ML18087A670

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Proposed Tech Specs Re Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor & Control Rod Insertion Limits
ML18087A670
Person / Time
Site: Salem PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 01/31/1983
From:
Public Service Enterprise Group
To:
Shared Package
ML18087A669 List:
References
NUDOCS 8302180439
Download: ML18087A670 (10)
v • d • e


Text

'.

(A)

Fx.y Technical *specification Change for Salem Unit Z Insert to-Page 3/4 2-7

e. The Fxy limit for Rated Thermal Power (~TP) shall be. provided for all core'planes containing bank. "D* cont~l rods and* all unrodded core planes in a Radial Peaking Factor Limit Report per specification 6.9.1.10..

Insert to Page B 3/4 2-S (B)

. The radial peaking factor Fxy(z) is measured periodically 'to provide

assurance that the* hot channal factor, Fg(z), remains within its li~t.
  • The F.xy limit for Rated Thennal Power- (~iP), as provided in the Radial Peaking Factor Limit Report per specifid~ion 6.9.1.-10, was determined from expected power control maneuvers over.. the full range of bumup conditions in the core.

Insert to Page 6-17 RADIAL PEAKING FACTOR LIMIT REPORT

. (C)

. *6.9.1.10" The Fxy limits for Rated Thermal Pewer c~V> for all core plan~s containing bank *o* control rods and all unrodded core planes and the plot of predicted (FQT *PRel) *vs. Axial Core Height with the limit erwelope_ shall

g.

be provided to the-NRC Regional Administrator with*. a copy to Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Attention: Chief, Core Perfonnance Branch, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Washington, D. C. 20555 af least 60*days prior to each cycle initial criticality unless othenrise approved by* the. Conmission

  • by letter.

In addition, in the event that the limit. should change requiring a.: new-submittal or an amended submittal to the Peaking Factor Limit Report, it will be submitted 60 days prior to the date the limit would become effective unless otherwise approved by the Conlnission by letter.

-. Any infonnation needed to support ~j" will be by request from the NRC and need

-not be included fn this report.

( 8302180439 830131 I PDR'ADOCK 05000311 I

p

  • PDR

'\\

I I

1 ---------:---.------*-*------

~----

~----:--*---***--*-------:-**:---

POWER DISTRIBUTION LIMITS

  • SURVEILLANCE REQUIREHENTS (Continued)
  • _b).

At least once per 31 EFPO, whichever occurs _first.:

2.

When the F~ is less than or equal.to the F~*limit for _the*

appropriate measured core plane, additional power distribution maps shal 1 be ta.ken and F ~ compared to F~ *and F ~ at 1 east once per 31 EFPO *

~e F xy limits for RATED_ 11iERMAL POWER within specific core planes.

sha11 be:

  • Replace with 1.*

F~ less than or equal to 1.71.for all core planes contai.ning bank 11011 contra 1 rods, and (A)

2.

F~ less than or equal to* 1.55 for all unrodded core planes.

f.
  • The F xy* limits. of e.,. above, are not applicable in the following core* plane regions as measured jn percent of core ~eight from the bottom of the* fuel:.
g.
l.

Lower core region from. ~ to 15%, i nc:l usive.

  • z.

Upper core region from S~ to 100%,* inclusive.

3.

Grid plane regions at 17~8.S: 2%,. 32.1% +/-. 2%, 46.-=: ~.

60.SS: ~ and 74.9': +/- Z', inc1usive. *

4.

Core plane regions within +/- 2% of core* height (+/- 2.88 inches) about the bank demand position of the bank *o* aintrol rods.

Evaluating the effects of.. F xy on Fq(Z) t;o determine. if FqCZ) is within its limit whenever F ~ exceeds F ~-

  • 4.2.2~3* When_FQ(Z) is measured pursuant to specif~~ation 4.10.Z.Z, an* overall
  • measured Fq(Z) shall be o~tained from a power distribution map and_ increased by 3::: ta account for manuf ac:turi ng tQ 1 eranc:es and further increased by 5% to account for measurement unce~inty.

SALEM - UNIT 2 3/4 2-7

BASES

  • event.
  • The penalties ap_pl'_ied _to F!H to account far Red Bow- (Figure 3.Z-4) as
  • a function of burnup are consistent with these described in Mr. John F. SU>lz's *

(NRC) letter ta T. M. Andersen (Westinghouse) dated-. April s*, 1979 and* W 8691 Rev. 1 (partial rod bow test data).

When an*FQ measure,ment is taken, an:aliowance for both experimental error and manufacturing.tolerance must be made.

An-a.11owance of S: is appropriate

.for a full *care* map taken with the inccre detector flux mapping system and a 3" allowance is appropriate far manufacturing tolerance.

When RCS flow rate

~d ~ are measured~. no additional allowances are-necessary prior to ~cmparison

  • with the limits of *Figure 3.2-3. Measurement errors cf 3.5% for RCS total flow rate and 4% for ~

.have* been a11_owed far in deter:minatic~ of the design.

