ML17319A798

Proposed Tech Specs 4.2.1.2,4.2.2.2 & 3.2.6 & Tables 3.2.3a & 3.2.3b,increasing Fq Core Peaking Factor Limits.Technical Bases & Safety Evaluation Encl

ML17319A798
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	03/26/1981
From:	INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
To:
Shared Package
ML17319A796	List: ML17319A795 ML17319A798 ML19350C391
References
NUDOCS 8104010367
Download: ML17319A798 (17)

Text

ATTACNENT 1 TO F

I AEP;NRC.;0538 PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE

1

~,

~$

"I

Pro osed Technical S ecification Chan es

1. The'roposed revisions indicated by vertical lines in the right margin o'f pages 3/4 2-6, 15, 16, 19,20 and B 3/4 2-2 are to the new Fq limits. changes'elated

2. The proposed revisions indicated on pages 3/4 2-3 and 2-17 are editorial changes to the existing Technical Specifications which rectify conflicts between certain peaking factor surveillance requirements. They are being submitted at this time for convenience since they involve the same Technical Specification sections as the changes discussed in 1 above.

POWER 0 I STR IBUT ION LIMITS SURVEILLANCE RENDU? R 1ENTS Continued) 4.2.1.2 The indicated AFD shall be considered outside of'ts + 5 target band when at least 2 of 4 or 2 of,3 OPERABLE excore channels are

'indicating the. AFD to be outside the target band. Penalty deviation outside of the + 5X target band shall be accumulated on a time basis of:

a. A oenalty deviation of one minute for each one minute of POWER OPERATION outside of the target band at TH=".""PAL POHER levels equal to or above 505 of RATED THERMAL POWER, and

b. A penalty deviation of n~e half minut for each one minute of POWER OPERATION outside or the target band at THEPNL POWER levels between 15$ and 505 of RATED THERMAL POWER.

4.2.1.3 The target axial flux difference of each OP RABBLE excor'e shall be determined in conjunction with the measurement of 'hannel FOL,'z) as defined in Specification :.2.2.2.C, The 'provisions of Speci-fscation 4.0.4 are not applicable.

0. C. COOK - UN IT 1 3/4 2-3

~

I ~

~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I

~

I

~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~

~ I ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ I

~ ~

I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I I

~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

I ~

II III I

W POWER DISTRIBUTION Lit<ITS AnIAL POWER DISTRIBUTION

~ ~

I L It< I TING COND I T ON FOR OPERATION 3.2.6 The'xi'al relationship:

[F (Z)l -

power

-(R

'Z distribution shall

)(PL)(1.03)(l + a be

)(1.07) limited by the following F'here:

a. F.(Z) is the normalized axial power distribution from 'thimble j at core elevation 2.

b. PL i's the fraction of RATED THERtVL POWER.

c. K(Z) is the function" obtained frcm Figure 3.2-2 for a given core height location.

d.. R., for thimble j, is determined: frcm at least n=6 in-core flux maps covering the full configuration of permissible rod patterns at 100" or APL (whichever is less) of RATED THERMAL POWER in accordance with:

Where:

R

. ij jtlax R. - and its associated a. may be calculated on a full core or a 1)Siting fuel batch basil as defined on page 83/4 3-3 of basis.

'"eas is the limiting total peaking factor in flux map i. The

e. F'0, limiti'ng total peaking -factor is that factor with least margin

~ to'.the F (E) curve defined in Figure 3.2-3a ror Exxon Nuclear Company fuel and in Figure 3.2-3b ror Westinghouse'uel.

0. C COOK UN IT 1 3/4 2-15

'I i'I.!Hl 'ISIRll!UlION I. Itll I.': ~ = I'

,I,j LIHITIHG CONOITION FOR OPERATION Continued T(E) is the ratio of the exposure dependent'F (EI) to 2,10.,:,i('i>> 'III 'I(Il 'j(

and is defined iti Figure 3.2-3a for fuel supplied by Exxon,'.,'" !, ,

Nuclear Company and in!Figure 3.2-3b for fuel supplied, by Westinghouse Electric Corporation.' ~

', i'",j>>.",

f . [F,.(2)](i ing is the bution at elevation total measured maximum 2

peaki'ng allowance of F>>ieas

0. is the standard devia'tion associated with thimble value of the normalized axial distri-, t,.;.,',~q;,;,,;,

from thimble j in map i which had a limit- SIlf.(I1I4. ,,

factor without uncertaintiesor ak a fraction or percentage of R.; "and is derived from n flux j,

i,"

expressed

'densification':: "., I'S'IlIIil

,maps froo) the relationship. below, or'0.02, (2X) whichever is, greater. ~

~

R.

The factor 1.07 is comprised of 1.02 and 1.05 to account for the axial power distribution instrumentation accuracy and the measurement uncertainty associated with F using the movable detec'tor sys.tern respectively.

