Checklist IC Revision Summary IE TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 1.0 PURPOSE / OBJECTIVE 3 2.0

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS 4 3.0 DESIGN INPUT / CRITERIA 6 4.0 COMPUTERCALCULATIONS 9 5.0 ASSUMPTIONS 9

6.0 REFERENCES

12 7.0 CALCULATIONS 14 7.1 Methods 14 7.2 Computations 14C 7.3 APRM Channel AFT/ALT: RFM Instrument Loop Check 41 R2 8.0 Attachments 44 2

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 jR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 1.0 PURPOSE / OBJECTIVE The purpose of this setpoint design calculation is to provide Allowable Values (AV) and Nominal Trip Setpoints (NTSP) for various setpoint functions of NUMAC Power Range Neutron Monitoring (PRNM) System {ARTS [APRM (including LPRM, RFM, LTS Option mI OPRM) / RBM]} for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 & 3. Therefore, this calculation utilizes methodologies of References 6.1 and 6.2.1 and updates References 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 [Ref 6.3.2 is a supplement to calculation #6 of Reference 6.3.1 ].

The methods used in this calculation would be consistent with the requirements of NRC RG 1.105 that the methodologies comply with. The results would be validated for adequacy against the appropriate criteria. jR2 NUMAC PRNM channels addressed herein are as follows (names of functions are given; names may be slightly different elsewhere, e.g., in specifications):

1) APRM setpoints: Neutron Flux Fixed High Trip (Scram), STP Flow-Biased Trip (Scram), STP Flow-Biased Alarm (Rod Block), STP Clamp Trip (Scram), STP Clamp Alarm (Rod Block),

Neutron Flux Upscale Setdown Trip (Scram), STP Upscale Setdown Alarm (Rod Block), Neutron Flux Downscale Alarm (Rod Block), and (Recirculation) Flow Upscale Level Alarm (Rod Block);

2) RBM setpoints: Neutron Flux Downscale, Low, Intermediate, and High Power and Trip, and (Recirculation) Flow Compare Level Alarm (Rod Block).

The objective will be accomplished by:

1. Using the Analytical Limit (ANL)/Design Basis (DB) defined by assorted References 6.3.2, 6.3.6, R 6.5.4 and 6.5.6, and using the error terms (LA, CA, LD, PEA and PMA) generated herein to calculate new I AV and NTSP.

2. Comparing the calculated AV/NTSP with the current or expected Technical Specification (TS) values to validate that the current or expected TS values are acceptable, or to determine the new TS values to be used.

3. Calculating the adequacy of the selected NTSP against the appropriate criteria (e.g., ANL/DB).

A LER avoidance test is performed to assure that the probability of a setpoint exceeding the Tech Spec allowable value during surveillance testing is acceptably low. This evaluation is done by first determining the errors that may be present during surveillance testing, and then assuring that the margin between NTSPI and R2 AV is large enough (in terms of the expected variability due to these errors) to prevent (within acceptable probability) the setpoint exceeding AV. If the margin is not sufficient, the nominal trip setpoint (NTSP) is adjusted to provide added margin. This adjusted nominal trip setpoint is designated NTSP2. This is a GE proprietary methodology that is further explained in Reference 6.1.

In addition to the above, assorted NUMAC PRNM channels which are not addressed herein utilize generic default values defined in various specifications of Reference 6.5.1, or values established by R other procedures or methodologies (e.g., bypasses, time constants).

R2 3

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study Additionally, As Found Tolerances (AFT) and As Left Tolerances (ALT) are computed for the APRM STP flow biased scram and APRM STP flow biased rod block functions using the error terms (loop reference accuracy, loop calibration equipment errors, loop calibration equipment reading errors, and loop instrument drift) generated herein. These tolerances are determined for use in trending instrument performance. The methodology utilized is in accordance with Reference 6.2.1.3 and is described in detail in Sections 7.1.11 and 7.1.12.

R2 3A

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 I R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 2.0

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS The following AV/TRM and NTSP/IS are calculated in Section 7 by using ANL/DB from assorted References 6.3.2, 6.3.6, 6.5.4 and 6.5.6. The NTSP/IS values are determined by allowing adequate margins to their ANL/DB. I R2 2.1 APRMChannel [all % P, except item i, which is

%91 TRIP ANL/DB AV/TRM NTSP/IS a-1. STP Flow Biased 0.55 W+65.5 0.55W+63.3 0.55W+61.3 Scram (TLO) (Ref 6.5.6) (Sect. 2.1.1) (Sect. 2.1.1) a-2. STP Flow Biased 0.55W+62.2 0.55W+58.2 0.55W+55.4 Scram (SLO) (Ref 6.5.6) (Sect. 2.1.1) (Sect. 2.1.1)

R2 b-1. STP Flow Biased 0.55W+55.9 0.55W+53.7 0.55W+51.7 Rod Block (TLO) (Ref 6.5.6) (Sect. 2.1.1) (Sect. 2.1.1) b-2. STP Flow Biased 0.55W+52.6 0.55W+48.6 0.55W+45.8 Scram (SLO) (Ref 6.5.6) (Sect. 2.1.1) (Sect. 2.1.1)

c. STP Flow Biased 120.0 118.0 116.0 Clamp Scram (Ref. 6.5.6) (Sect. 2.1.1) (Sect. 2.1.1)

(TLO & SLO)

d. STP Flow Biased 110.4 108.4 106.4 Clamp Rod Block (Ref. 6.5.6) (Sect. 2.1.1) (Sect. 2.1.1)

(TLO & SLO)

e. Neutron Flux Upscale 17.3 15.0 14.6 Trip -- Setdown (Ref. 6.5.10) (Sect 2.1.2) (Sect. 2.1.2) f, STP Upscale Rod 14.0 12.0 11.6 Block - Setdown (Ref. 6.3.2)

g. Neutron Flux 0.5 2.8 3.2 Downscale Alarm (Ref. 6.3.2)

h. Fixed High 122.0 119.7 119.3 Neutron Flux Scram (Ref. 6.5.4)

Flow Upscale N/A N/A 120.0 (See assumption (Ref.j6.3.4, 5.1 .14) 6.3.5 W = percent of rated recirculation drive flow 4

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 2.1.1 APRM Channel: STP Flow Biased Scram and Rod Block R2 The calculated NTSP and AV values for the APRM STP flow biased scram and APRM STP flow biased rod block functions determined in Section 7.2 of this calculation are compared to the values provided in Reference 6.5.6 in the following comparison table (Table 2-1). In all cases, the calculated NTSP and AV values are the same as the values provided by Reference 6.5.6. To achieve this, the calculated NTSP and AV values are determined by application of GE LER avoidance methodology documented in Section 7.1.10 and by application of a +/-2% power AGAF tolerance limit from Section 5.1.12. Furthermore, the calculated drive flow dependent (or non-clamped) NTSP and AV values for SLO are determined as described above, but with an additional application of GE loop uncertainty values as documented in Reference 6.10.

Table 2-1: Comparison Table APRM Allowable Value (%o Power) NTSP (% Power Function GE Task PE-0251 Comparison GE Task PE-0251 Comparison Report Value Report Value Value Value (Ref. 6.5.6) (Ref. 6.5.6)

STP F-B 0.55W+63.3 0.55W+63.3 same 0.55W+61.3 0.55W+61.3 same Scram (TLO)

STP F-B 0.55W+58.2 0.55W+58.2 same 0.55W+55.4 0.55W+55.4 same Scram (SLO)

STP F-B 0.55W+53.7 0.55W+53.7 same 0.55W+51.7 0.55W+51.7 same Rod Block STP F-B O.55W+48.6 0.55W+48.6 same 0.55W+45.8 0.55W+45.8 same Rod Block (SLO)

STP F-B 118.0 118.0 same 116.0 116.0 same Scram (Clamp)

(TLO&SLO)

STP F-B 108.4 108.4 same 106.4 106.4 same Rod Block (Clamp)

(TLO&SLO) 2.1.2 APRM Channel: Neutron Flux Upscale Trip - Setdown The Analytical Limit (ANL) for this setpoint function is changed from 17.0% (per Reference 6.3..2 and as noted in Rev. 1 of this analysis) to 17.3% (Reference 6.5.10). However, this ANL change has no impact on the calculated values for NTSP (14.6%) and AV (15.0%) as determined in Section 7.2.

4A

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 2.2 RBM Channel fail % P, except item h, which is

%_QJ TRIP MCPR* ANL/DB AVfTRM NTSP/IS

a. Low Power Setpoint 30.0 (Ref. 6.3.2) 27.3 27.0 (LPSP)

b. Intermediate Power 65.0 (Ref. 6.3.2) 63.4 63.1 Setpoint (IPSP)

c. High Power Setpoint 85.0 (Ref. 6.3.2) 83.4 83.1 (HPSP)

d. Low Trip Setpoint ** 1.20 118.0/117.0 116.2/115.2 116.2/115.2 (LTSP) 1.25 121.0/120.0 119.2/118.2 119.2/118.2 (Ref. 6.3.6) 1.30 124.0/ 123.0 122.2/121.2 122.2/121.2 1.35 127.0/125.8 12512/124.0 123.0/ 123.0

e. Intermediate Trip ** 1.20 112.0/111.2 110.2/109.4 110.2/ 109.4 Setpoint (ITSP) 1.25 116.0/115.2 114.2/113.4 114.2/113.4 (Ref. 6.3.6) 1.30 119.0/118.0 117.2/116.2 117.0/ 116.2 1.35 122.0/121.0 120.2/119.2 117.0/117.0

f. High Trip Setpoint** 1.20 108.0/ 107.4 106.2/105.6 106.2/ 105.6 (HTSP) 1.25 111.0/110.2 109.2/ 108.4 109.2/108.4 (Ref. 6.3.6) 1.30 114.0/113.2 112.2/111.4 111.0/111.0 1.35 117.0/116.0 115.2/114.2 111.0/111.0

g. Downscale Trip N/A N/A 5.0 Setpoint (DTSP) (Assumption 5.1.15)

h. Flow Compare N/A N/A 10.0 (Assumption 5.1.14)

I

• These MCPR limits are based upon a 1.07 Safety Limit MCPR as documented in Reference 6.3.6. Ifthe cycle specific SLMCPR is greater than 1.07, the MCPR values should be adjusted by multiplying the value by R2 the cycle specific SLMCPR/1.07. See the current Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) for cycle-specific MCPR limits.

• • For the LTSP, ITSP, and HTSP AV and NTSP values, the first entry (larger value "w/o filter")

applies for filter time constant (tr1 ) settings of _<0.1 second while the second entry (smaller'value "w/ filter") applies for settings of 0.1 < T,1 < 0.55 seconds. See Assumption 5.1.17 related to NTSP limits.

5

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 2.3 APRM ChannelAFT/AL T: STP Flow BiasedScram and Rod Block 2.3.1 Per Section 7. 1.11, AFT/ALT associated with APRM STP flow biased scram and rod-block calibration checks, in accordance with References 6.2.3.2.9 through 6.2.32.16, are provided in the below listing.

APRM Channel AFT/ALT for the STP Flow Biased Scram:

ALTF.B SCR = N/A AFTF.B SCRAM = N/A AFTF.B CLAMp = N/A APRM Channel AFT/ALT for the STP Flow Biased Rod Block:

ALTF-B ROD BLOCK = N/A AFTF.B ROD BLOCK = N/A AFTF.B ROD CLAMP = N/A This analysis does not provide an acceptance criteria for the calculated AFT/ALT values. Results are merely summarized as determined in Section 7.3.

2.3.2 Per Section 7.3, calculated AFT/ALT associate with the combined flow transmitter / recirculation flow monitor (FT/RFM) loop calibration check, in accordance with References 6.2.3.2.1 through 6.2.3.2.8, are provided in the below listing.

AFT/ALT for the RFM Loop Calibration Check RFM ALTLOop =+1.1 %rated Q RFM AFTLooP =+/-1.6 %rated Q R2 5A

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Semoint Study r

3.0 DESIGN INPUT I CRITERIA 3.1 The purposes ofthe instruments in the PRNM Channels of this Design Calculation are to:

1. provide a warning to the reactor operators via Annunciation in the Control Room

2. provide scram trip signals to the Reactor Protection System, and

3. provide trip signals to the Rod Withdrawal Block Circuitry indicating that the reactor power or recirculation flow is exceeding its operational limits.

The calculations in this report are consistent with the following channel diagram, which is based on Reference 6.5.1:

PRNM LPRM LpRh& (to both Trip Detectors APRM and APRM sig Flow Element (2)

RBM Trip Flow Transmitter (2) SI R .M Trip I Siga, 6

.%PBAI'S PRN'M Setpohit Calcjfinal.doc

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 I R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 3.2 APRM Channel 3.2.1 Process Design Parameters Ref Process Variable: Neutron Flux 6.5.2 Normal Operating Value: 0 - 100% Power 6.5.2 Analytical Limit (ANL)/Design Basis (DB): (see above) 6.3.2, 6.5.4, 6.5.6, 6.5.10 Allowable Value (AV): (see above) Section 7, 6.5.6 Nominal Trip Setpoint (NTSP): (see above) Section 7, 6.5.6 R2 3.3 RBM Channel 3.3.1 Process Design Parameters Ref.

Process Variable: Neutron Flux 6.5.2 Normal Operating Value: 0 - 100% Power 6.5.2 Analytical Limit (ANL)/Design Basis (DB): (see above) 6.3.2, 6.3.6 Allowable Value (AV): (see above) Section 7 Nominal Trip Setpoint (NTSP): (see above) Section 7 3.4 RFM Channel 3.4.1 Process Design Parameters Ref.

Process Variable: Recirculation Flow 6.5.2 Normal Operating Value: 0 - 100% Flow 6.5.2 7

I R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 3.5 Instrument Data 3.5.1 NUMAC Ref.

Manufacturer GE-NUMAC 6.5.1 Model No. PRNM 6.5.1 Location Main Control Room 6.5.1 Temp. Range 4.44 C (40-122 F) 6.5.1 Instrument Range

• 6.5.1 Calibration Span (SP) (%) 0-125 6.5.1, Sect 3.5.3 R2 Electrical Output (Vdc) 0-1.0"* 6.5.1 (mAdc) 0-I.0**

• It may vary from 0 to greater than 125% depending on the signals: applies to both flux (power) and flow.

For use by remote **recorders/***meters.

3.5.2 Recirculation Flow Transmitter Ref.

Manufacturer Rosemount Model No. 1153DB6RBN0037 Asm 5.1.6 Location Reactor Building 6.3.1 Calibration Temp.65-900 F 6.1 Normal Temperature 65-1020 F 6.8.1, Sect. 3.5.4 1R2 Instrument Range (in WC) 0-2772.9 6.3.1 (psid) 0-100 Calibration Span (SP) (in WC) 0-951.8 6.3.2, Sect. 3.5.3 1R2 (psid) 0-34.32 Electrical Output (mAdc) 4-20 6.6.1 8

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 3.5.3 EPU Impact on Calibrated Instrument Spans Per References 6.5.6 and 6.5.7, EPU conditions have no impact on calibrated instrument spans.

3.5.4 EPU Impact on Normal Ambient Environmental Conditions Environmental conditions for EPU are provided in References 6.5.8 (temperature) and 6.5.9 (radiation). Reference 6.5.8 identifies no change in normal area temperatures due to EPU for the areas in which the recirculation flow transmitters and NUMAC equipment are installed. Reference 6.5.9 identifies an increase in the normal radiation environment due to EPU. However, Reference 6.1 implies that normal radiation effects on the NUMAC equipment located in the control room (Section 3.5.1) are not applicable to this analysis. Furthermore, per Section 2.6 of Reference 6.1, there are no transmitter radiation effects below 0.1 Mrad gamma TID; and the normal EPU radiation dose in the areas, in which the transmitters are located, are within this limit. Per the above discussion; 1) there is no EPU impact on normal ambient temperature, and 2) there is an increase in normal ambient radiation due to EPU, however, the increase has no impact on instrument performance.

R2 8A

1R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 4.0 COMPUTER CALCULATION N/A. R2 5.0 ASSUMPTIONS 5.1 Assumptions related to the configuration to which this calculation applies are confirmed to be valid as part of the Exelon modification process. The remainder have been confirmed to be reasonable R2 and appropriate as part of the technical reviews of this calculation.

5.1.1 The currently installed analog NMS (APRM, RBM, and Flow Unit) is replaced by the digital NUMAC-PRNM arrangement of Reference 6.5.1.

5.1.2 For the APRM, both the flux (neutron) noise error and the flow noise error are 1.25% at 2-sigma values from LGS data (Ref 6.3.3); for the RBM, flux noise is 1.0% at 2-sigma; all per Reference 6.3.1.

(Regarding flow noise, PBAPS reports that the actual recirculation flow noise measured at PBAPS is approximately 1/3 to 1/2 of that at LGS (due to plant differences), so this assumption is conservative for PBAPS).

5.1.3 All individual uncertainty expressions apply to the overall component [LPRM, FT. PRNM (chassis, electronics, signal conditioning, digitizing, etc.)] and are at 2-sigma unless otherwise stated in Section 7. Ultimately, channel uncertainty is normalized to 2-sigma and process units of % power for subsequent AV, NTSP calculation. For the FT, uncertainties defined in Ref. 6.6.1 are considered 3-sigma, based on Ref. 6.1 and 6.2.1. This calculation uses the original drift specification for Rosemount 1153 transmitters of +1/- 0.25% for 6 months (3 sigma value). This specification is more conservative than the current Rosemount Specification of+l/- 0.20% for 30 months (2 sigma value) and is therefore acceptable. Sigma, called s, is given in the right-hand column of Section 7 for each term.

1R2 5.1.4 The calibration intervals maximum boundary values (and therefore the bases for VD expressions) are as follows: for flow channel FT and PRNM RFM, 30-months; for PRNM APRM, 700-hrs (approximately 1-month); for PRNM RBM, 4-hrs [insignificant time-interval for drift in RBM trip functions since RBM re-initializes (nulls) after each usage]. These intervals are expected to cover operational requirements (intervals less than these are therefore covered by this calculation).

5.1.5 PRNM uncertainty specifications include the environmental effect on the equipment.

5.1.6 The FT is assumed to be a Rosemount 1153DB6RBN0037 based on PIMS.

9

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 R2 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 5.1.7 Calibration temperature interval is 65-90 F, based on Reference 6.1 5.1.8 Since overall channel uncertainties are relatively minimal for digital equipment, and settings are digitally entered into equipment, additional margin is considered negligible and ATSP = NTSP.

Hence, STOL/LAZ (setting tolerances and leave-alone-zones) does not apply for PRNM (i.e.,

STOL/LAZ is assumed to = 0). STOLs for FT-related calibration are as follows: 0.04 mAdc (based on Ref. 6.1 - see assumption 5.1.18), 0.01 Vdc, 2.5 ohms (both based on Ref. 6.5.3). For the DMM used to calibrate the FT, CEi = 0.026 mAdc (tool-specific treatment based on Ref. 6.2.1 - see assumption 5.1.18).

5.1.9 All calibration uncertainty expressions are 3-sigma due to NIST traceability.

5.1.10 Flow element uncertainty (PEA) is 1% of rated loop flow at 2-sigma.

R2 5.1.11 Not Used 5.1.12 Per Ref. 6.3.2, AGAF limits are +1- 2% power.

5.1.13 Not Used R2 5.1.14 There is no safety credit taken for the recirculation flow upscale or recirculation flow comparison alarms. The purpose of the functions is to detect failed or abnormal conditions in the flow input functions. The replacement system performs the same functions, but now integrates the processing equipment into the APRM and RBM hardware. Therefore, except for the transmitter inputs, all flow processing equipment is covered by the APRM and RBM self-test functions. With this configuration, the same trip setpoints as used previously will provide equal or better detection capability for abnormal conditions provided the replacement PRNM equipment has equal or better R2 performance characteristics compared to the equipment being replaced.

The original equipment was replaced in PECO Mod P000479 with a PLC controller (Reference 6.3.4),

but the setpoints from the original equipment were maintained. Therefore, PRNM which eliminates all separate flow processing hardware except for the transmitter and the initial flow input analog-to-digital conversion (all calculations are performed digitally), provides substantial improvement in the inaccuracies and drifts compared to the original equipment. Therefore, the current setpoints are adequate and will be retained, except where setpoint changes are required per Reference 6.5.6 for APRM STP flow biased scram and rod block functions:

The current setpoints are 120% of rated recirculation flow for the flow upscale alarm, and 10% flow difference for the comparison alarm (8% of span with a span of, 125% = 10%) (Reference 6.3.5).

10

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 I PR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study These setpoints will be used as nominal setpoints. These functions are not included in the Tech Spec or the TRM, so no separate calculation of allowable value or DB will be performed.

5.1.15 Per Ref 6.5.5, there is no safety credit taken for the RBM Downscale Trip. The purpose of the function is to provide diagnostic information to assist trouble shooting the system under certain abnormal conditions that may occur. The NTSP is identified in Ref. 6.5.5 as 1.0%. However, per customer request, 5.0% is utilized as the NTSP. The RBM Downscale Trip is deleted from the Tech Spec by PECO ECR #PB 98-01802, so no separate calculation of an allowable value or DB will be performed.