DNBR v~lue...

The *12 hour periodic: survei11ance of indicated.RCS fiow is sufficient to I

rt detect only flow degl"adation which could lead ta operation outside the nse acceptable region of operation shewn in Figure 3.2-3.

(B) * " 3/4. Z. 4 *QUADRANT POWER TILT "RATIO

. The quadrant power tilt ratio limit assures that the rad.ial power distri-

  • bution satisfies the design va1ues used in the pq.ier *capability analysis.

Radial power distribut~on measurements are made during startup.testing and periodical-ly d~ring power operation..

.The limit of 1.02 at which corrective action* is required provides OHS and linear heat generation rate protection with x-y plane power tilts.* A limiting

  • tilt of 1.025 can be to1erated before the margin *for uncertainty in F is dep 1 eted.

The J imi t of 1. OZ was se 1 ected to provide an a 11 owance forQthe uncertainty associated with the indicated power* tilt.

The 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> time allowance for operation with *a tilt eendition greater than 1.02 but less than 1.09 is provided ta allow identification and correction of a dropped or misaligned red.

In the event such action does not correct the*

til~, _the _margin for uncertainty on F0 is reinstated by reducing.the p~er by*

32: from RA TED lHERMAL POWER for. each percent of tilt in excess of 1. O.

3/4.2.S ONB PARAMETERS The limits on the OHS related paramete~assure that eaC:h of t!te parameters are maintained within the normal steady state envelope of operation assumed in

The limits are consistent with the...

initial FSAR assumptions and have been analytica11y demonstrated adequate U>

maintain a minimum DHBR of 1.30 thro~ghout each analyzed transient.

The 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> periodic surveillance of these parameters.through instrument rea~out is sufficient to ensure th~t the parameters are restored within their limits fellowing load changes and other expected transient operation.

SALEM - UNIT 2.

B 3/4* Z-5

.. i

-~

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS

h.

Errors discovered* in the transient or accident analyses or in the

  • methods used for such analyses as described in the safety analysis report or in the bases*for the technical specifications that have or*

could have permitted reactor. operation in a manner less conservative than assumed in ~e.analyses.

i ~

Performance of structures, systems1 or *ccmpo*nents *that requires remedial acticn*or corrective measures ta prevent operation in a manner less conservative than assumed in tha accident analyses in the safety analysis report or technical specifications baseSi ar discovery during unit life of conditions not specifically considered in the safety analysis report or technical specifications that require remed1a1 ac:tion or corrective measures to prevent the exist-enc~ or development of an unsafe 0>ndition.

THIRTY DAY WRITTEN REPORTS 6.9. 1.9 The types af events listed below shall be the subject af Written reports ta the Director of the Regional Office within thirty days of occur-

  • rence of t,tie event.

The written report shall include, as a minimum, a :

. comp 1 eted copy of a 1i censee event report fonL Information prcvi ded on the

  • licensee event report form sha11 be supplemented, ts needed, by additional narrative material* to provide: complete explanation of the circ:umstanc:es surrounding the event. *

~.

L Reactor protec:ti on system or engineered safety* fea~re instrument

  • settings which are found ta be less conservative than those es~*

lished by the technical specifications but which do not prevent.the.

fulfill_ment of the functional requirements of affected 5ystems.

b.

c:.

Condi'ticns leading ta/. operation in a degraded mode permitted by a.*

limiting c:cndition for operation or plant shutdown required by a limiting condition fer operatjon.

Observed inadequacies in the implementation of administra~1ve ar*

procedural c:cntrols which threaten to cause reduction of deqree of redundancy provided in reactor protection systems ar engineered safety future systems.

d.
  • Abnormal degradation of systss other than those specified in Insert*

6.9.1.8.c above designed ta.eonta.in radioactive material resulting 6.9:1.10 fl"'Oll the fission process.

( C)

  • SPECIAL REPORTS.

'i.

6.9.% Special reports shall be submitted to the Director of the Off1ca of

. Inspection and Enforcement Regional Office within the time period specified for each report.

SALEM -*UNIT 2

. 6-17....... _.. *--**"*--*...... _.. _____,._... -*. -*-.... -..

I I

  • 1 I

I r

*---*------~ -***-----*-*

. ---*---*---~.

~----*--::-----*----~---*----*-*-*---*-*------* _____.,.. :_

(Fully Withdrawn)

' c:

0 -

+.1 VI 0

ii.

~

c:

ro cc

'.'C 0

c:::

200 150 y

( 0, ;t.30)

=-

100 50

-/-

~0,2) a 0

0.2 (Fully Inserted)

./

~

(. 5 5, 22 8)

..'01..

'(1.0,182) 1 __

=B<in"

  • --. --+---*-i----+-*-t--~r-t 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Fraction of Rated Thennal Power Figure 3.1-i.

