ML20154J576

Application for Amend to License NPF-18,changing Tech Specs to Support Second Reload.Cycle 3 Startup Scheduled for Jan 1989.Proprietary NEDC-3151OP Being Submitted Under Separate Cover.Fee Paid

ML20154J576
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	09/14/1988
From:	Allen C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20154J579	List: ML20154J576 ML20154J588 ML20154J602
References
5102K, NUDOCS 8809230073
Download: ML20154J576 (15)

Text

-

V~'N Connaoncealth Edison

, / / Ona Fir;t N 'ional P!aza. CNcago, lilinc's l

\ ' 7 ' ~] Address Fieply to: PoMcJ Box 76,7 , .

'Q' Chicago, lihnois 60690 0767 September 14, 1988 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation AT'IN : Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Subject LaSalle County Station Unit 2 Proposed Amendment to Technical Specification for Facility Operating License HPF Reload Licensing Package for Cycle 3 tiRC Docket No. 50-374 References (a): Unit 1, Cycle 3 Reload Licensing Submittal and Technical Specifications Changes, dated January 17, 1988. Approved June 23, 1988 as Amendment 58 to NPF-ll.

(bis GE Document NEDE-31455, "Extended Operating Domain and Equipment Out-of-Service for LaSalle County Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2", dated November 1987.

I (c): GE Document NEDC-31510P, "LaSalle County Station l Units 1 and 2 SAFER /GESTR-LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analyses", dated December, 1987 Proprietary.

Dear Sire Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59, Commonwealth Edison proposes to amend Appendix A, Technical Specification, to Facility Operating License NPF-18.

These changes are being submitted for your staff's review and approval and are in support of the second reload for LaSalle Unit 2. Startup for Cycle 3 is i currently scheduled for January 1989. I Attachment A provides background and discussion. The proposed changes are summarized in Attachment B. Attachment C provides a list of affected Technical Specification changes. Marked up copies of affected pages are enclosed as Attachment D. The attached change has received both On-Site and Off-Site review and approval. We have reviewed this amendment request and find that no significant hazards consideration exists. Our review is documented in Attachment E. i QO e009ea007a 000y14 DR ADOCK 05000374 h

mu s /*hh goo *700

1 US NRC Sept >mber 14, 1988

)

1 Enclosure 1 lists all attachments to this letter. Note that Attachment G is GE proprietary. This proprietary attachment is submitted under separate cover with the request that it be treated as proprietary and withheld from public disclosure in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790, under the GE af fida'ait of proprietary information.

Commonwealth Edison is notifying the State of Illinois of our request for this amendment by transmitting a copy of this letter and its non-proprietary attachments to the designated State Official.

In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 170, a fee remittance in the amount of $150.00 is enclosed.

Please direct any questions you may have regarding this matter to this office. j Very truly yours, e dLC. M. Allen Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m Enclosure 1: List of Attachments 2: Check for $150.00 Attachment cc Region III Inspector - LSCS P. Shemanski - NRR, Project Manager H.C. Parker - IDNS SUBSCRIBED AND j ..N to b9fo a me this/f_ m day of _ c / r./)L LLl_(. , 1988 h kh_L)YliO Notary Pubile 5102K

~_ ._

sd

')

{

, t

.-* Et[CLQSURE 1 OF ATTACJ9(ENT A LIST OF ATTACHMENTS i

A. Background and Discussion B. Summary of Proposed Technical Specification Changes L

C. List of Affected Technical Specification Pages 1

l D. Proposed Technical Specification Changes ,

d i

4 E. Significant Hazards Evaluation F. GE Document 23A5841, "Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittal for [

LaSalle County Station Unit 2 Reload (Cycle 3)", dated July 1988. l l

G. GE Document NEDE-31510P, "LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 SAFER /

GESTR-LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analyses," dated December 1987, l Proprietary. l

i H. GE Standard Licensing Stability Analysis Results  !

\

n l

t  !

i i

d 5102K 1 4

I t

- - - - -- . - .--- - - - , , - , e--- ,-, - , . - .-, .,. ,~ - - - - - - - , -- ------r

J; l e .

A27ACIMENT A BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSIOti A. BACKGROUND LaSalle County Station Unit 2 Cycle 3 will utilize 96 BC320C and 144 BC3OOD new fuel assemblies. The new fuel assemblies are of the GE 8x8EB fuel type, which is further discussed in Section B. Additional information on the Cycle 3 reload may be found in the "Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittal for LaSalle County Station Unit 2, Reload 2 (Cycle 3), "Document 23A5841, which it included as Attachment F. Key input parameters and assumptions for the transient and accident analyses were reviewed by NFS Safety Analysis, NFS Plant Support, and station personnel prior to initiation of the analyses.

The reload analyses were performed by GE using their new advanced reload licensing methods. These new methods are known as the Gemini methods and are discussed in Section B.2. The Gemini methods replace the Genesis methods. The reload was also analyzed with GE's SAFER /GESTR-LOCA methods rather than the SAFE /REFLOOR-LOCA methods.