5.1.16 To compensate for a deadband of 1.0% in the RBM Low Power Setpoint ("auto-bypass")

downscale trip setpoint and to convert it to an "upscale trip", subtract 1.1% from the calculated NTSP.

The input parameter is carried at a resolution of 0. 1%, so 1.1 % is the smallest value that exceeds the deadband.

5.1.17 The setpoint analyses justify a NTSP/IS equal to the AV/TRM for the RBM LTSP, ITSP and HTSP trip functions. RBM LTSP, ITSP and HTSP NTSP/IS are limited to 123.0%, 117.0% and I11.0% respectively due to section A.2.8.2. 1.1 of MELLL/ARTS Topical Report NEDC-32162P (Ref.

6.3.6). Thus, NTSP/IS values shown in Section 2 can not exceed these limits.

5.1.18 Ref. 6.2.1 defines a standard practice, unless an exception is identified, of setting A(FT) equal to twice vendor accuracy for the FT. Ref. 6.2.1 further defines a standard practice to set STOLs and CEs for an FT = A (which would be twice vendor accuracy for the FT). The standard practices in Ref.

6.2.1 conservatively provide margin to cover possible variations in the tools and methods used for the calibration. For this analysis, the A(FT) has been set equal to twice vendor accuracy per Ref. 6.2. 1.

However, setting the FT STOL and CE equal to twice vendor accuracy has been judged to be unnecessarily conservative, particularly since the only function affected are the flow biased rod block and scram functions, neither of which is credited in any safety analyses. For this analysis, the FT STOL has been set equal to vendor accuracy (consistent with Ref. 6.1) and FT CE has been selected to reflect commonly available DVMs, Fluke Model 8050 or equivalent (Ref. 6.2.1). Ref. 6.2.3 is affected in the sense that PRNM calibration procedures will have to reflect this assumption of the DVM type.

5.1.19 The RFM performs two square root conversion algorithms that converts the 4 to 20 mA signals from the flow transmitters to a 0 to I Vde output that corresponds to 0 to 125% rated loop flow. Since the square root conversion algorithm is non-linear, uncertainty terms appearing at the input of the square root conversion must be converted to equivalent output values by use of Equations in Section 7.1.13. These equations indicate that the conversion is a function of an operating point at which the input uncertainty is propagated through the square root algorithm. Therefore, an operating point must R2 be chosen at which the conversion will take place. For this calculation, the operating point is considered to be approximately 75% rated loop flow (or 0.6 V = 1 V

• 75% /125%). Choosing this value is a compromise in that the error term is then conservative at flows greater than 75%, but non-conservative at flows less than 75%. This is considered acceptable, since in general, plant operating margins become larger at low power and low flow conditions.

I1

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study

6.0 REFERENCES

6.1 GE Report NEDC-31336P-A, GE Proprietary Information, September 1996, GE Instrument Setpoint R2 Methodology 6.2 PECO/Exelon Procedures 6.2.1 Exelon design analysis related procedures 6.2.1.1 Exelon Procedures CC-AA-309, Rev 10, Control of Design Analysis 6.2.1.2 CC-AA-309-1001, Rev. 6, Guidelines for Preparation and Processing Design Analyses 6.2.1.3 CC-MA-103-2001, Rev. 1, Setpoint Methodology for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station and Limerick Generating Station (The above procedures supersede PECO Nuclear Procedure NE-C-420 Rev 3, Design Calculation

[including exhibits, mainly -4 ("dash-4")]) R2 6.2.2 Exelon configuration control related procedures 6.2.2.1 Exelon Procedure CC-AA-102, Rev. 20, Design Input and Configuration Change Impact Screening 6.2.2.2 CC-AA-103, Rev. 21, Configuration Change Control for Permanent Physical Plant Changes 6.2.2.3 CC-AA-103-2001, Rev. 3, Setpoint Change Control (The above procedures supersede PECO Modifications Procedure MOD-C-08 Rev 1, Setpoint Changes (no exhibits))

6.2.3 PECO Plant Procedures and Practices covering Surveillance Test and Calibration 6.2.3.1 Procedures and Practices for Recirculation Drive Flow Equipment 6.2.3.2 Procedures and Practices for NUMAC PRNM Equipment 6.2.3.2.1 S12N-60A-1 10-AEC2, Rev. 4, Calibration Check of APRM "1" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.2 S12N-60A-1 10-BFC2, Rev. 4, Calibration Check of APRM "2" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.3 S12N-60A-1 10-CGC2, Rev. 4, Calibration Check of APRM "3" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.4 S12N-60A-1 10-DHC2, Rev. 4, Calibration Check of APRM "4" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.5 SI3N-60A-1 10-AEC2, Rev. 5, Calibration Check of APRM "1"Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.6 S13N-60A-1 10-BFC2, Rev. 6, Calibration Check of APRM "2" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.7 SI3N-60A-1 10-CGC2, Rev. 5, Calibration Check of APRM "3" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.8 S13N-60A-1 10-DHC2, Rev. 5, Calibration Check of APRM "4" Flow Bias Signal 6.2.3.2.9 SI2N-60A-APRM-I IC2, Rev. 6, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor R2 (APRM) "I" 6.2.3.2.10 S12N-60A-APRM-21 C2, Rev. 6, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) "2" 6.2.3.2.11 SI2N-60A-APRM-31 C2, Rev. 6, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) "3" 6.2.3.2.12 S12N-60A-APRM-4 IC2, Rev. 7, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) "4" 6.2.3.2.13 S13N-60A-APRM- 11C2, Rev. 8, Calibration/Functional Check of Average PowerRange Monitor (APRM) "I" 6.2.3.2.14 SI3N-60A-APRM-21 C2, Rev. 9, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) "2" 6.2.3.2.15 S13N-60A-APRM-31 C2, Rev. 10, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) "3" 12

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 6.2.3.2.16 S13N-60A-APRM-41C2, Rev. 9, Calibration/Functional Check of Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) "4" 6.2.3.2.17 IC-1 1-50027, Rev. 3, Calibration, Alignment, Test and Related Functions for NUMAC Power R2 Range Neutron Monitor 6.3 Pre-Existing Calculations/Bases 6.3.1 GE Report GE-NE-901-045-1293-1, Power Re-Rate Setpoint Calculations for PBAPS-2, 3 (calculation #6), dated January 1994 6.3.2 PECO Calculation No. PM-0875 Rev. 10, including ECR PB 97-03269 rev 0, AIR A1057656 "APRM Setpoint Analysis Implementation", dated 11/25/97 (a supplement to Ref. 6.3.1) 6.3.3 GE Report GE-NE-208-20-0993-2, Power Re-Rate Setpoint Calculations for LGS-1, 2 (calculation #7), dated August 1994 6.3.4 PECO ECR PB 95-00382 rev 0, pages 1, 6, 7, 78, "Upgrade APRM Flow Bias Instruments per Mod P000479", dated 03/23/95 6.3.5 PECO ECR PB 95-02159 rev 0, page 65 6.3.6 GE Report NEDC-32162P, Rev. 2, Maximum Extended Load Line Limit and ARTS Improvement Program Analyses for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2 and 3, dated March 1995 6.4 PBAPS-2&3 Technical Specifications 6.5 Design Specifications R2 6.5.1 NUMAC Documents 6.5.1.1 24A5221 rev 7, NUMAC PRNM System Generic RS 6.5.1.2 24A5221HE0 rev 1, NUMAC PRNM System Specific RSDS, PBAPS-2&3 6.5.1.3 25A5916 rev 3, NUMAC APRM Generic PS 6.5.1.4 25A5916ER0 rev 1, NUMAC APRM Specific PSDS 6.5.1.5 25A5917 rev 2, NUMAC RBM Generic PS 6.5.1.6 25A5917ER0 rev 1, NUMAC RBM Specific PSDS 6.5.1.7 25A5041 rev 1, NUMAC OPRM Genetic PS 6.5.1.8 25A5041AA rev 1, NUMAC OPRM Generic DSDS 6.5.2 22A1372AB rev 3, NMS DSDS, PBAPS-2&3 6.5.3 GE DRF C51-00136 (4.42) 6.5.4 PRNM System Bases for Neutron Flux and STP AL/AV/DB, PBAPS-2,3, Rev. 0, dated 12/15/98 (GE DRF C51-00214-00 (5.6))

12A

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 I R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 6.5.5 PRNM System Bases for RBM Downscale Trip Tech Spec Deletion and Reduced Setpoint, Rev. 0, dated 1/8/99 (GE DRF C51-00214-00 (5.7))

6.5.6 Exelon Generating Company LLC, Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Extended Power Uprate Task Report

-Task T0506: TS Instrument Setpoints, Rev. 0, dated March 2011 (GE DRF 0000-0108-6952, Exelon Doc. PEAIC-EPU-7) 6.5.7 Exelon Generating Company LLC, Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Extended Power Uprate Task Report R2

- Task T0307: Reactor Recirculation System, Rev. 0, dated September 2010 (GE DRF 0000-0108-0105, Exelon Doc. PEAM-EPU-14) 6.5.8 Exelon Nuclear, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 & 3, Evaluation 2009-10708, Rev. 0, Final Task Report 24 -HVAC (Exelon Doc. PEAM-EPU- 104) 6.5.9 Final Task Report, Exelon Nuclear Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Extended Power Uprate, Task T0806, Equipment Qualification - Radiation, Revision 1 (Exelon Doc. PEAE-EPU-8) 6.5.10 Exelon Generating Company LLC, Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Extended Power Uprate Task Report

- Task T0500: Neutron Monitoring System, Rev. 1, dated March 2011 (GE DRF 0000-0109-1933, Exelon Doc. PEAIC-EPU-2) 6.6 Vendor Documents 6.6.1 Rosemount Model 1153DB6RBN0037 6.7 Licensing Documents 6.7.1 PECO COLR for PBAPS-3 Reload I1, Cycle 12 Revision 2, dated 3/10/98 6.8 Exelon Documents R2 6.8.1 PB Mod P00507, Design Input Document, Rev. I 6.9 ISA-RP67.04.02-2000 Methodologies for the Determination of Setpoints for Nuclear Safety- R2 Related Instrumentation 6.10 Exelon Transmittal of Design Information, Tracking No. PU-2011-020, Rev. 0 (Attachment 4) 13

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 7.0 CALCULATION 7.1 Methods 7.1.1 The accuracy due to noise is calculated from the LGS data in Reference 6.3.1.

7.1.2 The conversion of the flow error to power is modified by the 0.55 factor (see Section 3.3.1 of R2 Reference 6.5.6 for the slope of the function that defines the analytical limit).

7.1.3 The calibration instrument accuracies used in this calculation are based on a generically-expected calibration for the NUMAC-PRNM. Accuracy Ratio is considered to be unity (1).

7.1.4 Unless otherwise noted, the unit used in this document is in percent of the rated thermal power.

7.1.5 Unless otherwise noted, the uncertainty values used in calculations in Section 7 are two (2) sigma and +/- values.

7.1.6 DELETED R2 7.1.7 Final calculated values (e.g., AV, NTSP) are rounded: 1) in the direction of conservatism (i.e.,

away from the ANL/DB), and 2) to one decimal place. Intermediate calculated values (uncertainty terms, etc.) are not rounded.

various and sundry traditional and ongoing approaches that have evolved over the course of time (essentially Ref. 6.5.3).

7.1.9 LER Avoidance and STA criteria in accordance with the GE methodology (Reference 6.1) are not required per the Station methodology (Reference 6.2.1.3), and are therefore not required to be considered in this calculation revision. However, the Reference 6.1 LER Avoidance Criteria is applied for the APRM STP Flow Biased trip functions in order to maintain consistency with NTSP and AV values provided by Section 3.3.1 of Reference 6.5.6.

.7.1.10 The methodology used for determining the NTSP listed in Section 2.1 (functions a, b, c, & d only), R2 APRM STP Flow Biased Scram and Rod Block (Single Loop and Two Loop Operation), is based on a GEH methodology referred to as "LER Avoidance" (Reference 6.1). This involves a methodical approach to evaluate the calculated NTSP and determine whether additional margin is needed to ensure the allowable value is not exceeded. While this methodology is not addressed in Reference 6.2.1.3 for widespread use, it doesprovide a more conservative result to the NTSP. In addition, applying this methodology will lead to a result that is consistent with the values provided by GEH (Reference 6.5.6). Since Reference 6.5.6 only applies to the functions impacted as a result of EPU, this methodology will be applied only for Section 2.1 for functions a, b, c, and d only.

14

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 7.1.11. APRM Channel AFT/ALT: STP Flow Biased Scram and Rod Block Check:

Per Section 5.13 of Reference 6.2.3.2.17 (IC procedure), the APRM STP flow biased scram and rod block (non-clamped) actuation points are checked by applying a simulated total recirculation flow input along with a simulated power input. The simulated flow input is kept constant while the simulated power input is adjusted while monitoring the point of actuation. These simulated flow and power inputs are applied digitally with a key-pad. (Note that the SI procedures, References 6.2.3.2.9 through 6.2.3.2.16, do not perform a similar calibration check of these actuation points.) The NUMAC PRNM system is a digital system with digital processing. As such, setpoints are not affected by instrument accuracy, drift, and calibration equipment errors. Settings are entered digitally with a key-pad, and therefore, an ALT does not apply (per Section 5.1.8, STOL/LAZ = 0). Also, since the calibration checks are performed digitally with a key-pad, an AFT also does not apply. This is because there is no drift in the digital portions of the system. There will be drift in the analog-to-digital portions of the system, but not in the digital portions. (Note that per References 6.2.3.9 through 6.2.3.17, the analog portions of the system are aligned with external standards such as an oscilloscope, volt meter, and ohm meter). The clamped APRM STP flow biased scram and rod block actuations are checked similar to the method described above with the exception of applying a simulated power input without a corresponding simulated total recirculation flow input. Therefore, the APRM Channel AFT/ALT for the STP flow biased scram and rod block (both clamped and non-clamped) functions are:

APRM Channel AFT/ALT for the STP Flow Biased Scram:

ALT = N/A AFT =N/A APRM Channel AFT/ALT for the STP Flow Biased Rod Block:

ALT = N/A AFT = N/A Per Reference 6.2.1.3, ALT equals LAZ.

7.1.12. APRM Channel AFT/ALT: Recirculation Flow Monitor (RFM) Loop Check: R2 Per References 6.2.3.2.1 through 6.2.3.2.8, the calibration of the RFM instrument loop is checked by applying variable test pressure inputs at the inputs of the recirculation flow transmitters while monitoring total recirculation flow rates on the flow rate display. As such, this calculation will determine AFT/ALT associated with the RFM loop calibration check from the input of the flow transmitters to the output indication of total recirculation flow. The ALT for the RFM loop calibration check is determined by the SRSS of the loop reference accuracy, loop calibration equipment errors, and the loop calibration equipment reading errors. The AFT is determined by the SRSS of the loop reference accuracy, loop instrument drift, loop calibration equipment errors, and the loop calibration equipment reading errors. This methodology is in accordance with Reference 6.2.1.3. The equations utilized are as follows:

RFM ALTLooP = +/-[(RFM ALOOp) 2 + (RFM CELoOP) 2 + (RFM CERDG.LOOp) 2 ]0 "

RFM AFTLooP = +[(RFM ALOOP) 2 + (RUM VDLoop) 2 + (RFM CELooP) 2 + (RFM CERnG.Loop) 2 ]0 S' 14A

Calc 4 PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study where RFM ALOOP = RFM loop reference accuracy specifications RFM VDLoop = RFM loop vendor drift specifications RFM CELooP = RFM loop calibration equipment uncertainty RFM CERt.-LOOP = RFM loop calibration equipment readability All uncertainties used in the AFT/ALT determination are considered to be 2-sigma (2a) values.

7.1.13 Uncertainty Propagation through Square Root Conversion Algorithms:

The RFM performs two square root conversion algorithms that converts the 4 to 20 mA signals from the flow transmitters to a 0 to 1 Vdc output. From these values, the transfer equation for converting square root conversion input signals to output signals is determined to be, (V - 0) / (1 Vdc - 0) = (I - 4 mA)° 5 / (20 mA - 4 mA)0 5 solving for output voltage "V",

0 V = (0.25 mA-O5 ) *(I -..4 mAf)5 Equation 7.1-1 where V is the output voltage in Vdc and I is the input current from the transmitters in milliamps. Since this is a non-linear function, the uncertainty transfer from input to output depends on the operating point.

The transfer of the input error at any point can be determined by the derivative of this transfer function R2 (Ref. 6.9). The result is, dV = 0.5 * (0.25 mA"°-5 ) *(I - 4 mA)-°' 5

• dl dV = (0.125 me.') * (I - 4 mA)"0 '

• dl Equation 7.1-2 where dV is the output uncertainty (in units of Vdc) caused by an input uncertainty of dl (in units of mA) at a value of I current (or operating point in units of mA).

When the operating point is know as a function of the output voltage rather than input current, an equation can be developed by solving Equation 7.1-1 for I and substituting into Equation 7.1-2.

solving Equation 7.1-1 for I, I = (V / 0.25 mA 0 5)2 + 4 mA substituting I into Equation 7.1-2, dV = (0.125 mA°-)

• dI / [(V / 0.25 mA° 5)2 + 4 mA- 4 mA]°-

= (01.5 mAni-5)*(0. 125 mA4-')5

• dl / V dV = (0.03125 mAn')

• dI / V An operating point must be chosen at which the input uncertainty (dl in terms of mA) is propagated through the square root algorithm. For this calculation, the operating point (V) is considered to be 14B

Calc # PE-025 1 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study approximately 75% rated loop flow (or 0.6 V) per assumption 5.1.19. Therefore, dV = (0.03125 mA-)

• dI / (0.6 V) where dI is in units of mA and dV is in units of Vdc, or, converting from units of mA to units of amps, dV =(0.03125 mAN) *(100l mA /I A)

• dl/(0.6V) dV = (31.25 At) *dI / (0.6 V) Equation 7.1-3 where dI is in units of amps and dV is in units of Vdc 7.1.14 Uncertainty Propagation through Summing Algorithms:

Uncertainties associated with inputs (either LPRM detectors or recirculation drive flow) to the PRNM utilize the algorithm of 1/(N 0 ') to establish the overall uncertainty on a percent rated basis, where N is the number of inputs to the PRNM [e.g., LPRMs to either APRM (20 minimum) or RBM (2 minimum), with minimum used for conservatism and to account for sensor failure; or recirculation drive flow loops to RFM (2 loops)]. The basis for this approach is illustrated by the following example utilizing recirculation drive flow:

R2 Example: let hypothetical individual rated loop flow = 1000 gpm, hence for a two-loop system, rated total flow = 2000 gpm; if rated loop uncertainty =-10% rated loop flow = +100 gpm (10% of 1000 gpm),

then rated total flow uncertainty is as follows (per Ref. 6.9):

rated total flow uncertainty = +[(I00 gpm) 2 + (100 gpm) 2 ]°0 5

= -[2*(100 gpm)]°']

= 205"*(l 00 gpm)

= -141.42 gpm or, [(141.42 gpm) / (2000 gpm)]* 100 % rated total flow *-7.07% rated total flow which equals the following (per Ref. 6.9):

• 7.07% rated total flow = 4-[(0.5*10 % rated loop flow) 2 +2(0.5* 10% rated loop flow)2 ]0-

= +/-[2*(0.5*10 % rated loop flow) ]10S 2 0

= +/-[2*0.25*(10 % rated loop flow) ] '5 2 0

= +/-[0.5 ( 10 % rated loop flow) ] '.

