ML18227C719

Letter Transmitting Proposed Amendment to Facility Operating Licenses, Concerning Definition of Parameter P in Tech Spec to Determine Limiting Values of Hot Channel Factors

ML18227C719
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	07/29/1975
From:	Robert E. Uhrig Florida Power & Light Co
To:	Anthony Giambusso Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-75-380
Download: ML18227C719 (46)

Text

0 NRC DISTRIBUTION FOR PART 50 DOCKET MATERIAL (TEMPO RA RY FORM)

CONTROL NO:

8244 FILE'ROM.

Florida Power

& Light Co Miami, Fla.

33101 R.E II-29-75 8-4-75 XX DATE OF DOC DATE REC'D LTR TWX RPT OTHER TO:

Mr. A. Giambusso ORIG 3 signed CC OTHER 40 SENT NRC PDR SENT LOCALPDR CLASS UNCLASS PROPINFO INPUT PLANT NAME: Turkey Pt. Units 3 & 4 XXX DESCRIPTION:

Ltr notarized 7-30-75 requestin for amdt to App. A of OL/DPR-31 & DPR-41 'concern the definition of the parameter "P" used in the Thch Specs to determine the limiting values of t

,hot channel factors

& trans the following:

NO CYS REC'D 43 DOCKET NO:

" 50 51 (40 cys, encl "sec'd)

Ijjj30Pgjfjjgjt9 ENCLOSURES:

Revised Tech Spec. Change Pages ng 3.2-3

& B3.2-4 FOR ACTION/INFORMATION DHL 8-4-75 BUTLER (L)

W/ Copies CLARK (L)

W/ Copies PARR (L)

W/ Copies KNI EL (L)

W/ Copies SCHWENCER (L)

W/ Copies STOLZ (L)

W/ Copies VASSALLO (L)

W/ Copies PURPLE (L)

W/ Copies ZIEMANN(L)

W/ Copies DICKER (E)

W/ Copies KNIGHTON (E)

W/ Copies YOUNGBLOOD (E)

W/ Copies REGAN (E)

W/ Copies WEAL (L)

W~opies SPIES W/ Copies LPM W/

opjes INTERNALDISTRIBUTION Ltr-251)

~DR (Ltr-251)

GC, ROOM P-506A OSSI CK/STAF F CASE GIAMBUSSO BOYD MOORE (L)

DEYOUNG (L)

SKOVHOLT (L)

GOLLER (L) (Ltr)

P. COLLINS DENISE EG OPR ILE 5 REGION (2)

MIPC TECH REVIEW SCHROEDE R MACCARY KNIGHT PAWLICKI SHAO STELLO HOUSTON NOVAK ROSS IPPOLITO TEDESCO S,COLLINS LAI NAS BENAROYA VOLLMER DENTON G R IMES GAMMILL KASTNER BALLARD SPANGLER ENVIRO MULLER DICKER KNIGHTON YOUNGBLOOD REGAN JECT LDR Pkv HAR LESS LIC ASST R. DIGGS (L)

GEARIN {L)

E. GOULBOURNE (L)

P. KREUTZER (E)

J. LEE (L)

M.RU3HBROOK(L)

S. REED(E)

SERVICE (L)

S. SHEPPARD (L)

M. SLATER (E)

H. SMITH (L)

S. TEETS (L)

G. Wl LLIAMS (E)

V.'ILSON (L) 44., INGRAM (L)

M. DUNCAN A/T IND.

BRAITMAN SALTZMAN MELTZ PLANS MCDONALD CHAPMAN esses'S II sl,w 4f. COUPE pETERSON HARTFIELD (2)

KLECKER EISENHUT WIGGINTON.

EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION LOCALpDR Miami, Fla.

Q

. TIC (ABERNATHY)

(1)(2) {10) NATIONALLABS C/I' NSIC (BUCHANAN) 1 W. PENNINGTON, Rrn E-201 GT 1 ASLB

,1 CON SU LTANTS

~1 Newton Anderson NEWMAR K/BLUME/AGBA8 IAN (g ACRS Ale~~/SENT 1 PD R-SAN/LA/NY 1 BROOKHAVEN NAT LAB 1 G. ULRIKSON ORNL

'k

'I

~

~

~

~

~

~

t III

CP ll USy@EO

>Ops.