ROD BANK INSERTION LIMITS VERSUS THERMAL POWER FOUR LOOP OPERATkON SALEM -

UNIT 2

. 3/4 1-21

SALEM UNIT 2, CYCLE 2 RADIAL PEAKING FACTOR LIMIT REPORT

.. i.

SALEM UNIT 2, CYCLE 2 RADIAL PEAKING FACTOR LIMIT REPORT ljlis Radial Peaking Factor Limit Report is provided in accordance with Parasraph 6.9.1.10 of the SaleJ11 Unit 2 Nuclear Plant Technical Specifications *

~:,fxy i!~its for RATED THERMAL POWER within.specific core planes for Cycle.2 le For all core planes containing bank ~D" control rods;

..'~~ ~ 1.86 for core elevations.up to 6.0 *ft.,

. ~;P ~ l.72.for_ core elevations fonn 6.0 to 12.0 ft., and 2.** For all unrodded planes;

~.~TP. < 1.64 for core elevations up to 6.0 ft~, and

- xy *-

  • ~TP ~ 1.60 for core elevations from 6.0 to 12.. 0 ft.

xy These Fxy(z) limits were*used to confirm_ that the heat flux hot channel factor FQ(z) w~*11 be 1 imited to the Technical Specification. values Of:

\\

FQ(z).! [2p32].

[K(z)]

FQ(z),! [4.64]

[K(z)J for P > 0.5 and, for P.! 0;.5 assuming the most limiting axial power distributions expected to result from the insertion and removal of control banks C and D during operation, including the accompanying variations in the axial xenon and power distri-butions as described in the aPower Distribution Control and Load Following Procedures*, WCAP-8385, September, 1974. Therefore, these Fxy limits pr.ovide assurance that the initial conditions assumed in the LOCA analysis are met, along with the ECCS acceptance criteria of 10CFRS0.46~

See Fig~re 1 for a plot of [FQT.pRel] vs. Axial Core Height.

  • *_.r

\\ -.-:

I

  • . iL:

E

~

E X*

~

i::

Figure 1

~AX1MUM [FQT.pRELJ VERSUS AXiAL CORE HEIGHT DURING NORMAL CORE OPERATION 2.60 2.20

)

~ -

1.40 1.00 0

(Bottom)

A

~..,

x

~

.. x I -I"'--.....

~,., " ) '( "

~ ~...

I Xv 't ~.,.

~., (:

~1... '\\,.

J. '1 I

't '

I I

c...--"

4.

8 Core Height (ft.)

i

'(

x 12 (Top)

~

.. i

l'",,

SALEM UNIT 2, CYCLE 2 CORE LOADING PATTERN

---*-----------*---~ -

"" - *~....

goo

  • i

' i" R

4 4

4 4

4 4

4 SS p

4 4*

4 1

2 3

2 1

4 I

I 4

4 I

. Ref. LCR 83-02 e

FIGURE 1 e

CORE LOADING PATTERN SALEM UNIT 2, CYCLE 2 N

M L

K

  • J I I I 4

4 4

4 4

4 1

2 4

.2 2

2

.3 20*

2 2

4 3

3..

16 2

4 3

3 3

16 12*

2 3

3..

3 2

i 3

3 3

2 I

I 4 12 2

3 4

3 3

16*

16 3

3 3

2 4

12 2

3 3

3 2

I SS 2

4 3

3 3

16 12*

2 2

4 3

3 16 4

2 2

2 3

2Qk 4

4 4

1 2

I 4

4 4

Region Number Number of ~u~nable Poison Rods Secondary Source Rods Depleted Burnable Poison Rods H

G 1~0

. I 4

4 3

2

~

3 SS 16**

3 3

4 3

16 3

2

  • 3 4

12 1

3 3

4 12 3

2.

4 3

16 3

3 2

3 SS 16*

3 2

4 4

F E

I. I

_4 4*

1 4

2 2

3 4

16

  • 3 3

12*

3 3

2*

3 3

4 16 2

3 3

3

3.

3 12*

3 4

16 2

2 1

4 4

4 Region 1

2 3

4 D

4 2

2 4

16 3

SS 3

3 3

3 4

16 2

2 4

c B

I 4

I 4

20*

4 2

4 2

4 2

1 3

2 2

3 16*

3 2

2 1

2 4

2 4

4 4

20*

4 W/O U235 2.10 2.62 3.12 3.40 A

I I

i I !

I.

I I

4 I

4 4

  • 4 4

4 4

1 2

3 4

...____ 5 I ~

6 7

270° -

8 9

~*

L__1 a I 1 l 2

~ 3 1 4

., 5

=

g.

~----------*--------*--------------------------- *--

-,.,,.,,-*----*-------------------~----------..:... ____ _,

I

..

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18087A670&oldid=5009996"