= -(10 % rated loop flow) / (20,5)

Therefore,

% rated total flow = (% rated loop flow) / (2°'5) 7.2 Computations

[begins on next page]

14C

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study CHANNEL INSTRUMENT ERRORS (LA, LD)

Ref FT DEVICE UNCERTAINTY CALCULATION 6.1, 6.2.1, 6.6.1, 6.8.1 model range code output code URL SP units FT 1153DB 6 R 100 34.32 psid TERM EXPRESSION Results s A(FI)

A] = 0.5%*SP

0.5%*(34.32) 0.172 psid ATEI = (0.75%*URL + 0.5%SP )*(ATA /1 00°F) min. normal temp = 65OF max. calibration temp = 90°F max. normal/trip (n/t) temp = 1020F ATAn = ATAt = 102 0F - 90 OF = 120F ATEIn = (0.75%*100 + 0.5%*34.32)*(12 0F/ 100TF)

0.111 psid ATEIt = (0.75%* 100 + 0.5%*34.32 )*(12OF / 100TF) 0.111 psid SPNE1 N/A (systematic span effect is calibrated out) = 0.000 zero (random) span (random) R2 SPEI = 0.5%*URL*(P/1000 psig) =0.5%*reading*(P/1000 psig)

Static Line Pressure (P) = 1200 psig SPE1 = [(0.5%*100)2 + (0.5%*34.32)21]5*(1200 / 1000) = 0.634 psig OPEl = N/A 0.000 eval at 1200 psig line pressure PSE1 - 0.005 %*SP per 1 Vdc (change in 24 Vdc regulated power supply output voltage) negligible evaluate at 0 dVdc PSEI = 0.005 %*(34.32)*(0 / 1) = 0.000 3 HTE1 = N/A 0.000 2 RE1 = N/A 0.000 2 SEISI = N/A 0.000 2 overall normalization A(FT)norm 2/3*[(A1) 2 + (ATEln)2 + (SPNEI) 2 + (SPE1) 2 ]0 .5 2

+ (OPEl) 2 jR2 2 2 2

+ (PSEI) + (HTEI) + (REI) + (SEIS1) 15

IR2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study A(FT)norm = 2/3*[(0.172)2 + (0.111)2+ (0)2 + (0.634)2 + (0)2

+ (0)2 + (0)2 + (0)2 + (0)2°.5 0.444 psid 2 2

A(FT)trip = 2/3*[(A1)x + (ATE1t) + (SPNE1) 2 + (SPE1) 2 + (OPEl)2

+ (PSEl) + (ITE1) 2

+ (RE1) 2 + (SEIS1)21]-5 A(FT)trip = 2/3 *[(0.172)2 + (0.111)2 + (0)2 + (0.634)2 + (0)2

+ (0) + (0)2 + (0)W + (0)2.05 0.444 psid 2 D(FI))

DI = 0.25%*URL per 6 months Tech. Spec Calibration Interval (M) = 24 months; evaluated over 30 months with 25% grace period 5

D1 = 0.25%*URL*(M /6 month)°

= 0.25%*100*(30 / 6)V5 0.559 psid 3 DTE1 = (0.75%*URL + 0.5%SP )*(ATD / 100-F) R2 min. normal temp = 65*F max. calibration temp = 90*F max. normal/trip (n/t) temp = 102 0F ATD = 90OF - 65 0F = 25 0F DTE1 = (0.75%* 100 + 0.5%*34.32 )*(250 F / 100IF) = 0.230 psid 3 overall normalization D(FT) = 2/3*[(D 1) 2 + (DTEI1)2 ] 05-D(FT) = 2/3*[(0.559)2 + (0.230)2]05 0.403 psid 2 PRNM PRNM Channel (Figure 1) [% flux (power) at 2-sigma unless otherwise noted] Ref 6.5.1, 6.5.3 a) channel instrument accuracy (LA) s APRM ch 1,2,3,4 RBM ch A.B indiv effect

1) PRNM (LPRMs, APRM/RBM, and TU) (fixed) 3 gen VA = 0.00 % FS, where APRM FS =0 to 125  % rated P gen VA 0.00 % FS, where RBM FS = 0 to 125  % rated P gen L= 0.00 % FS, where APRM gen L= 0.00 % FS, where RBM genA = 0.00%ratedP APRM genA = 0.00%ratedP RBM 16

Cale # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study trip VA 0.00 % FS, where APRM FS = 0 to 125  % rated P trip VA 0.00% FS, where RBM FS = 0 to 125  % rated P trip H 0.00 % FS, where APRM trip H 0.00 % FS, where RBM trip A = 0.00 % rated P APRM trip A = 0.00 %rated P RBM LPRM gen VA 0.80 % FS, over FS =0 to 125  % rated P gen L= 0.80 % FS, over FS = 0 to 125  % rated P gen VA = gen L = 2/3"0.80 % *125 = 0.67  % rated P gen VA and gen L are combined and propagated through the summing algorithms as follows (Section R2 7.1.14):

gen A = LPRM(APRM) [1/(20)°s]*[(gen VA)2 + (gen L) 2]0 .5

[1/(20)0-5]*[(0.67)2 + (0.67)2]0.5 0.21 % rated P 20 LPRMs minimum gen A = LPRM(RBM) [1/(2)°S]*[(gen VA)2 + (gen L)2]°'

[1/(2)°'s]*[(0.67)2 + (0.67)2105 0.67 % rated P 2 LPRMs minimum IR2

2) RFM (FE, FT, and FU - for APR (fb) 3 FT: span 34.32 psi = 16 mAdc A(FT) 0.444 psi = (0.444 / 34.32)*100% = 1.29 % SP (e.g .,FT-(X-02-110A-H) sq rt cnv 0.600 Vdc a 75  % rated loop Q (Sect. 5.1.19)

RFM flow inputs: 2 (for standard TLO)

Per Sections 7.1.13 and 7.1.14, A(FT) is propagated through the square root conversion and summing algorithms as follows:

dV= (1 /sqrt2)*(31.25*dI/0.6) where, dI = A(FT) = 1.29 % SP

= 1.29 %*16 mA*(1 A)/(1000 mA) R2

= 1.29 %*0.016 A therefore, dV =(1/sqrt2)*(31.25*1.290%0*0.016/0.6)

= 0.0076 Vdc, or converting to units of% rated Q per scaling information in Section 3.5.1, dV = 0.0076 Vdc *(125%.rated Q)/(1 Vdc) = 0:95 % rated Q 17

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study As determined below under Item 3 [3) RFM (FE, FT, FU, and TU)] for 2 loop recirc:

gen A = 0.67 % rated Q by combining dV and gen A as shown below, 2 2 05 overall flow accuracy (RFM) = [(dV) + (gen A) ] , R2

= [(0.95)2 + (0.67)2]0.5 = 1.16 % rated Q hence, flow error = dP = coeff*dW FCTR slope = 0.55 (W coefficient) therefore, converting overall flow accuracy (RFM) from units of % rated Q to units of% rated P is, overall flow accuracy (RFM): = 0.55*1.16% rated Q = 0.64 % rated P RFM

3) RFM (FE, FT, FU, and TU) (flow) 3 gen VA = 0.80 % FS, over FS= 0 to 125 %loopQ gen L = 0.80 % FS, over FS= 0 to 125  % loop Q gen VA = gen L = 2/3*0.80 %*125 0.67 % loop Q gen VA and gen L are combined and propagated through the summing algorithms as follows (Section R2 7.1.14):

2 205 gen A = [1/(2)O']*[(gen VA) + (gen L) 1

= [1/(2)0-5]*[(0.67)2 + (0.67)2V]-

= 0.67 % rated Q 2 loop recirc (for standard TLO) trip VA 0.00  % FS, where FS = 0 to 125  % rated Q trip H 0.00  % FS, where FS= 0 to 125  % rated Q trip A= 0.00  % rated Q FT: span 34.32 psi 16 mAdc A(FT) 0.444 psi (0A44 / 34.32)*100% = 1.29 % SP (e.g., FT-(X)-02-11 A-H) 0.600 Vdc at 75  % rated loop Q (Sect. 5.1.19)

R2 sq rt cnv RFM flow inputs: 2 (for standard TLO)

Per Sections 7.1.13 and 7.1.14, A(FT) is propagated through the square root conversion and summing algorithms as determined above under Item 2 [RFM (FE, FT, and FU -- for APRM)].

dV = 0.0076 Vdc, or converting to units of% rated Q per scaling information in Section 3.5.1, dV = 0.0076 Vdc *(1 25% rated Q) / (1 Vdc) = 0.95 % rated Q 18

Calc #PE-0251 Rey 2 R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study a) channel instrument accuracy (LA) (as determined from above results, except as noted) 1R2 (APRM) [ 0.21 % rated P (fixed)

(APRM, RFM) (0.64A2+ 0.21^2)^0.5 0.67 %(ratedP (fb) 1R2 MRM) 00.21  % rated P (RBM power)

(RBM) [ 0.67  % rated P (RBM trip)

(RFM) [ 1.16  % rated (flow) b) channel instrument drift (LD) Ref 6.5.1,6.5.3

1) PRNM (LPRMs, APRM/RBM, and TU) gen VD = 0.5 % FS, where FS = 0 to 125  % rated P gen D = 2/3*0.5 % *125 = 0.42 % rated P APRM gen VD 0.0 % FS, where FS = 0 to 125  % rated P genD = 2/3*0%*125 = 0.00 %ratedP RBM LPRM gen VD 0.8 % FS, over FS = 0 to 125  % rated P gen VD = 2/3*0.8 % *125 = 0.67 % rated P LPRM gen VD (0.67% rated P) is propagated through the summing algorithms as follows (Section 7.1.14):

gen D = LPRM(APRM) = [1/(20) 0 5]*(gen VD)

= [1/(20)0"5]*(0.67) R2

= 0.15 %rated P 20 LPRMs minimum gen D = LPRM(RBM) = [1/(2) 0-5]*(gen VD)

= [1/(2)o5]*(0.67)

= 0.47 % rated P 2 LPRMs minimum (note that the above values for LPRM gen D (0.15 & 0.47 %rated P) are not utilized in this calculation)

2) RFM (FE, FT, and FU - for APRM)

FT: span 34.32 psi = 16 mAde D(FT) 0.403 psi = '0.403 / 34.32)*100%= 1.17 %SP sq rt cnv 0.600 Vdc at 75  % rated loop Q (Sect. 5.1.19)

RFM flow inputs: Z (for standard TLO) 19

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 I R2 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study Per Sections 7.1.13 and 7.1.14, D(FT) is propagated through the square root conversion and summing algorithms as follows:

dV= (1 / sqrt 2) * (31.2S* dI / 0.6) where dI = D(FT) = 1.17 % SP

= 1.17 %*16 rnA*(1 A)/(1000 mA)

= 1.17 %*0.016 A therefore, dV = (I / sqrt2) * (31.25

• 1.17 %

• 0.016/0.6)

= 0.0069 Vdc, or converting to units of % rated Q per scaling information in Section 3.5.1, dV = 0.0069 Vdc *(125% rated Q) / (1 Vdc) = 0.86 % rated Q R.2 As determined below under Item 3 [3) RFM (FE, FT, FU, and TU)] for 2 loop recirc:

gen D ='1.05 % rated Q hence, flow error = dP = coeff*dW FCTR slope 0.55 (W coefficient) therefore, converting dV and genD from units of % rated Q to units of % rated P is, dV = 0.55*0.86 % rated Q = 0.47 % rated P genD= 0.55*1.05 % rated Q = 0.58 % rated P overall flow drift (RFM): = [(dV)2 + (gen D)2]0

= [(0.47)2 + (0.58)2]05 = 0.75 % rated P RFM

3) RFM (FE, FT, FU, and TU) gen VD 1.79  % FS, where FS= 0 to 125  % loop Q gen D 2/3*1.79 %*125 = 1.49 %loop Q gen D is propagated through the summing algorithms as follows (Section 7.1.14):

gen D [1/(2)0.5]*(gen D)

= [I/(2)0.51*(I .49) P-2

= 1.05 % rated Q 2 loop recirc (for standard TLO)

FT: span 34.32 psi 16 mAdc D(FT) 0.403 psi (0.403/34.32)*100%= 1.17 %SP sq rt cnv 0.600 Vdc at 75  % rated loop Q RFM flow inputs: 2 (for standard TLO) 20

I R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study Per Sections 7.1.13 and 7.1.14, D(FT) is propagated through the square root conversion and summing algorithms as determined above under Item 2 [RFM (FE, FT, and FU - for APRM)].

dV = 0.0069 Vdc, or converting to units of % rated Q per scaling information in Section 3.5.1, R2 dV = 0.0069 Vdc *(125% rated Q) / (1 Vdc) = 0.86 % rated Q b) channel instrument drift (LD) (as determined from above results, except as noted)

F---

(APRM)

(APRM, RFM)

.0.42

[(0.75A2+ 0.42A2)^0.5 = 0.86

% rated P

% rated P (fixed)

(fb)

IR2 (RBM) [ 0.42  % rated P] (RBM power)

(RBM) [ 0.00  % rated P[ (RBM trip)

(RFM) [(0.86^2+ 1.05A2)AO.5 = 1.36  % rated (flow) 1R2

SUMMARY

OF CHANNEL INSTRUMENT ERRORS a) channel instrument accuracy (LA)

APRMfunctions 0.2 %rateIj (fixed) 02.67 raed P (fl) I R2 REMpowerfunctions 0.21% rted P (RBM power)

RBM tripfunctions 0.67 %ated P (RBM trip)

RFMfunctions L1.16 %ratedP (flow) b) channel instrument drift (LD)

APRMufunctions (fixed) R2 0.86 %rated P (fb) 0.42 %ratedP REM powerfunctions (RBM power) 0.00 %rated P RBMtrip functions (RBM trip) 1.3 %atedP 1R2 RFMfunctions (flow)

CHANNEL CALIBRATION ERRORS (CA) Ref 6.1,6.2,6.3,6.5 all calib errors are s indiv effect channel 1: APRM Channels 3 parameter / analog summary:

LPRM in APRM out RBM out mAdc Vdc Vdc 0.0 0.000 0.000 3.0 1.000 1.000 21

R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study INOP-CAL mode, essentially no uncertainty LPRMs cal uncertainty 0.0  % rated P APRM cal uncertainty 0.0  % rated P CE= 00 % rated P let CEstd = CE 0.010J %rated P STOLi: FS = 0 to 125  % rated P

%ratedP STOLI = 0.000 (LGAF) 6.5.3 STOL2 = 0.000 INOP-CAL STOL3 = 0.000 APRM downscale neut STOL3 = 0.000 APRM setdown neut/stp STOL3 = 0.000 APRM fixed hi-hi neut STOL3 = 0.000 APRM fb stp clmp STOL3 = 0.000 APRM fb stp scram/rb STOL4 = 2.000 (AGAF) 6.3.2

% rated P STOL = sqrt (STOLi^2) = 2.00 APRM downscale neut STOL = sqrt (2^2) = 2 2.00[ APRM setdown neut/stp R2 2.00 APRM fixed hi-hi neut L~ 2.00 2.oo0 APRM fb stp cImp APRM fb stp scram/rb CA = (2/3)*sqrt (STOL^2+CE^2+CEstdi-2) = 1.33 % rated P APRM downscale neut CA = (2/3)*sqrt (2A2+0A2+0A2) = 1.33 1.33 % rated P APRM setdown neut/stp R2 1.33 % rated P APRM fixed hi-hi neut 1.33 % rated P APRM ib stp clmp incl CA from Q ch I a (P) below>>>>> 139 % rated P APRM fb stp scram/rb CA = (2/3)*sqrt (STOLA2+CEA2+CEstdA2+PA2) R2 CA = (2/3)*sqrt (2A2+0A2+0A2+0.596A2) = 1.39 22

R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study channel 2: RBM Channels APRM input  % rated P APRM fb stp cimp to 3s (RBM power) 1 0.001 (RBM trip)

STOLi: FS 0 to 125  % rated P

% rated P STOLI = N/A STOL2 = 0.0 INOP-CAL STOL3 = 0.0 RBM low (RBM power)

STOL3 = 0.0 RBM inter (RBM power)

STOL3 = 0.0 RBM high (RBM power)

STOL3 = 0.0 RBM low (RBM trip)

STOL3 = 0.0 RBM inter (RBM trip)

STOL3 = 0.0 RBM high (RBM trip)

STOL3 = 0.0 RBM downscl (RBM trip)

STOL4 = N/A

% rated P STOL = sqrt (STOLi^2) = 0 RBM low (RBM power) 0.0 RBM inter (RBM power) 0.0J REM high (RBM power) 0.0 RBM low (RBM trip) 0,0j REM inter (RBM trip) 0.0 RBM high (RBM trip) 0.0. RBM downscl (RBM trip)

CA = (2/3)*sqrt (STOLA2 + APRMA2) = 1.33 % rated P RBM low (RBM power)

CA = (2/3)*sqrt (0A2 + 2A2) = 1.33 1.33 %rated P RBM inter (RBM power)

I R2 1.33 % rated P RBM high (RBM power)

CA = (2/3)*sqrt (STOL^2) - 0.00 % rated P RBM low (RBM trip) 0.00 % rated P REM inter (RBM trip) 0.00 % rated P RBM high (RBM trip) 0.00 % rated P RBM downscl (RBM trip) 23

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study channel la: APRM Channels RFM Flow Reference Channel parameter / analog summary:

FE out FT in FT out RFM in RFM out cal atm psid mAdc mAdc Vdc mAdc Vdc ohms 0 0.00 4.0 0.4 0.000 0.000 0.0 0.0 70000 33.89 20.0 2.0 1.000 1.000 10.0 1620.0 recirc FEs -> flTs /

.> PRNM high precision resistor

/

/ /

/ /

number: / /

/ /

2 / /

/ /

boundary / /

/ /

temp (F): / /

90 CE1A,B CE2A,B CE3 CE4 CE1A,Bstd CE2A,Bstd CE3std CE4std (Heise 710A) (Fluke 8050) (Fluke 8050) (Fluke 8050)

For DPIlPG: 0.00 % input+ 0.10 % FS of 100 psid 6.2.1 CE spec CE1A,B 0.10%*100 = 0.100 psid over span of 33.89 psid let DPI/PG=A 1? no (0.100/33.89)*.100% = 0.295 % FS of 125  % loop Q 0.295%*125 = 0.369  % loop Q ' R2 For DMM: 20.000 mAdc 125 % loop Q 6.2.1 CE sp=e CE2A,B 0.00 % input + 0.13 % range of 20 mAde 0.13%*20 = 0.026 mAdc over span of 16.00 mAdc R2 let DMM=A I? no (0.026/16.00)*100% = 0.1625 % FS of 125  % loop Q 0.1625%* 125 = 0.203  % loop Q For DMM: 10.000 Vde 125 % loop Q 6.2.1 CE spec CE3 = 0.00 % input+ 0.13 % range of 20 Vdc 0.13%*20 = 0.026 Vdc over span of 10.000 mAdc (0.026/10.000)* 100%-= 0.260 % FS of 125  % loop Q 0.260%*125- 0.325 %loop Q I R2 For DMM: 1620.0 ohms 125 % loop Q 6.2.1 CE spec CE4 = 0.00 % input + 0.13 % range of 2000 ohms 0.13%*2000 = 2.6 ohms over span of 1620 ohms (2.6/1620)*100%= 0.1605 % FS of 125  % loop Q 0.1605%*125 = 0201 %loopQ R2 24

I R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study CE = sqrt(O.369^2 + 0.203^2 + 0.325^2 + 0.201A2) = 0.569 % loop Q From Section 7.1.14, CE is propagated through the summing algorithm as follows: R2 CE = [1/(2)0'5]*0.569 = 0.402 % rated Q let CEstd = CE = 0.402 % rated Q STOLi: 6.5.3 analog  % FS  % loop STOLI = N/A STOL2= 0.04 (0.04/16)*100% = 0.250 0.250%*125 = 0.313 STOL3 0.010 (0.010/1)*100% = 1.000 1.000%*125 = 1.250 STOL4= 2.5 (2.5/1620)*100% =0.154 1.54%*125 = 0.193 STOL = sqrt (STOLi^2)

= sqrt (0.313A2 + 1.250^2 + 0.193A2) = 1.303  % loop Q From Section 7.1.14, STOL is propagated through the summing algorithm as follows:

STOL = [1/(2)°.]*1.303 - 0.921 % rated Q R2 CA = (2/3)

• sqrt (STOLA2 + CE`A2 + CEstdA2) =

CA = (2/3)

• sqrt (0.92 1A2 + 0.402",2 + 0.402A2) = 0.722 % rated Q converting to a 3-sigma value, CA = 3/2*0.722 = 1.083 % rated Q [3 s]

converting from units of % rated Q to % rated P, CA = 0.55*1.083 = 0.596 % rated P [3 s]

25

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study PROCESS MEASUREMENTACCURACY (PMA) VALIDATION Ref 6.1,6.5.3 channel 1: APRM Channels S

The PMA is a combination of the APRM tracking error and the uncertainty due to indiv effect flow noise and neutron noise. 2 For the loss of feedwater heating event, the APRM system is designed to have a tracking error of not more than 1.11 % power in response to a 20% flow control maneuver with a limiting control rod pattern. This shall hold true for all cases including that the LPRM sensors are failed or bypassed to the minimum number required in each APRM. The neutron IR2 noise impact to the setpoint calculation is not included for scram functions due to filtering.

Per below, flow noise contribution is 0.69 % power (as determined under "channel la: APRM Channels RFM Flow Reference Channel" below).

Hence, for heat flux PMA = 1 1.11  % rated PI (fixed)P 1(1.1IA2 +0.69A2YAO.5 = 1.31 Srated P (fb) 1R2 For the MSIV closure event, the APRM tracking error is 1.11% power, the neutron noise is 1.25 % power based on actual plant data, and the flow noise is 1.25 %flow (0.69 % power, as determined under "channel la: APRM Channels RFM Flow Reference Channel" below) based on actual plant data.