-.tg Q(

/Jjyg,

~/gM szg~~<4'ring, 5

EgQq P ~'

/

P. O. BOX 0'l3I00, MIAMI,FLORIDA 33'IOI

~yyll(/gg

~

=:Se FLORIDA POWER 5 LIGHT COMPANY July 29, 1975 L-75-380 Reguiatory Docket fife Nr. Angelo Giambusso, Director Division of Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Reg'ulation U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.

-C.

20555 Dear Nx.

Gi'ambusso:

Uo 5 NJC[IA'a )It l 'gP yoqY Cot~/'<]ec(..~)

hlcJI egg,'Ioq Re:

Turkey Point-Unit Nos.

3 and 4

Docket Nos.

-250 nd 50-251 Proposed Amen ment to Facility

'e'xa't'in L'i'c'e'ns'e's'PR-'31a'n'd'PR-'41 In accordance wi.'th 10 GFR 50.30, Florida Power 6 Light Company submits herewith three '(3) signed originals and forty (40) con-formed copies of a req'uest to amend Appendix A of the Facility Operating Licenses DPR-31 and DPR-41.

An ECCS analysis wa's submitted by" Florida Powe'r

& Light Company to the Regulatory Staff on March 10, 1975.

It -considered a

loss-og-coolant accident under'orst break conditions while operating the 'plant at thed'e'si n ower of 2300 MNt with a peaking factor of 2.32.

However, as.

escribed by Unusual Event Report No. 251-75-1 of July 7,

1975, the analysis used fuel pellet data which 'was not applicable to Turkey Point Unit No.

4 and res'ulted in an incorrect calculated value for peak clad temperature.

As 'a xesult, a revised analysis has been performed to determine the 'peak clad tempexature for Unit No. 4, Cycle 2, under woxst break 'conditions whi.'le operating the 'plant at the rated ower of 2200 K<t wi;th "a peaking factor of 2.32.

An appen 3.x to thi;s letter contains the results of this analysis.

Fox the thxee".'break sizes

analyzed, the highest clad temperature was 2158 F,,well below the 2200 F FAC limit.

Also, further analysis has shown that after a Cycle 2 exposure of 5000

EFPH, there will be a sufficient reduction of fuel stored energy such that the 'original ECCS analysis will again be applicable to Unit No. 4.

To reflect 'the results of these

analyses, we propose to change the'efinition of the parameter "P", used in the Technical Specifications to detexmine the limiting values of the hot channel factors, from fraction of des'ign power to fraction of rated power, A revision of the 'corresponding Basis is also proposed.

HELPING BUILD FLORIDA

I II I

P II

~.

k I

II I

It I h

h ~

II I

h e

4 Ih k

a g

'N t

P ih I

P P

h I

'Mr. Angelo Giambusso 22 JU15T 29,. 1975 The proposed changesare

"'set forth 'in the attached revised Technical Specification pages bearing the'ate of this letter in the lower'ight-hand corner'nd as describe'd below.

~3; 2.-3 In subsection 6.a, cha'nge the word "des'ign" to "rated".

~3'. 2'-3 Add the follows'ng sentence 'to the 3end of the first paragraph:

"An exception is 'the period from 0 'to 5000 EFPH of the second cycle for Unit No. 4, when, due to'uel pellet characteristics distinct for this cycle, a peak 'clad temperature "of 2158 F is calculated at rated power'."

This proposed change 'to the 'Technical Specifications repres'ents an increase in conservatism; ther'efore, we believe that it requires no significant hazards consideration nor does it,require 'prenoticing pursuant to 10 CFR 50,91.

Very. truly yours, Robert E,. Uhrig

'Vice President REU:MAS:nch

't tachmen3't cc:

Mx, Norman C.

Moseley'ack R, Newman, Esquire

0 t

7 P

P

",a v

t I'

s P 4

l t

l I

0 l

I

STATE OF FLORIDA

)

)

ss COUNTY OF DADE

)

ROBERT E.

UHRIG, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he is a Vice President of Florida Power S Light Company, the Licensee herein; That he has executed the foregoing instrument, that the statements made in this said instrument are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief; and that he is authorized to execute the instrument of said Licensee.

