ML20072R421

Submits Response to Request for Addl Info Re License Amend Application .Rev to TS 3.3,Page 2 of 5 Attached

ML20072R421
Person / Time
Site:	University of Missouri-Columbia
Issue date:	09/02/1994
From:	Meyer W MISSOURI, UNIV. OF, COLUMBIA, MO
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20072R423	List: ML20072R421 ML20072R429
References
NUDOCS 9409130184
Download: ML20072R421 (2)

Text

. o ,.

Research Reactor Facility I* I Telepho e Research Park Columbia. Missouri 65211 4 4 l

l UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA September 2,1994  !

l I

Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l ATTN: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Station P1-37 Washington, DC 20555

REFERENCE:

Docket 50-186 University of Missouri Research Reactor License R-103

SUBJECT:

Response to Request for Additional Information dated August 2,1994 The University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR) provides the following response to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission letter of August 2,1994, requesting additional information required to evaluate our license amendment application dated March 28,1994.

The table in TS 3.3.a. forpool coolant flow shows two instrument channels n> quired for Mode I operation and one instrument channel requiredfor Mode IIoperation. This arrangement appears to be in response to the use of two heat exchangers rated at 50 percent each offullpower. IIowever, this does not appearlogicalfor one heat exchanger.

Pleasejustify the use of a different number ofinstrument channels for Modes I and IIfor the new heat exchanger, or make the number ofinstrument channels required for the two modes identical. Providejustification ifyou choose to have one instrument channelfor both modes.

As the request above suggests, the number of pool coolant flow instrument channels required for Mode I and Mode II in the current Technical Specifications in the table in Technical Specification 3.3.a. do reflect the physical configuration of the heat exchangers and flow detectors for each mode of operation. The University of Missouri prefers to maintain the two flow instruments required for 10 MW operation for added conservatism and do not object to requiring two flow instruments for Mode II (5 MW) operation after the new 100% capacity heat exchanger is installed with its flow orifice flanged to support at least two flow transmitters.

The University of Missouri will change its amendment application request to revise the table in TS 3.3.a. for pool coolant flow to indicate two instrument channels required for both Mode I (10 MW) and Mode II (5 MW) operation after the 100%

capacity heat exchanger is installed.

&k y E E COLUMBIA KANSAS CITY ROLLA ST. LOUIS

$  % A w e wwsu ur gno 9409130184 940902 PDR ADOCK O$000186 \l P PDR

^

. o

• Ixtter to Di' rector of Nuclear Reactor Regulation September 2,1994 Page two Attached is a revision to Technical Specification 3.3, page 2 of 5, that replaces the one submitted with our March 28,1994, amendment request. j If you have any questions concerning our response, please contact me at (314) 882-5203 or Charlie McKibben at (314) 882-5204.

Sincerely, s

Walt A. Meyer Jr.

Reactor Manager

, vtOb h 184C$ Q 4t{

[ cmtsru n.EmAmt '

b J. Charles McKibben Associate Director "YdN#$f" m corresim to. wa. u,im bjb