R2 Combining by SRSS yields for neutron flux PMA = (1.11A2+ l.25A2)0.5 = 1.67 %ratedP (fixed)P (1.11^2+1.25A2+0.6912)^0.5= 1.81% ratedP (fb) channel 2: RBM Channels tracking: 0 % rated P at 2 s (RBM power) neutron noise same as above: 1.25 % rated P at 2 s (RBM power)

JR2 F(0"2 + 1.25^2)"0.5 = 1.25 % rated P J (RBM power) neutron noise estimated: 1.0 % rated P at 2 s (RBM trip)

LPRM readings 1.0 % rated P at 3 s (RBM trip)

PMA= (1.0A2 + (2/3*1.0)^2)A0.5 = 1.20 %ratedP (RBM trip)

I R2 channel 1a: APRM Channels RFM Flow Reference Channel The .flow noise, based on actual plant data, is:

PMA = 1 1.25 % ratedQ converting PMA from units of % rated Q to % rated P is:

PMA= 0.55*l.25=0.69%ratedP I R2 PRIMARY ELEMENTACCURACY (PEA) VALIDATION Ref 6.1, 6.5.3 channel 1: APRM Channels [NA200/NA300 LPRMS]

indiv effect 2

26

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study PEA is a combination of the LPRM sensor sensitivity and sensor non-linearity uncertainties.

bias random They are 10.33 +/- 0.20 % and sen-sen dpea 10.49 +/- 1.00 %, respectively sen-non-lin apea Also, since N1 = minimum number of LPRM to one APRM channel = 20 Therefore, overall PEA = (0.33 + 0.49) +/-(1/sqrt N 1)

• sqrt (0.202 + 12) bias random PEA = 0.82 {= 0.33 + 0.49) +/- 0.228 (1/20A0.5)*(0.20A2 + 1.OO2)AO.5) N  % rated P (fixed) R2 I 0.503 = (0.228A2 + 0.389A2 + 0.224A2)AO.5 Note I % rated P (fb)

Note 1: RFM flow element random PEA uncertainty (0.389 % rated P) and random apea uncertainty (0.244) values are both determined as shown below.

or, separated into drift and accuracy components:

dpea = 0.33 +/-0.045 {= (l/20"0.5)*(0.20}  % rated P R2 apea = 0.49 +/-0.224 {= (1/20A0.5)*(1.00)  % rated P (fixed) 0.449 {= (0.224A2 + 0.389A2yO.5 Note2  % rated P (fb)

Note 2: RFM flow element random PEA uncertainty (0.389 % rated P) is determined as shown below.

channel 2: RBM Channels PEA is a combination of the LPRM sensor sensitivity and sensor non-linearity uncertainties.

(RBM power)

They are 0.33 +/- 0.20  % and sen-sen dpea 0.00 +/- 1.00  %, respectively sen-non-I apea bias random PEA = 10.33 +/- 0.228 (=(1/2MAO.5)*(0.20^2 + 1.00"A2)0.5)  % rated P (RBM power) 1R2 or, separated into drift and accuracy components:

dpea = 0.33 +1- 0.045 (=(1/20^0.5)*(0.20)  % rated P (RBM power) apea = 0.00 +/- 0.224 {=(1/20AO.5)*(l.00)  % rated P (RBM power) jR2 (RBM trip)

They are 0.00 +/- 0.00 f % and sen-sen dpea 0.49 +/- 1.00 I%, respectively sen-non-I apea 27

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study Also,. since N2 = minimum number of LPRM to one RBM channel = 2 bias random PEA= ] 0.49 +/- 0.707 t=(I/20o.5)*(m.ofl  % rated P (RBM trip) I R2 or, separated into drift and accuracy components:

dpea = 0.00 +/- 0.000  % rated P (RBM trip) apea = 0.49 +/- 0.707 {=(i/2fo.5)*(i.oo)  % rated P (RBM trip)

IR2 channel Ia: APRM Channels RFM Flow Reference Channel PEA is the FE:

FE error = 1% loop Q each venturi )

converting to units of% rated Q, FE error = [1/(2)0.51*1 % loop Q = 0.707 % rated Q 2 loop recirc R2 converting to units of % rated P, FE error = 0.55*0.707 % rated Q 0.389 % rated P 2 loop recirc NOMINAL TRIP SETPOINT (IVTSP) AND ALLOWABLE VALUE (A V) Ref 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.5, 6.7 channel 1. APRM Channels I

a-i) APRM STP Flow-Biased (TLO) - Upscale (flow-biased) (scram)

ANL 0.55 W+ 65.5  % rated P 6.5.6 R2 NTSP = A - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+L.ID2))+PEAbiasI

= 0.55W + 65.5 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+1.39^2+1.31A2+0.503A2+0.86A2))+0.82]

= 0.55 W + 62.824 jR2 let NTSPI = 0.55 W+ 62.8 % rated P AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= 0.55W + 65.5 - [(I .645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+1.39A2+1.3 1A2+0.449^2))+0.49]

= 0.55 W+ 63.305 1R2 letAV 10.55 W+ 63.3 %ratedPP 28

PBAPS 2 & 3 R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study The following steps determine whether NTSPI satisfies the GEH LER Avoidance Criteria per Section 7.1.10.

Acceptance Criteria: Required Z(LER) ?: 0.81 (multiple channel) in accordance with Revision 1 of this analysis and Reference 6. 1. The Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) corresponds to a probability of 90% (one-sided normal distribution) for multiple channels as noted in Revision 1 of this analysis.

2 2 2 12 Sigma(LER) = (1/2) * (LA + CA + LD )'

= (1/2) * (0.672 + 1.392 + 0.862)1,7

= 0.883 Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP,) / Sigma(LER)

= (63.3 - 62.8) / 0.883

= 0.566 implies NTSPI does not pass acceptance criteria NTSP 2 is calculated by using above equation, inserting the required minimum Z(LER) and solving for NTSP 2.

Required Z(LER) = (AV -NTSP 2) / Sigma(LER). Therefore, solve for NTSP 2 0.81 = (63.3 - NTSP2) / 0.883; implies NTSP 2 = 62.58 After conservative rounding:

let NTSP 2 0.55 W+ 62.5 % rated P With consideration of the AGAF limits (+/-2% Power) given in Section 5.1.12, the 2 % Power value is added to NTSP 2. This will determine if the AV is exceeded.

NTSP 2 + AGAF limit = 62.5% + 2% = 64.5%; This value exceeds the AV of 63.3%. Therefore, NTSPAoj is determined below by subtracting the AGAF limit from the AV. R2 NTSPAoj = AV - AGAF limit = 63.3% - 2% = 61.3%

It is determined below whether NTSPArj satisfies the Z(LER) criteria:

Z(LER) = (AV - NTSPAw) / Sigma(LER)

= (63.3 - 61.3) / 0.883

= 2.265 implies NTSPAw passes acceptance criteria.

Therefore, let NTSP = 10.55 W+ 61.3 %rated P a-2) APRM STP Flow-Biased (SLO) - Upscale (flow-biased) (scram)

ANL= 0.55 W+ 62.2  % rated P 6.5.6 NOTE: SLO operation uses a -GEH proprietary method for calculating certain error terms (LA, CA, and LD).

While the same equations are used as the TLO operation, the specific error terms were provided as input from GEH and are not derived in this calculation. The error terms are being referred to below as (LA', CA', and LD') and are provided in Reference 6.10.

29

Rev 2 Calc # PE-0251 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study AV = ANL - [(I .645/2)*(SQRT(LA'^2+CA'A2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

Where, per Reference 6.10, LA' = 3.414% Power CA' = 2.139% Power 0.55W + 62.2 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(3.414A2+2.139.A2+1.31A2+0.449A2))+0.49]

- 0.55 W+ 58.21 let AV= 0.55 W+ 58.2 % rated P NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA'A2+CA'A2+PMA^2+PEArandomA2+LD'A2))+PEAbias]

Where, per Reference 6.10, LD' = 5.42 % Power 0.55W + 62.2 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(3.414A2+2. 39^2+1.31 A2+0.503A2+5.42A2))+0.82]

- 0.55 W+ 55.707 let NTSP, 0.55 W+ 55.7 % rated P The following steps determine whether NTSPI satisfies the GEH LER Avoidance Criteria per Section 7.1.10.

Acceptance Criteria: Required Z(LER)> 0.81 (multiple channel) in accordance with Revision 1 of this analysis and Reference 6.1. The Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) corresponds to a probability of 90% (one-sided normal distribution) for multiple channels as noted in Revision 1 of this analysis. R2 2 2 Sigma(LER) = (1/2) * (LA + CA + LD)1a

= (1/2) * (3.4142 + 2.1392 + 5 .4 2 2)"2

= 3.377 Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP,) / Sigma(LER)

= (58.2 - 55.7) / 3.377

= 0.740 implieg NTSPI does not pass acceptance criteria NTSP 2 is calculated by using above equation, inserting the required minimum Z(LER) and solving for NTSP 2.

Required Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP 2) Sigma(LER). Therefore, solve for NTSP 2 0.81 = (58.2 - NTSP 2) / 3.377; implies NTSP 2 = 55.46%

After conservative rounding:

let NTSP 2 0.55 W+ 55.4 % rated P With consideration of the AGAF limits (+/-2% Power) given in Section 5.1.12, the 2 % Power value is added to NTSP2 . This will determine if the AV is exceeded.

30

Rev 2 Calc # PE-0251 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study NTSP 2 + AGAF limit = 55.4% + 2% = 57.4%; This value does not exceed the AV of 58.2%. Therefore, R2 NTSP 2 passes acceptance criteria.

Therefore, let NTSP = 10.55 t

W+ 55.4 %rated P J I

b-i) APRM STP Flow-Biased (TLO) - Upscale (flow-biased) (rod block)

DB = 0.55 W+ 55.9  % rated P 6.5.6 NTSP = DB - [(1.645t2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CA^2+PMA^2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 0.55W + 55.9 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+ 1.39A2+1.3 1A2+0.503^2+0.86A2))+0.82]

= 0.55 W+ 53.224 R2 let NTSP1 = 0.55 W+ 53.2 % rated P AV = DB - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= 0.55W + 55.9 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+1.39A2+1.3 lA2+0.449A2))+0.49]

- 0.55 W+ 53.705 letAV 10.55 W + 53.7 % rated P The following steps determine whether NTSPI satisfies the GEH LER Avoidance Criteria per Section 7.1.10.

Acceptance Criteria: Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) in accordance with Revision 1 of this analysis and Reference 6.1. The Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) corresponds to a probability of 90% (one-sided normal distribution) for multiple channels as noted in Revision I of this analysis.

Sigma(LER) = (1/2) * (LA2 + CA'++ LD2)

= (1/2) * (0.672 + 1.392 + 0.862)1a

= 0.883 Z(LER) = (AV - NTSPI) I Sigma(LER) R2

= (53.7 - 53.2) / 0.883

= 0.566 implies NTSPI does not pass acceptance criteria NTSP 2 is calculated by using above equation, inserting the required minimum Z(LER) and solving for NTSP 2.

Required Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP 2) / Sigma(LER). Therefore, solve for NTSP2 0.81 = (53.7 - NTSP 2) / 0.883; implies NTSP2 = 52.98 After conservative rounding:

let NTSP 2 = 0.55 W+ 52.9 % rated P With consideration of the AGAF limits (4-2% Power) given in Section 5.1.12, the 2 % Power value is added to NTSP 2. This will determine if the AV is exceeded.

31

R,2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study NTSP 2 + AGAF limit = 52.9% + 2% = 54.9%; This value exceeds the AV of 53.7%. Therefore, NTSPADj is determined below by subtracting the AGAF limit from the AV.

NTSPADI = AV - AGAF limit = 53.7% - 2% = 51.7%

It is determined below whether NTSPADj satisfies the Z(LER) criteria:

Z(LER) = (AV - NTSPAm) / Sigma(LER)

= (53.7 - 51.7) / 0.883

= 2.265 implies NTSPADj passes acceptance criteria.

Therefore, R2 let NTSP= 0.55 W+ 51.7 % ratedPP b-2) APRM STP Flow-Biased (SLO) - Upscale (flow-biased) (rod block)

ANL= 0.55 W+ 52.6  % rated P 6.5.6 NOTE: SLO operation uses a GEH proprietary method for calculating certain error terms (LA, CA, and LD).

While the same equations are used as the TLO operation, the specific error terms were provided as input from GEH and are not derived in this calculation. The error terms are being referred to below as (LA', CA', and LD') and are provided in Reference 6.10.

AV = ANL - [(1 .645/2)*(SQRT(LA'^2+CA'A2+PMAA2+APEArandom^2))+APEAbias]

Where, per Reference 6.10, LA' = 3.414% Power CA' = 2.139% Power 0.55W + 52.6- [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(3.414A2+2.139^2+1.31A2+0.449^2))+0.49]

- 0.55 W+ 48.61 let AV 10.55 W+ 48.6 % rated P NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA'A2+CA'A2+PMA^2+PEArandomA2+LD'A2))+PEAbias]

Where, per Reference 6.10, LD' = 5.42 % Power

= 0.55W + 52.6 - [(1 .645/2)*(SQRT(3.414^2+2.139A2+1.31 A2+0.503^2+5.42A2))+0.82]

- 0.55 W + 46.107 let NTSPI = 0.55 W+ 46.1% rated P The following steps determine whether NTSPI satisfies the GEH LER Avoidance Criteria per Section 7.1. 10.

32

Rev 2 Calc # PE-0251 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study Acceptance Criteria: Required Z(LER)_> 0.81 (multiple channel) in accordance with Revision I of this analysis and Reference 6.1. The Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) corresponds to a probability of 90% (one-sided normal distribution) for multiple channels as noted in Revision I of this analysis.

2 2 2 2 Sigma(LER) = (112) * (LA + CA + LD )1

= (1/2) * (3.4142 + 2.1392 + 5.422)In

= 3.377 Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP1 ) / Sigma(LER)

= (48.6 -46.1) / 3.377

= 0.740 implies NTSPI does not pass acceptance criteria NTSP 2 is calculated by using above equation, inserting the required minimum Z(LER) and solving for NTSP 2.

R2 Required Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP 2) / Sigma(LER). Therefore, solve for NTSP 2 0.81 = (48.6 - NTSP 2) / 3.377; implies NTSP 2 = 45.86%

After conservative rounding:

let NTSP 2 = 0.55 W+ 45.8 % rated P With consideration of the AGAF limits (:E2% Power) given in Section 5.1.12, the 2 % Power value is added to NTSP 2. This will determine if the AV is exceeded.

NTSP 2 + AGAF limit = 45.8% + 2% = 47.8%; This value does not exceed the AV of 48.6%. Therefore, NTSP 2 passes acceptance criteria.

Therefore, let NTSP = 10.55 W+ 45.8 % rated P -

c) APRM STP Flow-Biased - Upscale (flow-biased clamp) (scram)

ANL= 120.0  % rated P 6.5.6 j NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEAranidomA2+/-LDA^2))+PEAbiasI

= 120.0- [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.2 ^2+1.33A2+1.11A2+0.228A2+0.42A2))+0.82]

117.69 R2 let NTSP] = 117.6 % rated P AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= 120.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.2 ^2+1.33A2+1.11 ^2+0.224A2))+0.49] R2

-- __118.06 I let AV" 118.0 % rated P The following steps determine whether NTSPI satisfies the GEH LER Avoidance Criteria per Section 7.1.10. I R2 33

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 I1R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study Acceptance Criteria: Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) in accordance with Revision I of this analysis and Reference 6.1. The Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) corresponds to a probability of 90% (one-sided normal distribution) for multiple channels as noted in Revision 1 of this analysis.

Sigma(LER) = (1/2) * (LA2 + CA 2 + LD2)V2 (1/2) * (0.2 12 + 1.332 + 0.422)1/2

= 0.705 Z(LER) = (AV -NTSP, / Sigma(LER)

= (118.0 - 117.6)/0.705

= 0.567 implies NTSPI does not pass acceptance criteria NTSP 2 is calculated by using above equation, inserting the required minimum Z(LER) and solving for NTSP 2.

Required Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP 2) / Sigma(LER). Therefore, solve for NTSP 2 0.81 = (118.0 - NTSP 2) / 0.70; implies NTSP 2 = 117.43 After conservative rounding:

let NTSP 2 = 0.55 W+ 117.4 % rated P R2 With consideration of the AGAF limits (+/-2% Power) given in Section 5.1.12, the 2 % Power value is added to NTSP 2. This will determine if the AV is exceeded.

NTSP 2 + AGAF limit = 117.4% + 2% = 119.4%; This value exceeds the AV of 118.0%. Therefore, NTSPADJ is determined below by subtracting the AGAF limit from the AV.

NTSPADI = AV - AGAF limit = 118.0% -2% = 116.0%

It is determined below whether NTSPADj satisfies the Z(LER) criteria:

Z(LER) = (AV -NTSPA 1 ) / Sigma(LER)

= (118.0- 116.0) / 0.705

= 2.837 implies NTSPADj passes acceptance criteria.

Therefore, let NTSP = 1 116.0 % rated P I d) APRM STP Flow-Biased - Upscale (flow-biased clamp) (rod block)

DB--= 110.4  % rated P 6.5.6 1R2 NTSP DB - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LIDA2))+PEAbiasI

= 110.4 - [(1.645i2)*(SQRT(0.21 ^2+1.33A2+1.11 .2+0.228A2+0.42^2))+0.82] SR2 108.09 let NTSPI = 108.0 % rated P 34

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study AV = DB - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

110.4 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+1.33A2+1.1 lA2+0.224A2))+0.49]

108.46 let AV= 108.4 % rated P The following steps determine whether NTSPI satisfies the GEH LER Avoidance Criteria per Section 7.1.10.

Acceptance Criteria: Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) in accordance with Revision I of this analysis and Reference 6.1. The Required Z(LER) > 0.81 (multiple channel) corresponds to a probability of 90% (one-sided normal distribution) for multiple channels as noted in Revision 1 of this analysis.

Sigma(LER) = (1/2) * (LA2 + CA 2 + LD2)"'

=(1/2) * (0.212+ 1.3 3 2+ 0 .4 2 2)1n

= 0.705 Z(LER) = (AV - NTSPI) / Sigma(LER)

= (108.4 - 108.0) /0.705

= 0.567 implies NTSPI does not pass acceptance criteria NTSP2. is calculated by using above equation, inserting the required minimum Z(LER) and solving for NTSP 2.

Required Z(LER) = (AV - NTSP 2) / Sigma(LER). Therefore, solve for NTSP 2 0.81 = (108.4 - NTSP 2) / 0.705; implies NTSP 2 = 107.83 R2 After conservative rounding:

let NTSP 2 = 0.55 W+ 107.8 % rated P With consideration of the AGAF limits (+/-2% Power) given in Section 5.1.12, the 2 % Power value is added to NTSP2. This will determine if the AV is exceeded.

NTSP2 + AGAF limit = 107.8% + 2% = 109.8%; This value exceeds the AV of 108.4%. Therefore, NTSPADJ is determined below by subtracting the AGAF limit from the AV.

NTSPADj = AV - AGAF limit = 108.4% - 2% = 106.4%

It is determined below whether NTSPADj satisfies the Z(LER) criteria:

Z(LER) = (AV -- NTSPAw) I Sigma(LER)

= (108.4- 106.4) / 0.705

= 2.837 implies NTSPADj passes acceptance criteria.

Therefore, let NTSP = 106.4% rated P 35

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study e) APRM Neutron Flux Upscale Trip - setdown (scram)

ANL = 17.3  % rated P 6.5.10 1R2 NTSP ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandom^2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 17.3 - ((1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.2 ^A2+1.33A2+1.67A2+0.228A2+0.42A2))+0.82]

14.67 1R2 let NTSP = 1 ~~14.6 %rated P =

AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

17.3 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+ 1.33A2+1.67A2+0.224A2))+0.49]

15.04 let AV = 1 15.0 % rated P I I R2 f) APRM STP Upscale Alarm - setdown (rod block)

DB = 14.0  % rated P 6.3.2 NTSP DB - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 14.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(O.21A2+1.33A2+1.11A2+0.228A2+0.42A2))+0.82]

11.69 let NTSP = 1 11.6 % rated P =

AV = DB - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= 14.0 - [(1 .645/2)*(SQRT(0.21^2+1.33A2+1.11 A2+0.224A2))+0.49]

12.06 1R2 let AV= 12.0 % rated P g) APRM Neutron Flux Downscale Alarm (rod block)

DB = 0.5  % rated P 6.3.2 NTSP = DB + [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

- 0.5 + [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+l .33A2+I .67^2+0.228^2+0.42^2))+0.82]

3.13 I R2 let NTSP = 3.2 % rated7P I 36 I R2

Rev 2 Calc # PE-0251 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study AV = DB + [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= 0.5 + [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+133A2+1.67A2+0.224^2))+0.49] R2 2.76 = 2.77 let AV 2.8 % ratedP h) APRM Neutron Flux Fixed High (scram)

ANL = 122.0  % rated P 6.5.4 NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 122.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21^2+l.33A2+1.67A2+0.228A2+0.42A2))+0.82] R2 119.37 let NTSP = 1 119.3 % rated P I AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

122.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+ 1.33A2+1.67A2+0.224^2))+0.49] R2 119.74 = 119.73 let AV 119.7 % rated P channel 2: RBM Channels a) RBM Low Power Setpoint ANL = 30.0  % rated P 6.3.2 NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

- (deadband + miin STP resolution) 30.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21 2+1.33A2+1.25A2+0.228A2+0.42A2))+0.33] R2

- (deadband + min STP resolution)

= 28.11 - (deadband + min STP resolution) let D = 1.0 %rated P let Res = 0.1 %rated P for overall effect of: 1.1 %rated P NTSP = 28.11 - 1.1 = 27.01 R2 let NTSP = ~Iz 27.0 % rated P Asm 5.1.16 AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMA^2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

- (deadband + min STP resolution)

= 30.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(O.21A2+1.33A2+1.25A2+0.224A2))+0] - 1.1

.R2

= 28.48 - 1.1 AV = 27.38 let AV = I Ii 27.3 % ratedP I I

b) RBM Intermediate Power Setpoint ANL= 65.0  % rated P 6 37 1R2

R2 Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CA^2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

65.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+1.33A2+1.25A2+0.228A2+0.42^2))+0.33]

63.11 IR2 let NTSP = 1 63.1% rated P AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

65.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+1.33A2+1.25A2+0.224A2))+0] jR2 63.48 let AV 63.4 %rated P c) RBM High Power Setpoint ANL = 85.0  % rated P 6.3.2 NTSP ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 85.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.2A2+ 1.33A2+1.25A2+0.228A2+0.42^2))+0.33]

83.11 I R2 let NTSP = 1 83.1% rated P I AV = ANL - [(I .645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

85.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.21A2+1.33^2+1.25A2+0.224A2))+o] ]R2 83.48 let AV 83.4 % rated P Note: RBM Trip NTSP & AV values are determined by applying the AL values corresponding to the associated MCPR values. Computations using a 1.20 MCPR value are shown below as examples.