The factor 1.03 is the. engineering uncertainty factor.

g. F is an unce) taintty factor for Exxon fuel to account for the rlduction in the F (Q) curve due to an accumulation of ex-t>rior to th3 next flux 'map. The follo&ing Fp factor,. 'osure shall apply:

Fp

= 1.0 0< E><12 Fl,

= 1.0'+r.0015 x W3 12 < E < 34,5 I

Fp

= 1.0 +L.0030 x W3 34.5 < E~< 42.2 where W >s the number of effective a*F 'w"(

'Pull power wehks (rounded up to the next highest integer), since the last xu full core flux map. ~ IS

~ I D. C. COOK - UNI T 1 3/4 2-16 Amendment No.

', Unit 1

POWER DISTRIBUTION LIMITS LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION Continued ll

~tf PM ~

~A ll lllft: M relationship.

d I'I l tl d t I RATER THERMAL POWER I dl t d by the 'v vd l M np)2'df, v" ,FP APL = min over Z of (Eg ) H(2) 1(lil FZ,Q xVZ xEp Z where Fq(1 ,$ ) is the measured Fq(Z,g), including a 3C uncertainty and a 5X measurement uncertainty, at the time of manufacturing'olerance target flux determination from a power distribution map using the moveable in-core detectors. The above limit is not applicable in the following core plane regions.

f ~ IP inclusive.

I

1) Lower core region 0 to 10Ã

2) Upper'ore region 90K to 100K inclusive.

ACTION:

a. With a F (2) factor exceeding [F (2g 5 by c 4 percent, reduce THERMAL i)OWER 1 percent for ever percent by which the F>(2) factor exceeds its limit within 15 minutes and within the next 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> .either reduce the F>'(Z) factor to within its limit or reduce THERMAL POWER to APL or less of RATED THERMAL POWER.

b. With a F (2) factor exceeding [F (2)15 by g'4 percent, reduce THERMAL ))OWER to APL or less of MATEO THERMAL POWER within 15 minutes.

t ~R M

Rla T e PDMS .may be out of service: 1) when in-core maps are being, taken as part of the Augmented Startup Test Program or 2) when surveillance for determining power distribution maps is being performed.

D. C. COOK - Uni t 1 3/4 2-17 E

Pl

?.2 jtit: 44 "I, ti' ~

I ~, I ~

~

tii I 4'I I ~

i 2.1 (0,2.07) (12.; \

IO):ji !i!I I!Ii I I ala

. ~ i. I I

.I ~ it:

~ ~

~

l 2.0 ji,  !

N 34'a ig 4 ~

~

'4 at(

)',

I

~

I i:ti ~ al 1.9 j'i9 Pt! 2,1.89)

'i L '.1

~ ~ ~ q,:ij 1,'I j jr! I 1.8 ,jl, Q:'i< Vl I 4 I

>>t ijki

':I I~

VI i 4 1.7 I'ai ji! i l!

k)'l

'I

~ ~

I

~ ~ I~ ~

~ ~

4 ~

~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

J4 ~ ~ ~ I

~ ~

J~ ~ ~ 4 4 !

4 Iit JJ

!!I!~ I JJI

~

I t

I J LJ ~ Jan ~ ~

~ 4 4 ~ 4 LJ J JJ

~

~ "i 4 I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I~

II~ I

~ Ii

~

~

~

la I'44 VI I ~ ~ 4

~ ~

~

II

~ ~~

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ I~

4~

~

~ ~

I

~

~ ~ ~

~ ~ i'i ~ I I ~

i ~

I~ ,444 ~ ~ ~ ~

I

~ ~ ~ ~ 4

tt; I I  !'i I~ ~

~

1.6

~ ~ ~ a l ~4 t~ ai I t'i

'i, il .i tat .l

.j.!'l ~ 14 I Jl j.j.L kh It;I I" I ,'til i!il tli'

,,jl 1::,

I iI lal Il

~

~

I

~

J ~ I i jl ij I I.

I ~

i4 I~ t~

'la I~

I~ I i 4 4

~

La ~

ill  !! t! I J

~,'

I jii lji Ijjj jlt j I I,,I ~ I .~j j

.(14 ,.0 I 1.0 (0, 986 4

4 I ~ i:: lijl 'i ~ I ~

I~

tjtj I

I

~ ~

~

4

~

I

~ ~

I I ~

i I~ 4

\

,.9 4

~ !ljt ill

~ l!

itl 3)I j i ~ I

.l II I I

'I

~ ~

, I ~ ~ I~I I I 4 ~

• 4 ~

I I

.9 (0: ','j  ; 986 '00.13, II ~

~

kl Qi(

4 ~

i ll li<;: ~

2:.

t

,.90)

~ 4 ~ ai baal I laal

~ I 4 I I kl kj'k t.j,!:

(E,); ,03 ,02 ,3E [j taa",j skit j(lj

.8 ii L!,I ta !i j'LL

, ili

"'I,13 LV jj!I I ill i

~

I: i aa I'il 4

I I Iaa

.7 la: I iiii aiil ~ ~

~ ~

la l'I 4)la 0 10 20 30 40 Peak Pellet Exposure In MWD/KG Figure 3.2.3a Exposure Dependent FQ Limit, FQ (g), and Normalized Limit T (E) as a Function of Peak Pellet Burnup for Exxon Nuclear Company Fuel.