Robert E. Uhrzg Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of l975 Notary Public xn and for the State of Fl rida at Large tIOTARY PO POBUC, STA'fE of FLORIDAat LARG APRIL 2, 1978 MY COMMISSIOIf EXPIRES Ea mum bueaAna Jlohoittat hsRC5 A

My Commxsszon Q

Ci

~V.qei+

c W.,'

'~

'- vsse f(

I la

%)'\\>>

H 4

"~ ~

t

gegulatory Docket file reactivity insertion upon ejection greater than 0.3%

A k/k at rated power.

Inoperable rod worth shall be determined within 4 weeks.

b.

A control rod shall be considered inoperable if (a) the rod cannot be moved by the CRDM, or (b) the rod is misaligned from its bank by more than 15 inches, or (c) the rod drop time is not met.

(~ HyoJgt/th'.>~to~~

c. If a control rod cannot be moved by the drive mechanism, shutdown margin shall be increased by boron addition to compensate for the withdrawn worth of" the inoperable rod.

5.

CONTROL ROD POSITION INDICATION

'f either the power range channel deviation alarm or j

the rod deviation monitor alarm are not operable rod I

I positions shall be logged once per shift and after a load change greater than 10% of rated power.

If both alarms are inoperable for two hours or more, the nuclear overpower trip shall be reset to 93%.,of rated power.

6.

POWER DISTRIBUTION LIMITS a.

At all times except during low power physics tests, the hot channel factors defined in the basis must meet the following limits:

F (Z) < (2.32/P) x K(Z) for P >.5 F (Z) < (4.64) x K(Z) for P <.5 FdH 1.55

[1 + 0.2 (1-P)l where P is the'raction of rated power at which the core is operating.

K(Z) is the function given in Figure 3.2-3 and Z is the core height location of Fq.

b.

Following initial loading before the reactor is operated above 75% of rated power and at regular effective full rated power monthly intervals thereafter, power distribution maps, using the movable detector system shall be made, to conform that the hot channel factor limits of the specifica-tion are satisfied.

For the purpose of this comparison, 302-3 7/29/75

I

An,upper bound envelope of 2.32 times the normalized peaking factor axial dependence of Figure 3.2-3 has been determined (from extensive analyses at design power considering all operating maneuvers) to be consistent with the technical specifications on power distribution control as given in Section 3.2.

The results of the loss of coolant accident analyses based on this upper bound envelope indicate a peak clad temperature of 2150'F at design power, corresponding to a 50'F margin to the 2200'F FAG limit.

An exception is the period from 0 to 5000 EFPH of the second cycle for Unit 4,

when due to fuel pellet characteristics distinct for this cycle, a peak clad temperature of 2158 F is calculated at rated power.

When an F measurement is taken, both experimental error and manufacturing q

tolerance must be allowed for.

Five percent is the appropriate experimental uncertainty allowance for a full core map taken with the movable incore detector flux mapping system and three percent is the appropriate allowance for manufacturing tolerance.

In the specified limit of F>

, there is an 8 percent allowance for uncertain-N ties which means that normal operation of the core is expected to result in F> <1.55/1.08.

The logic behind the larger uncertainty in this case is that (a) normal perturbations in the radial power shape (e.g., rod misalign-ment) affect F<

, in most cases without necessarily affecting F

, (b) the M

q'perator has a direct influence'on F

through movement of rods, and can limit q

it to the desired value, he has no direct control over and (c) an error in the predictions for radial power shape, which may be detected during startup physics tests can be compensated for in F by tighter axial control, q

but compensation for F< is less readily available.

When a measurement of F<

is taken, experimental error must be allowed for and 4% is the appro-priate allowance for a f'ull core map taken'with the movable incore detector flux mapping system.

Measurements of the hot channel factors are required as part of start-. up physics tests, at least once each full rated power month of operation, and whenever abnormal power distribution conditions require a reduction of core power to a level based on measured hot channel factors.

The incore map taken following initial loading provides confirmation of the basic nuclear B3.2-4 7/29/75

1 t

APPENDIX TURKEY POINT UNIT NO. 4, CYCLE 2 REVISED ECCS'NALYSIS An FAC ECCS analysis has been performed for a core power level of 2200 MWt using precise fuel data for Turkey Point Unit 4, Cycle 2, Region 3, under BOC conditions.