R2 NTSP & AV margins to the AL are equal for all evaluated MCPR values.

d) RBM Low Trip Setpoint ANL = 117.0 %ratedP 6.3.2 NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 117.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+0A2+1.20^2+0.707^2+0^2))+0.49]

= 115.24 I R2 let NTSP = I 115.2 % rated P ]

AV = ANL - [(1 .645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= 117.0 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+0A2+1 .20A2+0.707^2))+0.49]

115.24 IR let AV = 115.2%ratedP d) RBM Low Trip Setpoint MCPR AL AV NTSP 1.20 117.0 115.2 115.2 wfilter, 0. I<tau cI <- 0.55 sec 118.0 116.2 116.2 w/ofilter, tau cI<=0.1 sec 1.25 120.0 118.2 118.2 w/filter, 0.] <tau cI <= 0.55 sec 121.0 119.2 119.2 w/o filter, tau el<= 0. 1 sec 1.30 123.0 121.2 121.2 w/filter, 0.1<tau c1= 0.55 sec 124.0 122.2 122.2 wlofilter, tau cl< = 0.1 sec 1.35 125.8 124.0 124.0 w/filter, 0.1 <tauc I<= 0.55 sec 1270 125.2 125.2 wlofilter, iau cJ< = 0.) sec 38 I R2

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study e) RBM Intermediate Trip Setpoint ANL = 111.2 %ratedP 6.3.2 NTSP = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+PEArandomA2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= 111.2 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(O.67^2+0^2+1.2OA2+0.707A2+OA2))+0.49]

109.44 IR2 let NTSP = 1 109.4 % rated P I AV = AN_ - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMA^2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

111.2 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67^2+0A2+1.20A2+0.707A2))+0.49] 1R2 109.44 let AV= [ 109.4 % ratedPP e) RBM Intermediate Trip Setpoint MCPR AL AV NTSP 1.20 111.2 109.4 109.4 w/filter, 0. I<tau cl<= 0.55 sec 112.0 110.2 110.2 wiofilter, tau cl<= 0.1 sec 1.25 115.2 113.4 113.4 w/filter, 0.1<tau cl<= 0.55 sec 116.0 114.2 114.2 w/o filter, tau cl<= 0.1 sec 1.30 118.0 116.2 116.2 w/filter, 0.1<tau cl<= 0.55 see 119.0 11Z2 117.2 w/o filter, tau cl< = 0.1 sec 1.35 121.0 119.2 119.2 w/filter, 0.1<tau cl---0.55 see 122.0 120.2 120.2 w/ofilter, tau ci<= 0.1 sec f) RBM High Trip Setpoint ANL = 107.4  % rated P 6.3.2 NTSP ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CA2'2+PMA^2+PEArandomA2+LD^2))+PEAbiasI 107.4 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+0A2+1.20A2+0.707A2+0A2))+0.49]

105.64 R2 let NTSP = 1 ~105.6 %rated P AV = ANL - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LA^2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

107.4 - [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+0A2+1.20A2+0.707^2))+0.49] 1R2 105.64 let AV = 1 ~~105.6 %rated P I f) RBM High Trip Setpoint MCPR AL AV NTSP 1.20 107.4 105.6 105.6 w/filter, 0.1<tau cl<- 0.55 see 108.0 106.2 106.2 w/ofilter, tau cI< = 0.1 sec 1.25 110.2 108.4 108.4 w/filter, 0. l<tau cl<= 0.55 sec 111.0 109.2 109.2 w/o filter, tau cl<=0.1 sec 1.30 113.2 111.4 111.4 wffilter, 0. I<tau cl<= 0.55 see 114.0 112.2 112.2 w/o filter, tau c1<= 0.1 sec 1.35 116.0 114.2 114.2 w/filter, 0.1'<tau cl< 0.55 see 117.0 115.2 115.2 w/ofilter, tau cl<=0.1 sec 39 I R2

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 IR2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study g) RBM Downscale Trip Setpoint DB= -0.77  % rated P IS = DB + [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CA^2+PMA^2+PEArandom^2+LDA2))+PEAbias]

= -0.77 + [(1.645/2)*(SQRT(O.67A2+0A2+1 .20^2+0.707^2+0A2))+0.49] R2 0.99 let NTSP = I 1.0 % rated P I 6.5.5 TS = DB + [(I.645/2)*(SQRT(LAA2+CAA2+PMAA2+APEArandomA2))+APEAbias]

= -0.77 + [(1.645I2)*(SQRT(0.67A2+0/A2+l.20^2+0.707A2))+0.49) jR2 0.99 let AV 1.0 %rated P]

40 IR2

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 7.3 APRM Channel AFT/ALT: RFM Instrument Loop Check The AFT/ALT for the RFM Instrument loop check is determined per methodology provided in section 7.1.12.

7.3.1 RFM Loop Reference Accuracy (RFM Awop)

Per Ref. 6.6.1, recirculation flow transmitter reference accuracy is +/-0.25% span. Per section 7.2, accuracy specifications associated with the RFM instrument loop includes "genA". Therefore, FT A = 0.25% span RFM A = genA = 0.67 % rated Q, where rated Q = 125%

In addition to RFM A, accuracy of the flow rate display is also included when determining total RFM loop reference accuracy. Per section 5.10 of Reference 6.2.3.2.17, the accuracy of each of the two flow channel displays (recirculation flow loops A and B) is 1.0 % loop Q. Therefore, RFM ADISPLAY = 1.0 % loop Q Propagating FT A through the square root and summing algorithms per methodology provided on page 17 is, FT ApRop - [(1/2o 5)*(31.25*0.016*0.25%)/(0.6*100%)]*(125 % rated Q)

= 0.184 % rated Q R2 Propagating the two flow channel display accuracies through the summing algorithm per methodology provided on page 17 is, RFM ADISPLAY-PROP = (1/2 0'S)*(RFM ADISPLAY)

= (1/20')*( 1.0 % loop Q)

= 0.707 % rated Q Combining terms via the SRSS method, RFM ALoop = [(FT Apaop) 2 + (RFM A)2 + (R*M ADrSPYPROP 2 0.

2 2 05

=[(0.184% rated Q) + (0.67% rated Q) + (0.707 % rated Q) ] -

=0.991% rated Q 7.3.2 RFM Loop Vendor Drift Specification (RFM VDLooP)

Per Ref. 6.6.1 and Section 5.1.3, recirculation flow transmitter vendor drift specification is +/-0.2%

URL. Per page 15, the URL is 100 psi and calibrated span is 34.32 psid. Therefore, FT VD = 0.2%*(URL)*(100%) / 34.32 psi

= 0.2%*(100 psi)*(l00%) / 34.32 psi

= 0.583 % span Per page 18, vendor drift specifications associated with the RFM instrument loop includes "genD".

Therefore, RFM VD = genD = 1.05 % rated Q, where rated Q = 125%

41

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study The drift associated with the flow rate displays are considered to be included in the RFM VD specification.

RFM VDDisPLAy= 0 Propagating FT VD through the square root and summing algorithms per methodology provided on page 17 is, FT VDpRoP = [(1/20'5)*(31.25*0.016*0.583%)/(0.6*100%)']*(125 % rated Q)

= +/-0.429 % rated Q Combining terms via the SRSS method, 2 2 RFM VDLoop = [(FT VDpRop) + (RFM Vl)) + (RFM VDDISPLAY)2]°

= [(0.429 % rated Q)2 + (1.05 % rated Q)2 + (0)

= 1.134 % rated Q 7.3.3 RFM Loop Calibration Equipment Uncertainty (RFM CELooP)

Per References 6.2.3.2.1 through 6.2.3.2.8, the calibration of the RFM instrument loop is checked by applying variable test pressure inputs at the inputs of the recirculation flow transmitters while monitoring total recirculation flow rates the at the flow rate display. As such, CE error will consists of errors associated with the pressure gauges used to measure the applied test pressures at the R2 transmitter inputs.

Per References 6.2.3.2.1 through 6.2.3.2.8, the accuracy of the test gauges used to measure the applied pressures is required to be equal to or better than -0..16 psig. Per page 15, the calibrated span is 34.32 psid. Therefore, CE = (0.16 psig/34.32 psig)*100% span

= 0.466 % span Propagating CE through the square root and summing algorithms per methodology provided on page 17 is, RFM CELooP [(1/20's)*(31.25*0.016*0.466 %)/(0.6*100%)]*(125 % rated Q)

= 0.343 % rated Q 7.3.4 RFM Loop Calibration Equipment Readability (RFM CEMG-Loop)

Readability associated with reading the test gauges is considered to be included in the CE term.

Reading error associated with reading the flow rate display (total recirculation flow) is equal to the resolution of the display. Per References 6.2.3.2.1 through 6.2.3.2.8, the readings are in a resolution of 0.1% rated Q. Therefore, RFM CERDW-LOOP 0.1 % rated Q 42

Calc 4 PE-0251 Rev 2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 7.3.5 Determination of AFT/ALT for the RFM loop calibration check Utilizing methodology in section 7.1.12, RFM ALTLoop - [(RFM ALOOP) 2 + (RFM CELoop) 2 + (RFM CERnG.LOOp)2 ] I'0

+/--[(0.991% mted Q)2 + (0.343% rated Q)2 + (0.1% rated Q)2]

=-1.053 % rated Q

+ 1.1 % rated Q (rounded upward to nearest 0.1%, which is consistent with indicator readability)

REM AFTLoop = 1[(RFM ALOOP) 2 + (RFM VDLooP) 2 + (RFM 2 CELooP) 2 + (R.FM2 CEirDG.LOOP) 2 ]- 5 2 0 5

=-+[(0.991% rated Q) + (1.134% rated Q) + (0.343% rated Q) + (0.1% rated Q) ]

=+/-1.548% rated Q

= -1 .6 % rated Q (rounded upward to nearest 0.1%, which is consistent with indicator readability)

R2 43

Calc # PE-0251 Rev 2 I R2 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study 8.0 Attachments

1. Universal Glossary

2. Bases Documents (Ref. 6.5.4 and 6.5.5)

3. Attachments Pertinent to OPRM IR2

4. Exelon Transmittal of Design Information, Tracking No. PU-2011-020, Rev. 0 44 (Final) I R2

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATrACUTMENT 1 I UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY A ampere; Accuracy;, vessel "A0 side AAV Allowable Allowable Value (this Is not a redundancy)

A* Individual Device Accuracy ABA Amplitude-Based (core instability detection) Algorithm (a portion of OPRM ODA) a-c alternating-current ACRS Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards A/D Analog-to-Digital ADS Automatic Depressurization System AFT As-Found Tolerance AGAF APRM Gain Adjustment Factor AL Analytical Umit AL Loop/Channel Accuracy ALT As-Left Tolerance A/M ARTSJMELLL amb ambient AN Loop Accuracy During Normal Conditions ANL Analytical Limit ANSI American National Standards Institute AOO Anticipated Operational Occurrences AOT Anticipated Operational Transients APEA Accuracy (random) portion of PEA APED Atomic Power Equipment Department Appx Appendix APRE Accuracy of Pre-Amp APRM Average Power Range Monitor APT Acceptable Performance Tolerance (synonymous with LAT)

AR Accuracy Ratio (used in calibration to denote ratio between C and Cs)

ARE Aging Rate Error AR! Alternate Rod Insertion ARM Area Radiation Monitor ARTS APRMIRBMITechnical Specification Asm Assumption ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASP Allowable Setpoint; Analog Signal Processor; Automatic Signal Processor AT Loop Accuracy During Trip Conditions ATE Accuracy Temperature Effect atm standard atmosphere (14.696 psia)

ATR Accuracy of (Flow) Transmitter (including Flow Element)

ATSP Actual Trip Setpoint ATU Accuracy of Trip Unit ATWS Anticipated Transient Without Scram aux auxiliary

Caic 4 PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NIMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY AV Allowable Value (Tech Spec Limit)

B vessel 4B* side bar bar (unit of pressure (14.504 psia)]

BE Battery Error Bldg Building BPWS Banked Position Withdrawal Sequence BOS bottom-of-scale BS Bias Span Effect Btu British Thermal Unit BV Bounding Value BWR Boiling Water Reactor BWROG Boiling Water Reactor Owners' Group byp bypass c vessel coefficient of linear thermal expansion C Calibration Tool Error, Degrees Celsius; Conformity;, Closure; Discharge Coefficient CA Calibration Accuracy CAL Calibration Tolerance calib calibration C, Individual Device Calibration cb control building cc cubic centimeter (synonymous with ml)

CC Condensing Chamber CDB Component Data Base CDCI Common Data and Control Interface CE Channel Error; Calibration Equipment CF (static pressure span shift) correction factor CFR Code of Federal Regulations ch (instrument) channel CHC Constant Head Chamber chk check Ci Curie CIM Computer Interface Module CJ cold junction CL Loop/Channel Calibration Accuracy; center line cm centimeters C/M Calibration and Monitoring cntr counter COL Channel Operability Limit COLR Core Operating Limits Report COU component of uncertainty cps counts per second CPU Central Processing Unit 2

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATTACJHMNT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY Cr Crosstalk CR Current-Rated CRB Control Rod Block CRD Control Rod Drive (System)

CRDA Control Rod Drop Accident CRPC Control Rod Program Controls CRSS Control Rod Selection Signals CRWB Control Rod Withdrawal Block CS Core Spray (System); Calibrated Span CSCS Core Standby Cooling Systems Csm Calibration Standard Error (Tool Calibration Error)

CTP Core Thermal Power cu cubic CU Channel Uncertainty (at a designated point in the channel) d drywell; throat diameter D Deadband; pipe diameter

.D1 Individual Device Drift DIA Digital-to-Analog DAS Data Acquisition System dB decibel (ratio of two parameters using logarithms to base 10)

DB Design Bases DBA Design Bases Accident DBD Design Bases Document DBE Design Bases Event d-c direct-current DC Design Calculation DCA d-c (current) alarm DCD Design Change.Document [identified by Volume No. (Roman numeral)]

DE Display Exponent DFCS Digital Feedwater Control System DFS Divisions of Full Scale DG Design Guide dh instrument line elevation differential diff differential D, LooplChannel Drift DL Design Umit DMM Digital Multi-Meter dp differential pressure DPEA Drift (bias) portion of PEA dpmin minimum measurable differential pressure (across FE) judgment]

DPRE Drift of Pre-Amplifier OPS Design & Performance Spec 3

.%%* *t*t-.%* =* ........ ,%,==*.***,..

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATTACHqENT I UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY DR Drift; Decay Ratio DRF Design Record File DS Design Specification DSDS Design Specification Data Sheet DSP Digital Signal Processor DTA delta T (accuracy)

DTD delta T (drift)

DTE Drift Temperature Effect DTR Drift of (Flow) Transmitter DTUI Drift of Trip Unit dV delta volt (change within the specified power supply voltage requirements)

DVM Digital Volt-Meter dW delta recirculation drive flow dw drywell EAROM Electrically-Alterable Read-Only Memory ECC Elevation Correlation Chart ECCS Emergency Core Cooling Systems ED Elementary Diagram EDC Engineering Design Change EDDL Elementary Diagram Device List EDBS Equipment Data Base System EDF Equipment Data File EER Engineering Evaluation Report elev elevation ELFS Equivalent Linear Full Scale ELLLA Extended Load Line Limit Analyses ELTR Extended Licensing Topical Report EOC End-Of-(fuel) Cycle EOP Emergency Operating Procedure Ep (Calibration) Procedural Effect EPRI Electric Power Research Institute EPROM Electrically-Programmable Read-Only Memory EPU Extended Power Uprate EQ Equipment Qualification EQAB Engineering Quality Achievement Board Eqn equation EQEDC Equipment Qualification Environmental Design Criteria ERF Emergency Response Facility ERFIS ERF Information System ERIS Emergency Response Information System ESF Engineered Safety Feature EUT Equipment Under Test 4

Calc # PE-0251 Roy. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY eV electron-volt eval evaluation E1A Enhanced 1A [reactor stability option (long-term solution)]

F Degrees Fahrenheit; Fluke (calibration tool)

F, area thermal-expansion factor FB; f-b Flow-Biased fc comer frequency (of noise filter, PBA)

FC Fast Closure FCD Functional Control Diagram; Flow Control Diagram FCS Feedwater Control System FCTR Flow Control Trip Reference FD Functional Diagram; Row Device FDDI Fiber Direct Data Interface FDDR Field Deviation Disposition Request FE Flow Element FFWTR Final Feedwater Temperature Reduction FL final FM Full Meter FMdp Full Meter dp FO Fiber Optic FPS Final Product Spec; Functional Performance Spec freq frequency FS Full Scale FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report ft feet FT Flow Transmitter FTC Flow Trip Card FU Flow Unit FW, fw Feedwater FWHOS Feedwater Heater Out-of Service FZR Fuel-Zone Range g local acceleration ofgravity; grams; gain go standard acceleration of gravity (32.1740 ft/sec&, by international agreement) g= Newtonian dimensional constant (32.1740 Ibm-ft/lbrsec 2 )

G Gain GA Gain Accuracy GAF Gain Adjustment Factor GAFT Gain Adjustment Factor (Total); Group As-Found Tolerance GBA Growth-Based (core instability detection) Algorithm (a portion of OPRM ODA)

GEASC GE Advanced Setpoint Calculation GEITAS GE Instrument Trending Analysis System GESET GE Setpoint Evaluation Tool 5

Calc # PE-02531 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PNM fStroint Study ATTACHMENT I UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY GETAB GE Thermal Analysis Basis GETARS GE Transient Analysis Recording System.