C. COOK - UNIT 1 3/4 2-.19 Amendment No.'

2,0 1.9

~ ~

2' a L 0(

F (@~1.90~ E 1.8 0 1.6 I ~

I I

~ . I 1.0

'I p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s r 0.9 I I

0.8 0.7 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 Peak Pellet Exposure In h1WD/KG Figure 3.2 - 3b P

F< Limit, F<(Q, and Normalized Limit T(Q as a Function of Peak Pellet Burnup for Westinghouse Fuel

0. C. COOK - UNIT 1 3/4 2-20

~~

~0 II~

Irei

~ ~

~~

~ II PC'r!ER 0r.STR'."-(IT'.Gi'I '!.rTS BASES ~ <

Althcugh it is intended that the olant will,"e operated with the

-'"..target the tarce flux l AXIAL FLUX OIF;=RE!CE . i:hin tne band about difference, during rapid plant T!!ERIIAL PCWER I educ:.ioris, control rod motion will cause the AFD to deviate outside of the target band at duced THERMAL ?OWER levels. This deviation will not affect the xenon redistributicn sufficiently to change the envelooe of peaking factors which may be reached on a subsequent return to R"TED THERMAL PC';I R '(',vith the AFD within the araet band) provided the time duration of the devi-ation is limit'ed. Accord:ngly, a hour penalty i deciation limit cumu-lative during the previcus 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> is orovided fcr operation outside or the target band out within the 1imits or Fiaure 3.2-1 while at 7'rlERIQL PO'!IER levels above ""0,: of RATED,THERI1AL PO',IER. 'or THEar!AL POhER levels below 50i'f RATED THERMAL PO'1!E?, deviations. the AFD outside or the taraet band ar less signific nt.. The penalty of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> actual tim reflects this r duc d significance.

Provisioris ror monitoring the AFD on an autcmatic basis are derived from the piant'process ccmputer throuah the AFO Monitor Alarm. Ine computer determines the "ne minute averace of each or the OPEo<BL:-

excore detector cutouts ~rd proviaes an alarm messaae ir the AFD ror at least 2 or 4 or or 3 OPERASLE evccre channels are outside .the target

=-2 band and the THE.".I!AL PO'rIER is areater than 90~ or 0.9 x APL of RATED THERMAL PO~r!ER (uhichever is less}. During ooeration at THE?JILL POIIER levels bet<<een lS.. and 90",. or 0,9 x APL or RATED THERMAL POWER (uhich-everis lo ss), the ccmout r outputs an alarm message when the penal:y deviation accumulates beyond the limits of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />, respectively.

The upper bound limi . (90 or 0.9 x APL of RATFD THERl~~L POWER (whicn-ever'is less)) on AXIAL FLUX OIFFERBICE assures that the F<(Z,L) envelooe nf.2.10 times '<(2) x T(Q) is not exc ded during ither noirma1 operat:cn or in the event or xenon redistribution follcwing power chances. The lever bound limit {"0.'f RATED THERMAL PG';.'ER) is based on the fact .th' at THERMAL -PCv!ER Ieveis bylorv 0".. of RAT=D, TH:-~.'dAL PO!!ER, the average 1 near heat generation ra:e is hair of its ncminal operating v lue and bel ow that va 'rue,'er'.ur"ati ons in oca i =ed 'lux di stri ou tions'ar,not 1 1 affect'the results or =.CS or GIIGR analyses in a "!armer wn'Icir wcu:d adversely afr c". the ! eel th anc sa- ty of the public.

Figure 8 3/4',2-1 s.'loivs a typical monthly target band near, the beginning of core life.

-The bases and methodology for stablishina oi:ese limits is oresente" in tooical .-,or: .".,'I-"F-r;-"l. =>'xon N rcl ear waiver Ols ibut on Control or .".IR's-?!rase 'I" and Suppl8llen 1;o;hai I eocr't.

0. C ~ CQOl'"Ui! IT 1 8 3/4 2-2

ATTACNENT 2 TO AEP:NRC'0538 SAFETY EVALUATION

Safety Evaluation of Proposed Fq Limit American Electric. Power Service Corpora't,ion staff- members have reviewed the ECCS reanalysis summarized in .Attachment 3 t'o this letter. l<e have found the analysis to be acceptable and concur with, the conclusion that the 'reanalysis results demonstrate the operation of the reactor at the increased peaking factor limits will insure compliance with the NRC acceptance criteria as defined in 10 CFR 50.46.

The PNSRC and AEPSC NSDRC have'also reviewed the proposed change and concur with this evaluation. The reviews of these committees have concluded that the subject change will not adversely affect the health and safety of the publ'ic.

o J C

ATTACNENT 3 TO AEP:NRC;0538

'XXON REPORT

O r