The general methods and proce-dures used for the analysis were those given in the Turkey Point FSAR, Section 14.3.2.

The hot rod thermal transients were re-analyzed for the three large break sizes using the March 15,

1975, version of LOCTA-IV computer code.

The results of the re-analysis are given in Table 1 and Figures 1 to 15.

The highest clad temperature of 2158 F occurs with a double-ended cold leg guillotine (DECLG) break and a discharge coefficient, CD, of 0.4.

These results show that Unit 4 is in compliance with Appendix K

ECCS criteria for full licensed power operation (rated power).

As fuel burnup progresses, there is a reduction in fuel stored energy.

A series of LOCTA runs for operation at 2300 MWt (design power) and reduced fuel stored energy values has shown that after a burnup of 6500 MWD/MTU, corresponding to 5000 EFPH of operation at, the licensed

power, the peak clad temperature during a LOCA would be 2150'F, the value reported in the Turkey Point FSAR ECCS analysis for 2300 MWt operation.

0 0

TABLE j.

RESULTS OF LOCTA RUNS, LARGE BREAK ECCS ANALYSIS TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 DECL 0.6 DECL 0,4 DECL Resul ts Peak Clad Temp. 'F Peak Clad Location kt.

Local Zr/H20 Rxn(max)%

Local Zr/H20 Location Ft, Total Zr/H20 Rxn

%%u Hot Rod Burst Time sec Hot Rod Burst Location.Ft.

1734.

6.5 1.8 I.,

6.25 c0. 3 57,2 6.25 1853.

6.75 2.2 5.75 c0,3

'6.4 5.75 2158.

6.0 9.0 5.75

~0.3 26.5

'.75 Cal cul ation I

NSSS Power flwt 102% of

Peak Linear Power kw/ft 102%,of

'Peaking Factor (At License Rating of 2200 MMt)

I

- Accumulator Mater Yolume I

2200

13. 20 2.32 825 i Fuel region + cycle analyzed I

Unit 4 FLA Cycle 2

Region 3

(Limiting Region) 4

0.0 Time (Sec)

Figure 1

Fluid Quality (DECLG (C =1. 0) d

'C

-150. QO O

Time (Sec)

Figure 2

Mass Uelocity DECLG (C<=1. 0)

I I

W80O

6. 26' 8

Time

{Sec)

Figure 3

Heat Transfer Coefficient DECLG (C =l.0)

g

'aco.e I

0 0

C48

'd O

6.25

6. 50 C7 Time (Sec)

Figure 4

peak Clad Temperature DECLG (Cd

\\

Time (Sec)

Figure 5

Fluid Temperature DECLG (C =1.0) d

e-

t.0000 CI 8

8 Time (Sec)

Figure 6

Fluid Quality DECLG (Cd=0.6)

I i

50 OOO r

O.O 00

-100. 00

-150. OO Cl CP O

Vl Time (Sec)

Figure 7

Mass Velocity DECLG (C =0.6) d

l

N 300. 00 g8 0

4l

'4I Ql0O

50. 000

10. 000 30.000 i

I S. 75 S.

75'.

0000

3. 0000 t 0000 Time (Sec)

Figure 8

Heat Transfer Coefficient DECLG (C<=0.6)

C 5

0

~ moo cf0 0

C48

'd IU

~0 I

\\

1I 1000,00 t

I

5. 75 6, 75'

~5 Time (Sec)

Figure 9

Peak Clad Temperature DECLG (C =0. 6) d

t

llCSll5 Time (Sec)

Figure 10 Fluid Temperature DECLG (Cd=0.6)

0

'I

I qy I

~ 75000 50000 O.D CI Cln Time (Sec)

Figure ll Fluid Quality DECLG (Cd=0. 4)

I I

4

eu' 0.0

%0. ON 0

8

-tm aa

-150, 00 CI CI 8

8 Time (Sec)

Figure 12 Mass Velocity DECLG (C =0.4) d

0

I

0O

5. 75 6.0 Time (Sec)

Figure 13 Heat Transfer Coefficient - DECLG (C<=0.4)

4

S48 0

0 8

V

5. 75 6.0 Time (Sec)

Figure 14 Peak Clad Temperature DECLG (C =0.4) d

2500.0 Time (Sec)

Figure 15 Fluid Temperature DECLG (C =0.4) d