GNWS Group Notch Wfthdrawal Sequence gpm gallons per minute GRBA Growth Rate-Based (core instability detection) Algorithm (a portion of OPRM ODA)

GS Gain Stability h height H Hysteresis; Heise (calibration toot); overall elevation differential HE Humidity Effect;, Harsh Environment (for EQ)

HELB High Energy Line Break HHM hand-held monitor hp high pressure (e.g., turbine)

HPCI High Pressure Coolant Injection (System)

HPCS High Pressure Core Spray (System)

HPSP High Power Setpoint HTE Harsh Temperature Effect HTSP High Trip Setpoint HVAC Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning HVPS High-Voltage Power Supply hr hours effective differential pressure (in WC)

Hz hertz H20 water t&C Instrumentation and Control ICD Ion Chamber Detector, Interface Control Drawing ICF Increased Core Flow ICPS Ion Chamber Power Supply ICS Integrated Computer System ID inside diameter IDCCSIP inside diameter of the condensing chamber steam inlet pipe IDS Instrument Data Sheet IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers IEC International Electro-technical Commission lED Instrument Engineering Diagram IIR Infinite Impulse Response (filter for STP) in (or ") inches ind indicator in HgA inches of mercury (absolute)

INPO Institute of Nuclear Power Operations in WC inches of water column 110 Input/Output IPM Integrated Plant Model 6

Calc # PE-025 i Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY IPSP Intermediate Power Setpoint IRA Insulation Resistance Accuracy Error IRM Intermediate Range Monitor IS Instrument Setting ISA Instrument Society of America ISO International Standards Organization isol isolation ISP Instrument Surveillance Procedure ITS Improved Tech-Spec ITSP Intermediate Trip Setpoint IN Current-to-Voltage Convertor I&TU indicator & trip unit IWD Interconnection Wiring Diagram 10 instrument zero JP Jet Pump k kilo (E+03;10); isentropic exponent K Flow Coefficient kg kilograms I liter L Level; Linearity LA Loop Accuracy LACT level actual LAFT Loop As-Found Tolerance LAL Lower Analytical Limit LALT Loop As-Left Tolerance LAT Leave-Alone Tolerance LAZ Leave-Alone Zone Ib, pound-force Ibm pound-mass LCD lowest common denominator LCO Limiting Condition for Operation LCR Loop Calibration Report; Logarithmic-Count Rate LD Level Device; Loop Drift LDM Leak Detection Monitor (NUMAC)

LDS Leak Detection System LDT Line Designation Table LE Load Effect LER Licensee Event Report LFMG Low-Frequency Motor-Generator LGAF LPRM Gain Adjustment Factor LI level indication (e.g., water level)

LIMAX level indication maximum (e.g., water level, synonymous with TOS) 7

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Semoitn Study ATTACEMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY LIMIN level indication minimum (e.g., water level, synonymous with BOS)

LISPAN level indication span LIO level instrument zero LLLA Load Une Limit Analyses LLS Low-Low Set (S/RV)

LMG .Level Meter Group LMR Liquid Metal Reactor LMRL Lower Meter Reading Limit LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident lp low pressure (e.g., turbine)

LPAP Low Power Alarm Point LPCI Low Pressure Coolant Injection (mode of RHR)

LPCS Low Pressure Core Spray (System)

LPRM Local Power Range Monitor LPSP Low Power Setpoint LRDRM Uquid Radwaste Discharge Radiation Monitor LRES Liquid Radwaste Effluent System LRM Logarithmic Radiation Monitor LSB Least-Significant Bit LSD Least-Significant Digit LSL Licensing Safety Limit (Tech-Spec channel, bounds AL)

LSSS Limiting Safety System Setting LT Level Transmitter LTR Licensing Topical Report LTS Long-Term Stability LTSP Low Trip Setpoint LU Loop Uncertainty LVE Line Voltage Error LVPS Low-Voltage Power Supply m mass flow rate; meters; milli (E-03; 10-3); months (surveillance interval); overall component (sigma) Of statistical adjustment M Metrology Lab; mega (E+06;10); months (surveillance interval); margin M ratio (WtVVd) - 1 mA milliamps d-c max maximum MAZE maximum-acceptable zero error mbar millibar MCPR Minimum Critical Power Ratio MCR Main Control Room MELLLA Maximum Extended Load Line Limit Analyses MEOD Maximum Extended Operating Domain min minimum; minutes 8

Ca*c # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoint Study ATTACIHMET 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY ml milliliter (synonymous with cc) mm millimeters MM muli-meter MPL Master Parts List Mrad megarads gamma (E+06 rads;10 6 rads)

MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve MSL Main Steamline MSLB Main Steamline Break MSLRM Main Steamline Radiation Monitor MSR Moisture Separator Reheater MST Main Steam Tunnel; Maintenance Surveillance Test MSV Mean Square Voltage MTBF Mean Time Between Failure MTE Maintenance & Test Equipment MTT-R Mean Time to Repair mV millivolts d-c MVD Multi-Vendor DAS MVP Mechanical Vacuum Pumps MW, Megawatts-electrical MW, Megawatts-thermal n the number of standard deviations (sigma) used (individual component); sample size N population size; System Noise N/A, n/a not applicable; not available NBR Nuclear Boiler Rated NBS Nuclear Boiler System; National Bureau of Standards (archaic)

NC normally dosed NED Nuclear Engineering Department negi negligible NEMA National Electrical Manufacturers Association NF Neutron Flux NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly NBS)

NL No Limitation NMS Neutron Monitoring System NO normally open NOP not-on-peg norm normal NPS nominal pipe size NR Narrow Range NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission NSSI Nuclear Steam Supply Interface NSSS Nuclear Steam Supply System NS 4S Nuclear Steam Supply Shutoff System 9N

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setpoit Study ATrACHMENT I UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY NTSP Nominal Trip Setpoint NUMAC Nuclear Measurement Analysis and Control NUREG Nuclear Regulation nv Neutron Velocity (flux)

NVRAM non-volatile RAM nvt lime-Integrated Neutron Flux NWL Normal Water Level O Offset OCF Overlap Correction Factor ODA Operator Display Assembly; Oscillation Detection Algorithm (synonymous with SA)

OE Other Error OL Operational Limit OLM Operating License Manual OLMCPR Operating Limit MCPR O&MI Operation and Maintenance Instructions OOS out-of-service OPE Overpressure Effect OPIC Overall Procedure for Instrument Calibration OPL Operating Parameters for Licensing OPL-3 OPL covering Transient Protection Parameters Verification OPL-4 OPL covering ECCS Parameters Verification OPL-4A OPL covering Containment Analyses Input Parameters Verification OPL-5 OPL covering Single Failure Evaluation OPRM (thermal-hydraulic) Oscillation Power Range Monitor (reactor core instability)

ORE Observer Readability Error [accounts for parallax; typically half the minor division on the linear (e.g., indicator/recorder) scale, other than e.g., meniscus, tape measure]

OTS On-The-Spot (change) p pressure; pica (E-12;10")

P power P0 Plant Zero PBA Period-Based (core instability detection) Algorithm (a portion of OPRM ODA)

PC Process Computer PCI PRNM Communication Interface PCIS Primary Containment Isolation System PCT Peak Clad Temperature PD Process Diagram PDIS Pressure Differential Indicating Switch PDS Product Data Sheet.

POT Pressure Differential Transmitter PE Position Effect; Primary Element (can also mean PE Error)

PEA Primary Element Accuracy P/FM Powerl(Core) Flow Map 10

Calc #~PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Setoint Study ATTACHMOENT I UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY PG Pressure Gauge PHD Pulse Height Discriminator PIC portable indicating controller P&ID Piping and Instrumentation Diagram PIMS Project Information Management System PIS Pressure Indicating Switch PLA Point Log and Alarm PLC Programmable Logic Controller PME Process Measurement Error PMI Plant Monitoring Instrumentation PMP Preventive Maintenance Procedure POP Percent of Point PPC Plant Process Computer PPD Purchase Part Drawing PRM Process Radiation Monitor, Power Range Monitor PRMS Process Radiation Monitoring System PRNM Power Range Neutron Monitor PROM Programmable Read-Only Memory PS Pressure Switch PSA Proabilistic Safety Assessment PSE Power Supply Effect PSH Pressure Switch (High) psia pounds per square inch (absolute) psid pounds per square inch (differential) psig pounds per square inch (gauge)

PSL Pressure Switch (Low); Process Safety Limit (non-Tech-Spec channel) pt point PT Pressure Transmitter PTDR Pneumatic Time-Delay Relay PU Power-Uprate q flow rate (generally volumetric, although sometimes mass)

Q Quantizing Error; RL margin QLVPS Quad Low-Voltage Power Supply R rem; Repeatability;, Rosemount (transmitter)

RA Reference Accuracy RAD rads gamma RAM Random-Access Memory rb reactor building RB Rod Block; Reactor Building RBM Rod Block Monitor RBVRM Reactor Building Vent Radiation Monitor rc range code 11

Calc NPE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NU-MAC PRNM Sgtioint Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY RCE Readability and Calibration Equipment (Effect)

RCIC Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (System)

RCIP Reactor Capacity Improvement Program (i.e., power uprate)

RC&IS Rod Control & Information System RCP Rod Control Program RCPB Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary RCS Reactivity Control Systems; Reactor Coolant System RCTP Rated Core Thermal Power Rd Readability Error (half the minor scale division)

RD Reset Differential RDA Rod Drop Accident RDD Rod and Detector Display rdg reading Red Reynolds number based on d Reo Reynolds number based on D RE Radiation Effect; Readability Error rec. recorder REE RFIIEMI Effect ref pertaining to reference leg; reference Ref Reference rem roentgen equivalent man REP Reactor Engineering Procedure Repro Reproducibility Res Resolution rev revision RFIIEMI Radio Frequency/Electro-Magnetic Interference RFM Recirculation Flow Monitor RG Regulatory Guide

.RHR Residual Heat Removal (System)

RI Readability (of the) Indicator (synonymous with ORE)

RIC remote indicating control RIPDs Reactor Internal Pressure Differentials RL Required Limit RLA Reload Licensing Analyses RLP Reference Leg Penetration RM Relief Mode (S/RV)

RMCS Reactor Manual Control System RMS Root Mean Square R/O (Rosemount trip unit calibration) Read-Out Assembly (calibration tool)

ROM Read-Only Memory ROU Relay Output Unit RPCS Rod Pattern Control System 12

I.... ......

Caic # PE-0251 Rev. 1 PBAPS 2 & 3 hR&MAC PRNM Set;oint Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY RPIS Rod Position Information System RPS Reactor Protection System RPT Recirculation Pump Trip RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RPVO Reactor Pressure Vessel Zero (Vessel Invert)

RRCS Redundant Reactivity Control System RRS Reactor Recirculation System Rs Resolution RS Random Span Effect RSCS Rod Sequence Control System RSD Reactor Steam Dome RSDP Remote Shutdown Panel RTI Referred-To-Input RTO Referred-To-Output RWCU Reactor Water Cleanup (System)

RWE Rod Withdrawal Error RWL Rod Withdrawal Umiter, Rx Water Level (process condition)

RWM Rod Worth Minimizer Rx Reactor RZ Random Zero Effect s seconds; sigma (standard deviation); steam S Sensitivity SA Setpoint Accuracy (a term found in some calibration procedures); Stability Algorithm (either ABA, GRBA, or PBA of OPRM; synonymous with ODA)

SAR Safety Analyses Report sat saturated SBO Station Blackout S&C sensor & converter SCIS Secondary Containment Isolation System SCS Significant Change Summary (ERIS)

SDDF Supplier's Document Data Form SE Seismic Effect SEHR Special Emergency Heat Removal SEIS Seismic Effect SER Safety Evaluation Report; System Evaluation Report sec seconds SGTS Standby Gas Treatment System SIL Services Information Letter SL Safety Limit SLMCPR Safety Limit MCPR SLO Single-Loop Operation SM Setpoint Margin; Safety Mode (S/RV) 13

CaNc# PE-0251 Rv. 1 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUJMAC PRNM Setnoint Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY S/N Serial Number SP Calibrated Span; Surveillance Procedure; Setpoint Special Publication (of NBS)

SPDS Safety Parameters Display System; Setpoint Data Sheet SPE Static Pressure Effect SPNE Span Effect SR Shutdown Range SRI Select Rod Insert SRM Source Range Monitor SRSS Square Root of the Sum of the Squares SRU Signal Resistor Unit SlRV (main steam) Safety/Relief Valve SSA Safe Shutdown Analyses St Stability ST Startup Test STA Spurious Trip Avoidance STOL Setting Tolerance STP Surveillance Test Procedure; Simulated Thermal Power (avg NF with 6-sec IIR);

standard temperature and pressure (68 F and 1 atm) sub subcooled T Temperature t time TAF Top-of-Active-Fuel Ta Temperature Change applied to Accuracy Td Temperature Change applied to Drift tb turbine building TBD to be determined TC thermocouple; Temperature Coefficient to time constant TCIU Thermocouple Input Unit TCV (Main) Turbine Control Valve td time delay TDR Time-Delay Relay TDU Total Device Uncertainty

• TE Temperature Effect; Temperature Element; Trip Environment TEC Temperature Equalizing Column TEF Temperature Effect Factor TFSP Turbine First-Stage Pressure THP Time History Plot (ERIS)

TID Total Integrated Dose (gamma equivalent)

TIP Traversing In-core Probe TLD Test-Loop Diagram TLO Two-Loop Operation 14

Caic # PE-0251 Rev. I PBAPS 2 & 3 NUMAC PRNM Set-point Study ATTACHMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY TLU Total Loop Uncertainty TOPPS Tracking Overpower Protection System TOS top-of-scale TRA Transient Recording and Analyses TRAPP Transient Protection Parameters TrE Trigger Error TRF Trip Reference Function TRK Uncertainty due to APRM Tracking TRM Technical Requirements Manual TS Technical Specification (Tech-Spec)

TSV (Main) Turbine Stop Valve TT Temperature Transmitter TTA Tabular Trend Analysis (ERIS) turb turbine u micro (E-06; 100)

UAL Upper Analytical Limit UMRL Upper Meter Reading Umit UFN Uncertainty due to Flow Noise UNL Uncertainty due to Sensor Nonlinearity UNN Uncertainty due to Neutron Noise UR Upper Range-Limit; Upset Range URL Upper Range-Limit USNRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission USS Uncertainty due to Sensor Sensitivity v specific volume [e.g., superheated steam, compressed (subcooled) water]

Vf specific volume of saturated water v* specific volume of evaporation v9 specific volume of saturated steam VA Vendor Accuracy vac vacuum Vac volts a-c var pertaining to variable leg VD Vendor Drift Vdc volts d-c VE Vibration Effect V/I Voltage-to-Current Convertor VLN Variable Leg Nozzle (tap)

VLP Variable Leg Penetration VM voltmeter VOM volt-ohm meter VWO (Main Turbine) Valves Wide Open w water;, with 15

Catc # PE-0251 Rev. 1 PBAPS 2 & 3 NUIMAC PRNM Seooint Study ATTACEMENT 1 UNIVERSAL GLOSSARY W,Wd recirculation drive flow Wt coolant core flow w/o without WC water column [instrument reference condition (at 68 F and 1 atm)]

WR Wide Range WRM Wide Range Monitor WRNM Wide Range Neutron Monitor W&T Wallace & Tieman (calibration tool)

WTE Warmup lme Effect X (Setpoint - Instrument Zero)/Calibrated Span (term in xmtr radiation effect algorithm) xmtr transmitter XPU Extended Power Uprate XRL RL drift margin (synonymous with Q)

Y c-fftirated SpaniUpper Range-Limit (term in xmtr temperature effect algorithm)

Y, frictionless adiabatic isentropic expansion factor, inlet to throat (ratio of compressible fluid flow to incompressible fluid flow)

Z Measure of Margin in units of Standard Deviations ZPA Zero-Period Acceleration ZS Zero Stability end English, begin Greek ratio of diameters (d/D)

A delta; differential F. period tolerance (of PBA) y isentropic exponent; specific weight [(weight) density]

R micro (E-06;:10"); absolute (dynamic) viscosity v kinematic viscosity p (mass) density a sigma; standard deviation

'1 square root extractor (also called square root converter) summer Q ohms END 16

DRF C5 1-00214-00 (5.6)

GE Proprietary Information Power Range Neutron Monitoring (PRNM) System L Bases for Neutron Flux and STP Analytical Limits/Allowable Values/Desipn Bases Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS) Units 2&3 Revision 0 December 15, 1998 Prepared by: -' t -9' q D. W. Reigel Reviewed by: E[(

E.C.Eckert CG~(O  ?*- QYZ-*l 'P~.Lv. O~1 Rage I of 4 Page 0r4basesSTPsetptO.doc

15 December 1998 DRF C51-00214-00 (4)

1. Background and Purpose Peach Bottom 2 and 3 are replacing their original Power Range Monitoring (PM)systems with NUMAC Power Range Neutron Monitoring (PRNM) systems. As part of'that modification, the existing APRM high neutron flux flow biased scram and scram clamp functions will be replaced by a neutron flux- high scram and a simulated thermal.power (STP) flow biased scram with clamp. Similarly, the current APRM high neutron flux flow biased rod block and clamp will be replaced with a simulated thermal power (STP) flow biased rod block with clamp. Reference (c),

reviewed and approved by the NRC, provided justification functionally for this action but provided no guidance on the bases for establishing analytical Emits for the new functions (allowable values and setpoits are established by the standard setpount methodology based on the analytical limit).

Therefore, it is necessary to establish the analytical limit or design bases for the replacement functions.

Reference (a) established Analytical Limits/Design Bases for the current APRM neutron flux based flow biased and clamp functions. The intent of this document is to establish a bases for the replacement functions without nev analysis.

2. Evaluation/approach 2.1 PreviousAnalysis Refence (a) identifies the following key points.,

"The scram clamp is the only trip credited in any current PBAPS safety analysis. No credit is taken for the flow biased trip.

" The "AL- for the flow biased scram trip is established so that the value is clamped at 81% of rated drive flmv (which gives a maximum high neutron flux trip setpoint of 121.5% [81-0.66+681).

" -Of the limiting transients which are identified in Reference (a). maximum licensed loss of feedwater heating, a "slow" transient, does not result in neutron flux reaching the scram trip limit.

• The analysis for a slow recirculation flow increase transient is used to establish the flow-dependent core operating limits. During this postulated event, power would also exceed rated power, but no credit is taken in the analysis for the high pover'scram function (flow ref:renced value or clamped value).

" The limiting values for the rod block fimction are "design bases" values established based on historical values and engineering judgment not any specific analysis. No credit is taken for the APRM rod block inpany safety analysis.

Reference (a) established the following values:

Function AIJDB AV " NTSP High Neutron Flux 0.66W+08.0% (DB) 0.66W+63.9% 0.66W+62.7%

Scram. Flow Biased High Neutron Flux 12210% (AL) 118.0% 117.0%

Scram. Clamp Rod Block. Flow Biased 0.66W+59% (13B) 0,66W+56% 0.66W+54%

Rod Block. Clamp 112.5% (DB) 110.0% 108.0%

Page 2 of 4

15 December 1998 DRF CSI-00214-00 (4) 2.2 Comparison of functions For the replacement PRNM the replacement functions can be considered as follows:

0 The Neutron Flux - High lfmction, based on neutron flux. is an added function. It is not a funnion of recircato flow, and for protection purposes it replaces the e.dsting scram clamp for fast transients or events.

• The STP flow biased scram and rod block fiuctions replace the existing flow biased functions including the clamps, but operate froin a filtered neutron flux. They respond more slowly than the current fctions, filtering out the higher frequency "noise characteristics from the direct APRM signal, thereby allowing the setpoints to be set cloe to reactor operating power with less operational imerfere (especially the rod block).

2.3 Bases for new values The Neutron Flux - High setpoint function in the PRNM will perform identically to the high neutron flux scram setpoint clamp in the current system. Therefore. the AL for scram clamp in the cuumet system will be retained as the AL for the Neutron Flux- High function in the replacement system. This will meet the assumrptions upon which safety analysis were previously performed. thus requiring no new analysis. The analytical limit for this selpoint value is reconfirmned with the utility during transient analysis for each reload co*.

Since Neutron Flux - High function is the only function which is credited in plant safety analysis, the remainder of the values are established based on historical results, trip avoidance margin, and engineering judgmet One factor to be considered is that since die APRM neutron flux has essentially continuous "neutron noise", for mrnsients that result in slowly changing neutron flux an actual rod block (or trip) would occur when the avrage neutron flux reached a level below the actual trip setting (because noise "peaks" would cae a tip when the average value nears the trip setting). Rod block initiation below the actual average power setpoint due to 'noise" can be a nuisance to the operators during plant poner ascensions.

Historically, for plants with STP based flow biased trips, typical values for the ST7 scram clamp AL/DB values have been somewhat lower (about 2-5%) than the AL value fbr the neutron flux high trips.

Therefoe, for Peach Bottom 2 & 3. even though there is no specific safety analysis that requires such. the DB value for the STP flow biased trip clamp will be set at 2% less than the AL for the Neutron Flux-High trip. This recognizes that the SrP setpoint can be closer to reactor operation without introducing greatcr risk of inadvertent trip. With the maximum neutron flux setpoint (AL) currently at 122% of rated power, this places the maximum clamped seApoint (DB) for the STP scram setpoint at 120% ofrated power. This MT? setpoint is consistent with the original P3 2&3 transient design analysis in Reference (d) which studied the possibility of implementing the STP function into the design (plotsfor Sections 5.14 and 5.15 show the upper limit of the STP setpoint at 120% of uprated power).

The flow-referenced portion of the setpoints for the STP scram and rod block are also not essential for any safety analysis. Their historical purpose is to provide backup assurance that the plant is not operated grossly above the planned operating range (defined in the power/flow operating map. Figure 2-1 of the Power Rerate Licensing report, as amended. Reference (e)). The scipoints should be high enough that they do not prevent plant operation within the entire analyzed operating range.

Full power operation is planned oyver a range of core flow down to 81% (Table 2-1 and Figure2-1 of Reference (e)). in order to maintain margin between the sctpoints and the planned operating range, the "comer" of the flow-referenced setpoints needs to be maintained near this operating snap -comner". Core flow and drive loop flow are nearly proportional in the high flow range (-80% drive flow should provide

-81% core flmv). Therefore t[ie flow-referenced sctpoint DB has been scle.ccd to reach the DB clamped Pag"3 of4

15 December 1998 DRF CS 1-00214-00 (4) value at about 80% drive loop flow. The slope of the setpoint variation has been assumed to remain the same since it approximates the slope of the flow control lines on the power/flow map.

The equation for the DB flow-referenced portion of the scram setpoint that reaches the 120% DB upper limit for the scram setpoint at 80% drive flow is 0.66*W+67.2 % RTP.

Them is no safty-credht taken for the clamped or flow biased rod block ftctnon. The primary criteria for these values is to provide rod blocks early enough in any rod maneuvering to avoid the risk of a scram trip. Therere, the selection ofthese values is based on enkineeringjudganent and historical experience.

The Nominal value for the APRM rod block clamped setpoint function for other plants with SM rod blocks has hisorically been set at 10%. equal to the current design APRM neutron flux trip setpoint for PBAPS. This value will be selected fbr the Nominal value for PBAP& The equation selected for the Nominal flow-rcef ced portion of the rod block setpoint is 0.66*W+5.2S% so that the Nominal 108%

upper lintbfor the rod block setpoint is reached at 80% drive flow. With the improved performance specifications for the PRNM included In the analysis, these Nominal values will yield equal or greater margin between the rod block nominal setting and the trip nominal setting for the PRNM system compared to currently installed equipment. so the scram avoidance objective of the rod block function is met.

2.4 Analytical Umits/Design Bases Values for PRNM Based on the rationale in section 2.3. the selected values for the PRNM trips are as follows.

Function ALJDB AV NTSP Neutron Flux -- Ugh 122.0% (AL) (1) (1)

Scram STP- High Clamp 120.0% (DB) (1) (1)

STPP-Ulgh (flow 0.66W+67.2% (DB) (I) (I) biased)__________

STP Rod Bock. Clamp (1 (1) 108% (Nom)

STP Rod Block, Flow (1) (1) 0.66W+55.2% (Nora)

Biased _t__ _ _ _66_ _

(1) To be determined in the PRNM setpoint analysis.

3.

References:

a) Peach Bottom EM Number PB 97-03269-000 b) Peach Bottom 3 Technical Specification (including Amendhnent No. 224) c) NEDC-324 10P-A. Licensing Topical Report, NUMAC PR Retroflt Plus Option IXI Stability Trip Function, October 1995.

d). NEDC-10996, PeachBottom Units 2 and 3 TransientAnalysis Design Report. October 1973.

e) NEDC-32183P. Power Rerate SafeiyAnahsis Reportfor Peach Bonom 2&3. May 1993 (as amended).

Page 4 of 4

DRF C51-00214-00 (5.7)

GE Proprietary Information Power Range Neutron Monitoring (PBNM) System Bases for REM Downscale Trig Tech Spee deletion and reduced setpoint Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS) Units 2&3 Revision 0 January 8, 1999 Prepared by: '

D. W. Reigel Reviewed by-E. M Chu 0r Page I of 5 bases-downmscaledselpt_revOa.doc

8 January 1999 DRF C51-00214-00 (5.7)

1. Introduction and Purpose Peach Bottom 2 and 3 are replacing their original Power Range Monitoring (PRM) systems with NUMAC Power Range Neutron Monitoring (PRNM) systems. Included in the modification is the ARTS based Rod Block Monitor (ARTS RBM).

The present design for the ARTS RBM and the PBAPS Tdch Specs include a downscale trip. The seipoint for the ARTS RBM downscale trip was originally established at nominally 94%. This value results in fairly fiequent "nuisance" rod block alarms when rods are driven in for rod swapping or other maneuvers. These rod block alarms cause distinctions for the operators without any apparent operational benefit.

In 1994, GE provided to PECO justificaton for reducing the setpoint to nominally 1% (Refirnce (d))

provided administrative actions were implemented to assure that the RBM had "nulled" shortly before any rod motion (a rod dc-select/re-select within the 10 minutes prior to withdrawing a rod). Subsequent discussion apparently lead to the conclusion that a 5% nominal setpoint provided some additional benefits and was easier to administer, leading to a formal PECO change of the RBM downscale trip setpoint (eeece e)). /

Recent reviews associated with the PRNM retrofit project at PBAPS have revealed that the earlier justifications didn't address the potential Technical Specification issues (the associated -allowable value" for the downscale trip setpoint is inthe PBAPS COLR. so a Tech Spec change was not required to implement the revised setpoint). Inaddition, recent reviews have identified some ambiguity between the dis.cusion in Refren (d) and the discussions in Reference (c).

The purpose of this document is to provide justification, for the NUMAC PRNM system, for deletion of the RBM downscale .fromTechnical Specifications and clarify the bases for the setpoint (at nominally 1%).

2. Evaluation/justification 2.1 History The original RBM designs for PBAPS and most other GE BWVRs included flow biased trips for the RBM, with functions implemented in analog electronics. For this design. the RBM flux and related setpoint values could vary over a wide range of values, potentially down to 30% power or less. That original design included a downscale trip setpoint of nominally 5% which was intended. at least inpart. to.detect failed hardware which could result in an unusually low value of-the RBM flu-.

When the ARTS design is implemented, some of the basic logic is changcd. Specifically, the RBM local power level is always normalized to 100 and all upscale setpoints are greater than 100. Therefore, When the ARTS RBM program first evolved, an engineering judgment was made that the RBM downscale trip setpoint could be increased (over that used in the non-ARTS RBM system) without problem. The hardware in which the ARTS RBM functions wcre first implemented was the same analog clectronics used in the original non-ARTS REM, and still had at least the potential for hardware failures that could result in a reduced R3M flux signal that could be detected by the downscale trip. although no specific failures of that kind have been documented. On the other hand. experience has shown that the incrcased do-wnscale'trip setpoint in fact leads to nuisance rod block alarms under normal rod maneuvering conditions.

Page 2 of 5

8 January 1999 Slauay 199DRF C51-00214-O00(5.7) 2.2 Review and Evaluationof PreviousAnalysis 2.2.1 Original ARTS RBM Analysis Refenc (q) docnuents the original analysis and bases for the ARTS improvement program, including the revised REM logic. That report established the technical bases for the change, and in particular provided the technical bases for the upscale trip analytical limits. The report established thi'initial dowscale trip Setpoint (94%) and idemifies that the there is no technical bases for the value (the "analyil limit" and "allowable value" aIe shown as "nea).

Review of the report and*thc rationale and factors considered for the upscale trip points confirms that no credit is taken ft the downscale trip setpoinL Futher there is nodiscussion of the rationale for selecting 94%. It appears that an engineeringjudgment was made that 94% was a reasonable value since in opeation the actual R1M value would always be greater than 100% fhr rod withdrawal action. Discussioa with GE experts indicam that selection of this value was intended to allow 1br certain calibration errors and likely the small "pre-withdrawal" insertion of a rod (to unlatch the collett) prior to withdrawal (so that inadvertent downscale trips would not occur). However, there is no specific discussion in the Reference ofexpected behavior of the trips when rods are inserted, and it appears that extended insertion, such as will occur during rod swapping, and the likelihood of"withdraw blockds due to tripping the downscale trip during such insertions, was not considered in the selection of the nominal scipoint of 94V/0 Review of rence (c) also shows that the RBM system operation is based on the assumption that a new rod selection has been made within a short period of time before rod withdrawal (10 minutes is used as a typical value). Further, it is clear that the analysis are based on changes from the RBM flux value at the time of the last selection with no specific provision for a reduction in RBM flux prior to witdlrawing the rod (which might be limited by the original downscale trip setpoin).

22.2 Peach Bottom Setpoint Analysis Reference (a) is the Peach Bottom setpoint calculation. updated after uprating the power for the station. The portion applicable to the RBM setpoints is essentially a insertion of the GE prepared analysis. That analysis, reflecting the most recent analysis prepared, shows the RBM dowuscale setpont at 94%. with a "design bases" value of 99%.

There is no oscusion in that document o the basis for the 88% or 94% values. Itappears that a "design bases" value was "backfit" to correspond to the 94% nominal trip setpoint for the purpose of establishing an "allowable value" (which, based on Reference (b) is fisted in PBAPS' COLR).

Review of the analysis further co-nirms that the error and drift terms included in the setpoint ralculations for the RBM upscale power trips do not include any error terms related to the RBM dosriscale trip. i.e.. it confirms that no credit is taken for the downscale trip.

2.2.3 Peach Bottom Analysis to Reduce RBM Downscale Setpoint Reference (d) was prepared at PBAPS' request to justify reducing the RBM downscale trip. setpoint to eliminate spurious RBM rod block alarms that were occurring during normal rod maneuvering (e.g., rod insertions during rod swaps at power). That reference states that at least part of the purpose of the downscale trip is to "prevent the input signal from drifting too far away from the reference signal such that it will impactthe setpoint margins determined in the RBM upscale trip setpoint'" However, review of Reference (e) and Reference (a) shows that no such credit has been taken for the downscale trip in the calculation-of the upscale trip setpoints. In fact, the only "drift- considered in the upscale trip setpoints is that in the actual hardware with values on the order of 0.5%, significantly less than the 6% that would be allowed by the original nominal 94% downecale trip setpoint. Reference (d) concluded that it was acceptable to reduce the setpoint to nominally 1%.

The conclusion that the RBM upscale power setpoints are based on the assumption that the RBM local flux starts at the initial "nulled" value (with no provision for "drif" domn toward the downscale trip supoint) is further supported by the recommendation in Reference (d) that PBAPS implcment a procedural action to

. Page 3 of 5

8 January 1999 DRF C51-00214-00 (5.7) require that the operator assure that a nv selection (or deselectionreselection) has occurred within 10 minutes prior to rod withdrawal to assure that the RBM has properly "nulled".

2.2-4 PBAPS RBM Downscale Trip Setpoint Reduction Reference(a), the PBAPS ECIL that imlc ncted the reduced RBM downscale trip setpoint cites Referince (d), but also incldes discussion lea&ig to the conclusion that 5% is the preferred nominal trip sezpoint Specifically, the ECR states: "Per GE's recommendation, the downscale trip seepoint should be set 2a5 percent rather than the 2.5 percent specified under revision 0. This will allow frs of rcpcatabilty of calibrations and will bring the trip above the LPRM dropout setting." It appears that earlier discussion had already lead to the conclusion that a 2.5% setting was preferred over the 1%value discussed in Reference (d). AlU of these points are reasonable bases for the value selected, but do not relat in any way to the RBM upscale power trip operAtio 2.2.5 Summary It is clear from review ofthe previous analysis that there is no actual analytical basis for the ARTS RBM downscale trip seopoint. Therefbre, the conclusion is that the primary value of the downscale trip is to detect actual equipment failures so thatý for functional purposes, it actually forms an "extension" of the RBM inop trip function.

2.3 NUMAC RBM Evaluation 2.3.1 NUMAC Digital ARTS RBM vs. Current Analog ARTS RBM The NUMAC implementation ofthe ARTS RBM perfmons all of the calculations digitally, so thae is no analog hardware to "drift' of "fail low". In addition, the equipment includes self-test functions that cause most hardware and many of the "system logic" failures to result directly in an Iop trip. Thercfore. theme are no identified or credible falb thatwill be detected by the downasale trip with one possible exception. There are a few conditions that result in the REM logic setting the RBM flu, to zero. While all of these are intentional and rettu'normally" to the normal value or result in an Inop trip or alarm. it is possible that some unanticipated failure or failure combination could leave the RBM flux value at the zero setting. While these will most likely be detected by the automatic self-tes* logic or other "abnormal condition detetion" logic (e.g., no unbypassed LPRMs available would result in both a "ze RBM flux value and a "too few LPRMs" alarm), a downscale alarm could be ofhdp in diagnosing the situation and identifying the source of the alarm.

23.2 Bases for the NUMAC RBM Downscale Trip Setpoint Based on the above evaluation. the conclusion is that the dowttscale trip could be eliminated with virtually no impact on the RBM operability. However, since the fbnction is available and has the possibility of detecting supporting the diagnosis of sone falure conditions, it is concluded that the NUMAC RBM Downscale Trip setpoint for the ARTS REM at PBAPS (and for other plants with the same function) should be 1% as the nominal trip setpoint. with no related analytical limit/design bases value or allowable value. The 1% value is selected only because it is a convenient value, and with the digital processing in the NUMAC REM will always result in a downscale trip if the REM flux remains "set" to zero due to some failure (for the type of failure hypothesized, the RBM will not be processing a normal signal, so noise or error terms in the LPRM values need not be considered is establishing the 1% value).

3. Removal of RBM Downscale Trip from Technical Specifications Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that the only potential benefit of the RBM downscale trip function for the NUIMAC ARTS RBM is to provide diagnostic information in the event offailures. but that those same failures are also going to result in an RBM inop alarm. Consequently, the RBM downscale trip function in the NUMAC ARTS RBM providct no significant operability or failure detection benefit beyond that already provided by the RBM Page 4 or 5

g$1== 1999 DRF C51-00214-00 (5.7)

Inop function, and should, therefom be deleted from the Technical Specifications for PBAPS and other plant which utilize the NUMAC ARTS RBM 3.1 Justificationfor Deletion of the RBM Downscale Tdp from Tech Specs The REM downscale trip fnmcdton will detect substantial reductions in the RBM local flux after a "nW Iscompleted (a"nulr' occurs after a new rod selection). This function. in combination with the RBM inop finction, is intended to dect problems with or abnormal conditions In the RBM equipment and system. However, no credit is talen for the R*M dmwnscale trip function in the establishment of the RBM upscale trip analytical limits or setpoint'values.

In the original analog RBE the inclusion of a "downscale function in addition to the inop function had some merit in that the analog equipment had some failure modes that could result in a reduction of signal, but not afull failure.

Unlilk other nauun mosnitoring sysmem downscate functions (eg, the APRM downscale), there are no normal operating conditions which am intended to be dected by the downscale function. Therefore, the RBM downscale function was in fact part of the overall RBM "mop" function.

The replacement of the original analog RBM with the NUMAC digital RBM results in all of the original analog pwcessing being replaced by digital processing. One effect of this is to eliminate the types of failures that can reasonably be detected by the downscale trip function. In addition, the inop" finction is enhanced in the NUMAC RBM by the use of automatic self-est and internal logic to increase the detectability of abnormal conditions and to directly included these in the RBM Inmp function.

Therefore, in the NUMAC ARTS RBM, there is no incremental value or benefit provided by the REM downscale trip function. Cossten vdth the overall thrust of the Improved Tech Specs to eliminate "no value" requirements, the RUM downscale trip function. and its related discussion in the Bases, should be removed from the Technical Specifications. The RBM loop function should be retained.

4.

References:

a) Peach Bottom Calculation OPM-0875 b) Peach Bottom 3 Technical Specification (including Amendment No. 224) c) NEDE-30908P. GE Generic ARTS Description d) GE Letter G94-PEPR-IIS, May 23, 1994, GVKumar (GENE) to HJ Ryan (PECO) e) PBAPS MCR No. PB 94-07707-001.

Page 5 of 5

1. PE-0251 Rev. 002 Atta( hrment 3

• Page 1 of 14 175 Cuw,4ye=4w San JawjCA 951 25 N&SA 00412 DRF A13-00381-02 January 2, 2001 Sujit Chakzaborty, PRŽIIM Project Manager

Subject:

Minimum Number of Operable OPRM Cells for Option lf Stability at Peach Bottom 2 and 3

References:

1. Licensing Basis Hot Bundle Oscillation Magnitude for Peach Bottom 2 and 3, GE-NE-C51-00214-01, Revision I, January 1999.

2. NEDO-32465-A, "BWR Owners' Group Long-Term Stability Detect and Suppress Solutions Licensing Basis Methodology And Reload Applications," August 1996.

Stability Option M operational requirements include (1) the minimum number of operable LPRMs per OPRM cell for a cell to be operable, (2) the minimum number of operable OPRM cells for an OPRM channel to be operable, and (3) the minimum number of operable OPRM channels for the OPRM function to be operable. Peach Bottom 2 and 3 has selected 2 as the minimum number of operable LPRMs for an OPRM cell to be operable. The Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Technical Specification for the OPRM function requires that a minimum of 3 OPRM channels be operable for the OPRM function to be operable without a LCO. The purpose of this letter is to document an evaluation of the minimum number of operable OPRM cells for an OPRM channel to be operable.

The licensing basis Peach Bottom 2 and 3 analysis performed with zero LPRM failure rate was shown in Reference 1. This letter documents the LPRM failure sensitivity on the hot bundle oscillation magnitude (HBOM) for the plant-specific configuration for the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 4P design. The LPRM failure rate is varied from 44% to 46% to provide a licensing basis for Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Option Ill stability. These results are shown in Table 1.

ill" -- W4 %a Q Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 2 Januury 2001 Attachment 3 Pge 2 Page 2 of 14 Table 1. Results Summary for Peach Bottom 2 and 3 HBOM (2 LPRMs Minimum)

Setpoint Licensing Basis 44% Failure 45% Failure 46% Failure (Reference 1) Rate Rate Rae 1.05 0.172 0.171 0.172 0.173 1.10 0.337 0.333 0.334 0.341 1.15 1 0.495 0.490 0.493 0.498 It is noted that 45% LPRM failure rate is the maximum LPRM failure rate allowable without having the HBOM greatly exceeding the licensing basis IBOM.

For a LPRM failure rate, GE has also performed a Monte Carlo simulation to determine the corresponding operable OPRNM cells. This results is shown in Figure 1 Figure 1. Operating OPRMav. Failed LPRMs for Peach Bottom 2 and 3.

35 30 0 25 Q

a.

C a

I 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Number of Failed LPR9l

Cale # PE-0251 Rev. 002 2 January 2001 Attachment 3 Page 3 Page 3 of 14 This study shows that a setting of 25 operable cells required per OPRM channel are consistent with Reference I and the licensing methodology in Reference 2. Hence for the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 OPRM confguration, a minimurr number of operable OPRM cells per OPRM channel setting of 25 (out of 33) is adequate to meet the licensing bases for the OPRM function.

This minimum value assures, based on the same acceptance criteria and statistical methodology discussed in Reference 2 that, for random LPRM failures up to at least 45.0% of the total LPRMs, the results of Reference I still apply. The analyses performed addressed OPRM peak/average setpoint values up to 1.15 and total LPRM failures equal to 45.0% of the total LPRMs in the core. Based on the trends in the data, the OPRM minimum cells per channel setpoint of 25 may also be valid for setpoints higher than 1.15 and numbers of LPRM failures not exceeding 45.0%. Additional analyses were judged unnecessary since setpoints above 1.15 are not likely and LPRM failures even approaching 45.0% as a practical matter will never occur.

A minimum number of operable OPRM cells per OPRM channel setting of 25 may also be used in combination with a minimum number of LPRMs per OPRM cell setting of 1.

However, in that case It is likely that more than one of the APRM channels, which at Peach Bottom 2 and 3 share hardware with the OPRM channels, will reach its limit on minimum number of operable LPRMs per APRM channel before more than one OPRM channel reaches its limit on minimum number of operable OPRM cells per OPRM channel.

Please let me know if there are any further questions regarding this analysis.

Sincerely, Alan Chung (408) 925-2876.

cc: Jason Post Clark Canham Nader Sadeghi Margaret Harding

Kevin P.Oonawon. QChormw BWAOWNERS' GROUP F ()0 do enm bWROG rgd 98113 September"17, 1996

• P"my Nuclea P r K

Plan - MoM Code F1210

• 10 Cemer Rad a Perlu, OH 44081 Attachment 3 NRC ProJect No. 691 Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Page 4 of 14 Docmue Contmo Osk United Statn Nuclear Regulatory Commission WhShmgton, DC 20555 Atentirtn Mr. LE Phaps Reactor Systems Branch

SUBJECT:

Guidejwins for SiabiUgy Optlon i "-Enabled Regiorn- (TAC M92882)

Refemnce 1) Letter, RC Jones to RA Pinsilu, Acceptance for Referencing of Tbpicai Report NEDO-32465, "BWR Owners' Group Reactor Stability Detect and Suppress Solutions Ucensing Basis m , Marc 4,1996 Methodology and Reload Appfctmonsi Atahed. for you Information, is guidance the BWROG is providing to the stability Opetin Ill par*iciputing utlitles regarding the powermfw conditions for which the Option Itl protection feature wll be enabled (Le., operational bypass removed). This guidance is Consistent with the methodology described in NEDO-32465 'BWR Owner' Group Reactor Stabibty Dot and Suppress Licensing Basis Metodology and Reload AppI~cadonsW.

The Opton I1rMethOWc9gy requires that te tip functon be enabled in W1e region of the oDWersflow map in which instabiliies ar expected. This region has been canseratlvely deined i NEDO-32465 Section 2.2 as pow level greter than 30%. and core flow less than GO%. 1ypassing t trip funcmtion outside this region minkrionz the potental for spurous tIP due to random signal whifch mig* occr during prlong= periods of normal Pow o peration at high coe fowe or as a result of low power manevering.

Because the enabled region conservatively bounds the region whom instUbilitles am actually Wee trhe selected power and tow values are not plet or cycle speci and the UsA of the nominal values (1.s., without futher allowance for instrument ddft or Uncertaibt) Is approptat. The BWROG guidance for esablishing thos setpointS is discussed in the attacpmert.

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Attachment 3 BWROG GUIDANCE Page 5 of 14 REACTOR CORE STABILITY OPTION IIl ENABLE REGION The purpose of this guidance is to clarify application of the operating bypass for the BWR Owners Group Reactor Stability Detect and Suppress Solution Option Il, described in NEDO-31960-A and NEDO-31980 -A Supplement 1. As stated in those Icenrasng Topical Reports and Inthe Licensing Basis Methodology and Reload Applications Topical Report NEDO-32465-A (Section 2.2), the trip function Is to be enabled when both core power Is greater than 30% of rated and core flow is less than 60% of rated. These "enable regmon setpoints do not initiate any pmrcdv actions by themselves, Instead, they define the region of thm poweriflow map in which the trip function Is enabled (Le., operational-bypass Is removed). These aatpntx have been conservatively selected so that speclfic, additlonal uncertainty allowances need not be applied. Thus, setpoints corresponding to the value listed above (30% of rated core power and 50% of rated core flow) will be used to establish the enabled region of the Option Ill trip function. Further discussion of the validity of this approach is provided below.

iTrl r-Eabl -atminimu The BVVROG Stability Option Ill Solution has two principal objectives. First. the trip function Is designed to automatically detect and suppress antickpated reactor instabilities to provide a high level of assurance that the MCPR Safety Limit will not be exceeded. This suppression funclion is active In the region of the power/flow map where appreciable reactor instabilities am possible. Second, the trip funcion should avoid unnecessary reactor scrams for non-stability related eventL Both of these objectives support safe operation of a BWR.

The current recommended Inderm Corrective Action (ICA) regions provide high confidence that reactor instabliy events outside of the regions wm unfliely. The ICAs and other operational guidance developed by the BWROG are based on actual plant events as wall as analytical studlies.

To meet both Option IIl objectives the region of the powedlow map where automatic suppression Is required was defined to be significantly larger than the ICA regions.

Large stability-related oscillations outside this region are considered highly unlikely.

The additional margin beyond the ICA regions was included to provide assurance that the trip function Is available when needed and to allow utli to use the nominal boundaries as stated without additional conservatism. UtIlIties are not expected to Increase the size of the region to account for Instrument drift or uncertainty because of the consernatism with which the setpolts were selected. A larger region may Increase the probability of Inadvertent scra*m The region defined by the setpoints bounds the conditions at which actual plant instabilities have occurred.

Caic # PE-0251 Rev. 002 SWROG 96113 September 17, 1996 Attachment 3 Page 2 age 6 of 14 This mtewsl is being provided for NRC nforation. Because the guidance is consient with the basis for the methodology described inNEDO-32466 (which Was approved by Refenwce 1), qsiffo NRC approval of this material Is not believed to be nlessary.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact either Chat Lehmann (PP&L) on (610) 774-7984, or Hank Piefforien (GE) on (408) 925-3392.

Sincerely, KP Donovan, Chairman BWR Owners' Group impgd/lhcp oc TJ Rausch, BWROG Vice Chairman BWROG Stablty Detect and Suppress Methodology Committee BWROG Primary Representatives (PartIcipating Utilte)

SJ StarK GENE HC Pflef-eren, GENE

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Attachment 3 Page 7 of 14 Table 3-2: PBDA Trip Setpoints Confirmation Count Setpoint: Amplitude Setpoint Sp

___N____, (Peak/Average) 6 _>1.04 8 _>1.05 10 -1.07 12 >1.09 14 >1.11 i1.14 16 18 Ž1.18 20 >1.24 Note: This table is from GE Topical Report NEDO-32465-A, "Reactor Stability Detect and Suppress Solutions Licensing Basis Methodology." The entire Topical Report is maintained in the Peach Bottom Records Management System as G-080-VC-150. This table is reproduced in PE-0251 for convenience and clarity. Table E-1 in NEDO-32465-A is also relevant.

OCr P 03124FM GE MCLEAR DENTW4es 925 1490 3

ý 2f2 P' RENuclearEnergy Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Attachment 3 October 4,2003 age 8 of 14 WN 03-107 Document Contol Desk United States NuMdear Rogulary Commlssion One White Pint North 11555 tock kvll,, Piks llnckville Maryland 20852,-2738.

Subject:

Part 21 Notfleation- Stabity Option 111 Period Band Detecton Algorithm Allowable Settings This letter providas information concming a reportable condition on the stability Option MfPeriod Based Detction Algorithm ("'BIDA). The technical bases forth. fPBDA was defined by OGE Mclear Ene- (OGNE) and supplied to Hicens=e as safty related doametaton in licensing topical leports. Spedficaly, NDO-32465.A, Reactor Stability Detect and Suppress Solutions Licesing Babs Me*todology for Reload Applicatiozs, August 1996, defifte the P*DA pae confirmation adjustable varibles for the Osillation Power Range Monitor (OPXM)to be the period tolerane and the conditioning filter cutoff freqeny. The period tolerance could be adjusted in the range of 100 to 300 msec, and the conditioning filter cutoff fiqun*y could be adustd in the range of 1.0 to 2.5 Hz. Subsequent plant-specifio submittals may have extended the period tolermace range on the low end to 50 mace and the cutofffrequency on the high end to 3.0 H.

On July24, 003, a slow growing core wide instability event occurd at NMP-2. The OPM" instaled at 0MP-2 with 4 OPeRM chaels, eahwith 30 O Mcells A plant-specific Cdtical Power Ratio (CPR) per ma cr"ve has been detelmined for NMP-2 and the OPRM was armed when the evet occume For the current cycle, the PBDA confirmtion count (CC) setpoint is 14 count, and the normulluzd an"litude trip setpoint is 1.12. A cram,ocfre when at least one cell in two or more OPRM channels simuftaneously exceeds both the CC and amplitude tdp seipoints.

In the NMP-2 eve, the OPRM detected the instability and hditid a reactor scram that provided Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR) protection. However, post-.vent analyses kidicate, that the,OPRM did not perfotm as epected. Out of 120 cells, only one Performed correctly in that it reached &h CC tip Getpoint first, then the amplitude ttip setpoint. At the time of the scrm, there were >20 cells with amplitude at 10104/ZOO1SAT 18:19 [TZ/RI NO 88371 0001

• ... *r.*,.,w-rA.L L MI:. Y/4Md S 149.

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Octub 4,2003 ttachmnent 3 UFO 2-107 age 9 of 14 or I to 2% above the ampiltud setpoint, and only 5 cell wft CC at or above the CC setpoin. W'his was attributed to a large number of unexcted CC reset thsmghout the eveat.

At NWMP-2, the adjustable Period con~foinaion variables were set at 50 rsnec for the period tolerance and 3.0 Rz for the cutoff frequeny. The evabiation by GENE concluded that the 3.0 Hz value does not adequately filter out high ftuquepy noise and products a signal w*ith lse peak and valley tdt causes frequent CC resets. In addition, the 50 osea value poduces fiequcet CC mree due to sal)variations In the oscillation period. A=4-sis by ONE has demined that expected CC paftmanca Is achieved with a cuto~ffrequeacy of 1.0 Hz and aperiod tolerance of 100 msec or larger With these seutigs, the majority of the OPRM c*ll would have had CC at or above the CC setpot when fte amplitude tip wepoint was reached.

Even with the 50 sease and 3.0 Oz settig, the OPR, provided SLMCF1P prot-tion for the Nb-2 evezIL Due to the robust OPRM desi*g it ispossible that dia sctings currently in =a and allowed by licenoing documentation couldprovide SM*CPR.

protection 6x other instability ents. Additital justification mays how t1st other values fbr the PBDA adjustable period condmation vmarble provide acceptable perforamance. However, GmeN cannot curtconfirm that perorance of the OPRM

'with setting other tan period tolemma ,of 100 msec or highe and atofffreuency of 1.0 Ef will not contribuft to exceeadig the SLMCPR for all anticipated fistability events.

The reconmended changes to the PSDA period confirmaon adjustable variables docs not produce asignificant increae In the probability oftapu-ious scrom since both counts above the CC satpoint and amplitude above the amplitude trip setpoimt are required for an OPEtM cal to tdp, and calls in multple OPRM cha*ms must trip befoe Lscram is initiated (in accordance with the reactor protection system logic). It I higl unlikly that the CC rnd amplitud, rip sepolnts would be reached simultaneously in multiple OPRM coUs in multiple OPRM channels cxccpt during an actual instability evnt The rcoonmmded chagSes to the ThDA period confirmation adjustable variablee are expected to hn=rease the occurence of OPPtM alarms bused on higb CC. noe OPRM alarm is not a licensing basis uirnodon ofthe OPM. An alam based on hig CC In a single OPRId cell may resut in ambiguous Indication since It could be attributed either to an acual redction in stabifly margin or could hmve been generated asa eult of'tbe rd=om natuar of the OPRIM signal. Due to the large number of opportunities associated with cor, tunous monitoring of -120 OPRM CelL signal%, operating expcicuce is that occasional alam1s am not assoiated with an actual reduction instability margi.

Thcrefo, it may be appropriate to incease the alsn CC setpoiftt, or disable the alarm if it continues to provide ambiguous indication.

2 10/04/2003 SAT 18:19 [TIJI NO 8837) I002

_ 1490 Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002

-, ,,. . / Attachment 3 October4, 2003 Page 10 of 14 IM1P 2-107 This cftditim does not pw uc a substmdl afety bhaud and twhe is no tlusat of fuel failure. However, beause the condition could contribute to exceeding the SLMCPR, it is a reportable condiion.

Ifyou have any question, please call me at (408) 925-5362.

laoom S. Post Manager Engineein Qualit and Safey Evaluatimn cc: S. D.-Alxnder (QRC-NRMl. P/PAl) MalR Stop 6 P2 3, F. Foster (NRC-NRRWRIP/RORP) Mail Stop 12 W4 A. B. Wang (NRC-NR/DRLPM/lD4) Mll Stop 7 El

3. P. Klapprth (GENE)

-L J.Neme (Menq)

0. B. Stmback (OEM

1. 1 r (GE NM PRCFIoe AtWnhm=Mt I0/04/2003 SAT 18:19 [ITIIZ NO 8837) Q003

.. Urje /4r4 50 14,.

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 A LDJUm Octber 4, 2003 Attachment 3 F}N 024107 A1.. Page I Iof 14 x AmerG=Rea uryCo.

AmerGen EnmWg Co. Oyster Cru*

x CaROliR PoWVr &Light Co. Bznmwick I CMaMroln ower &Ligh Co. Thueawick 2 x stebIation Nuclear Ntoc M!fe point I x Conaftef Iou Nuclear DW*Eitdhon Q6. Foruzl 2 X tDeminton 0 cras~oo Millstoe I x BMeWg Noithwest Columobia Ent~xcKU0arNojthea FitzPatrick hntl4&mW SuCler &xtie EAtergy OPMSrA% o.u Gramd Oulf Emba OPMIS bc .iver~and Eutawu Nuclea Nartbat VerImontTYM*W~

&ologi Geommdai Co.

Exelon GeMMUAtl CO. Drasden 2

_x D5cclon Otnoragmo Co.

EnklnOotnezlIon Co. La~sle 2 Szcion eoencrat Co.

x Ensiw Genaezaon Co.

xx 2=10no Oeneastlon Co. Limuerickc 2 xx Ezolon GeneUd=o Co. Peach Bottom 2 x szolon omeneraft CO. Peach Bottom 3 x Ex"lo Gemmaion Co. Quad Cities I Exelon Generatiou Co. Quad Ctiew 2 rX Fhsmztvnrg Nuclea Opersting C, Nebraska Public Power Ditiwtt Cooper Nuclear MaMSCOAAn Co. tDuans Artold Nizolear Managoijic Co. Movbticlo x Pooled Equiment Inventry Co. Pm' x PPL Susqweana LLC.

P?t, SUSVMUM nuLLC Suaquelzai1a2

_.x Pub~11 $=rVic* mEctiO & Gas Co. Hlope creek x SouthernNuclar peatng Co. Htatch I Southepi~aclea Operating Co. Hatch 2 x

TCUMOSMe VaNly AV4103ity Browns Ferzm I Tcunasee ValleY Aitbority Browns [en 2 T Vally Authority menieae Brown$ Fenn7 3 4

10/04/2003 SATr 15:19 [I=/lX NCO88373 J*004

.,C.,.. L.q=, Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Octobe 4, 2003 Attachment 3 NIFN 02-107 Page 12 of 14 Attachment 2 - Informaidon per §21.21(d)(4)

(i) Hame aud address of the Individual Inforning the Cou*tiusiosn Jasom &.Po0t, Mmger, nginering Qualty &SaftT Evaluation, GS Nuolear Energy, 175 CurtnerAvenue, San Jose CA 95125 (11) Idexificati of to fetofty, dt. actvity, or the basde component supplied for such follty or =h activity within the United Staws which fills to comply or contais a dc*c=

All tbility solution Option U plats on potentially affected. Thems plants arc sted in Aulmreait. The basic componast with the deftet is specliamon of do allowable vahm for the a4utable period confummada variables in the Period Based Detection Algorithm (PBDA) used In StaMty Option ilL IWi) ldentfication of the firm couustrcting the thmlity or supplying the basic component wbich fi t conmply or coundns a*deft 09 Nuclear w eg, San Jose, Cania (iv) Hlatwe of hde defect or lMme to comply and afety hbazrd which Is creted or could be created by such defeat or bilne to comply:

This condition does not produc. a substantal safety hazam. The daeet is that certain value of pedod tolemranc and conMdtionIg iler a ffquency within the previously

,peFMeacceptable mu could produ suificient successive confirmation cou resen such dit SLMCP$ protectlan might not be provided for ill anticipated reamtor hIst*eblides. Evai with the deaft, the system provided SLMCPR. protection for tbe mga atNii-2. Due to th robust C 3 A desk%it is possible ta the settings cuerendy in un.

and allowed by liwe*sng documentation could provide SLMC protection for other instabty eavts. HMWWWa at this time G*N* cannot conflon that Peibmae of the OPRM with all cofditionwo filte and period tolermce settings cutently in = and allowed by lHeing documentation will not lead to a candition where the SLMCPR could be violated for some anticipated instabil ty events. The recommtved caumps to the FBDA period confirmation adjustable varbles do not produce a giftw¢n incmre in th. probability ofa spurious scram.

(v) The data an which the i xmaion ofsuh defect or fMuam to comply wa obtaied:

August 5, 2003 (vi) In the ,aso of a basic component which conains a defeat or Edl]=e to comply, the number and locations ofall suc components In use a, supplied for, or being supplied f one or mom tihoifies or adctvid subjc to th* nrgulations In this part:

The potentially affected plants re listed in Attachment 1.

(vii) Tho corrective action whiah has beetr, is being, or wMi1 be btna the name of the individual or organization rsponsible for the acion; and the length of time that has been or will be taken to complete the action (note, these are a~tions specifically associated with the identified Reportable Condition):

10/04/2003 SAT 18:19 ITIIPJ NO 88371 IJOO5

S.q. U6 %IJ4 - I., A.M.,. UVJ%,,.,4M 1 24- Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 October 4, 2003 Attachment 3 W:N 02-107 [Page 13 of 14 a All potentially affected licen s have been notified by a Pat 21 R.eportable Condition Notification pet §21.21(d).

e GE will modify"dteues manul for plaow which use the GE supplied Power Pange Neutron Monitor to set the cutoff feqizuncy to I HIz and the period tolWeme to 100 mge or greater with allowance to =a a diffrae value if applicable, besed on additonaljuslficatmon.

(vih) Any advice rdatd to

• defect or failus to wnoply about the f*cility, acdvity, orbaskc component that has been, Is beii o wM be Sgven to puchasers or licensees,

1. Tit instaility event stNMaP-Wad&d*a analmiysis has shown that selection of I W.for dte coadtiuonis Ifte cutoff faequcAy is eff*etive Infiltaeng the high hcq=uey noin compoets which b essential forrefcding excessive rests of sucmee period aIIrIa counI F- (CC) during oesabe operatons.

Analysis by GENE does not suppor use of a conditioning filter cutoff fiquenoy higher than I Hz. Absent ddialtiflcationofanother value, the cutoff freuqncyahould be set to I Hz.

2. 7he hitib* t.vent at NMP2 and additfonal awaei has shown that apedod toleranc of les than 100 vose does not provide for an uffective trip fwmtf n by accommodatiug amll o-cillation, parod vadations, which Is essential for redcing excesvav CC resets during umatible qmopeaios Analsis by GENE does not support use ofa period tolerance lower than 100 msec. Absent addItional jusification ofanothar value, ft period toletence should be set to 100 msec orgeater.

3. Additional infozundon Isbeing providtd to licensee relative to the alar'm ctlon ofthe OPHi and di procedure for toning the pedod toler*nce mad corner

• An miami based on hAh CC ika single OPRM coil aosy mault in ambiguou Iudicadon since it could be attnuted cither to an actual reduction Instability margin or It could have been generated ag a result of the nrndom nature of the OP1ZM sidnaL Themfore, It may be appropriate to incea the Warm CC setpohit or dbable the alarm if it continues to provide ambiguous indication; uT:ePBDA pOZiod cxiuumiodn adjusable variables Should not be cbhan.d (ix, "tuned") in such a way as to limht the number of aarns, without adequate consideration of the impact ofthi chanm an ability ofthe PBDA to detect an actual instbilt event Ifonly a single value of each adjustable variable is allowed basd on ana4=aaeustilcul, Ina ptning procedure for the PBDA perio confirmation adjustable variables himno applicable.

6 10/04/Z003 SAT 18:19 [TI/RI NO 8837) QOO6

Calc # PE-0251 Rev. 002 Attachment 3 NEDO-32465-A age 14 of 14 Table A-I: Example Amplitude and Growth Rate Algorithm Setpointe Setpolnt Typical Value S, 1.10 S2 0.92 Sffm 1.30 GR 3 1.30 T" (time window) 0.3 to 2.5 seconds T2 (time window) 0.3 to 2.5 seconds Note: This table is from GE Topical Report NEDO-32465-A "Reactor Stability Detect and Suppress Solutions Licensing Basis Methodology." The entire Topical Report is maintained in the Peach Bottom Records Management System as G-080-VC-150. This table is reproduced in Calc PE-0251 for convenience and clarity.

EXELON TRANSMITTAL OF DESIGN INFORMATION NSAFETY-RELATED Originating Organization Tracking No:

-INON-SAFETY-RELATED ]Exelon I-REGULATORY RELATED I"]Other (specify) PU-2011-020 (rev. 0)

Station/Unit(s) Peach Bottom (U2/U3) Page I of 2 To: W. Barasa - S&L Subject Transmittal of Instrument error uncertainty -term t by Sargent & Lundy.

Steve DraQovich __'__"/__ _

Preparer pPrepares rlugnve Datei Approver /Appp6vers SIa)&4 6ate' Status of Information: MApproved for Use OUnverified Description of Information:

This TODI provides error terms for use in calculation PE-0251, "Provide Allowable Values (AV) and Nominal Trip Setpoints (NTSP) for Various Setpoint Functions of the NUMAC PRNM System." In particular, the provided values are required for use In APRM STP Flow-Biased scram and rod block functions for SLO - Single Loop Operation only.

-LA a Loop Accuracy = 3.414 %PWR CA = CallbratlonAccuracy = 2.139 %PWR LD,= Drift for total loop = 6.42 %PWR The above values were provided by GEH in accordance with the attached emall and were used In determining the results that were provided In GEH Task Report 506, 'rTS Instrument Setpoints" for Peach Bottom (Units 2 &3) EPU.

Purpose of Issuance and Umitations on Use: This information. Isbelngsupplled solely for the use in the referenced calculation above, PE-0251, in support of EPU for Peach Bottom (Units 2.& 3).

Source.Documents:

E-mail, dated May 4,2011, from Eic Helin of GEH to Steve Dragovich of Exelon Distribution:

Original: TODI file CC: T. Wicket, J. Stahl, M.Coakley Calc # PE-025 1, Rev. 002 Attachment 4 Page 1 of 2

Dragovich, Steve:(GenCo-Nuc)

TODI PU-2011I-= (rev. 0)

From: Helin, Eric J (GE Power & Water) [eric.helin@ge.com]

Page 2 of 2 Sent- Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:09 PM To: Dragovich, Steve:(GenCo-Nuc)

Subject:

SLO-TLO accuracy data Steve:

As discussed earlier today, here are the differences in TLO and SLO accuracies.

TLO SLO APMA & APEA (%pwr) = 1.380582 1.354033 PEA/PMA Loop AV Acc(%pwr) 1.433426 3.672462 All accuracy LA, PMA, and errors for APEArandomr AV Loop LER Acc(%pwr) = 0.379257 3.264606 Accuracies for LER DPMA & DPEA (% pwr) = 0.044721 0.044721 Drift for PMA/PEA NTSP drift (ignore)

LD Loop NTSP Drift (%pwr)= 0.985554 §.42033 Drift for total Ioop 7

Loop Instr Drift (% pwr) = 0.984539 5.420146 LER calc Loop Instr Cal (%pwr) = 1.334268 2.1386 Calibration accuracy Loop Instr Acc (%pwr) = 0.385622 3.413732 Loop LA )Accuracy Eric Eric J. Helin GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy Project Manager, Steam Dryer Analytical Services T 910-819-1932 Calc # PE-0251, Rev. 002 C 910-398-0304 E eric.helin@,e.com Attachment 4 www .,e-eneray.com/nuclear Page 2 of 2 3901Castle Hayne Road P.O. Box 780,M/C: A75 Wilmington, NC 28402 USA