Also, included as part of this reload are analyses for the Equipment Out-of-Service (EOOS) and Extended Operating Domain (EOD) operating modes. EOOS analyses include feedwater heater (s) out-of-service (FWHOOS),

safety / relief valve out-of-service (RVOOS), main turbine bypass system out-of-service (TBOOS) and recirculation pump trip system out-of-service (RPTOOS). EOD analyses included Extended Load Line Limit Analysis (ELLLA), Increased Core Flow (ICF) and Final Feedwater Temperature Reduction (FFWTR). The results of these analyses are provided in this I

report and in Attachment 4. Table i summarises the analyzed combined modes of operation.

The analyses and methods used for LaSalle 2 Cycle 3 were previously approved by the NRC for LIC3 (r eference 1).

The following sections provide a discussion on the key featureJ of  !

this reload.

B. Q15 tuss 10t{

1. GE_Bxjg B_Eut1 The reload fuel for Cycle 3 is of the same design as reviewed and approved for LaSalle Unit 1, Cycle 3. However, the NRC has not J reviewed the specific bundle types to be used for LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 3. GE has submitted to the NRC an snendment to GESTAP which

e s 10 will remove the specific bundle types from GESTAR and place them into a separate GE report which will be referenced in GESTAR. This will eliminate the NRC approval of specific bundle types in GESTAR and will require the licensee to submit bundle specific information to the NRC with the MAPLHGR changes for each reload.

Since the NRC has not yet approved the GE anendment or the Cycle 3 bundle types, CECO is required to submit bundle-specific information to the NRC. This data is included as Attachment I which replaces Appendix B of the previously reviewed "SAFER /GESTR-LOCA" report and therefore includes the previously approved information on the UIC3 reload bundles as well as the new information on the U2C3 reload bundles. The bundle types have been analyzed with the approved methods and comply with the approved limits described in GESTAR.

1.a LHGR Limit The Unit 2 Cycle 3 (L2C3) reload bundles (GE 8x8EB) have been designed te allow a LHGR limit of 14.4 kw/ft to ensure thermal mechanical integrity during analyzed transient events.

The LGHR limit of 14.4 kw/ft for the GE 8x8EB fuel was previously approved by the NRC for LIC3.

1.b MAPHLGR Curves Maximum Average Planar Heat Generation Rate (MAPLHGR) limit curves were calculated for both LaSalle Units 1 and 2 using the 1 SAFER /GESTR .DCA analysis. MAPLHGR limit curves for each lattice are developed and the MAPLHGR limits for the L1C3 reload fuel are provided in a supplement to NEDC-31510P (Attachment G). These lattice specified MAPLHGR values will be used in the core monitoring code, while the most limiting curve for each fuel type will be included in T.S. Figure 3.2.1-3, with a reference to GE Document HEDC-31510P.

2. ADVRLCER_ RELOAD _ METHODS..LGEMINI VS GENESISl l

The L2C3 analysis uses the same GE Advanced Reload Methods I (designated GEMINI), as t'te LIC3 reload analysis approved in Reference 1.

3. SAEEBLGESIR-LOCA GE has raanalyzed the LaSalle units with an improved ECCS analysis code package called SAFER /GESTR-LOCA. This analysis was previously approved in the LaSalle 1 Cycle 3 licensing documents.

I l

~

r I

e ,

4. CORE WIDEL2RA1EU2iIS 4.a Relief Valve Out-of-Service (RVOOS)

All core wide transients and ECCS analyses were performed with the most restrictive relief valve, i.e., lowest pressure setpoint SRV, out-of-service. This reload package includes T.S.

change to support unrestricted operation with RVOOS, as was analyzed and approved by the UIC3 reload analysis.

4.b MCPR Safety Limit The current MCPR fuel cladding integrity safety limit of 1.07 is maintained for Cycle 3. Two new fuel types are being introduced, BC320C and BC3OOD, as described in Section B. The new fuel types have the same MCPR safety limit of 1.07.

4.c Limiting MCPR Transient The core wide transients analyzed for LaSalle 2 Cycle 3 include the Load Reject with No Bypass (LRNBP), Loss of Feedwater Heating (LOrWH), and Feedwater Controller Failure (FWCF) events. Of these, the LRNBP transient is the most limiting, with an Option B MCPR limit of 1.22. This differs from Cycle 2 in which the FWCF was the most limiting transient.

Although the LRNBP is the limiting core wide transient, the limiting MCPR transient for the cycle is the Rod Withdrawal Error (RWE) event with the exception of the region of scram times (tau) between .818 and .860 when the RBM setpoint is 106%. For this region, the LRNBP becomes limiting, based on the transient analysis results from extended EOC with increased Core Flow (page 12 of the Supplemental Reload Submittal 23A5841).

This core wide transient result is the same as for UIC3, l however, since the PHE results for UIC3 required a HCPR limit of 1.27, the core wide transient did not appehr as limiting for any portion of T.S. Figure 3.2.3-la.

4.d Compliance to ASME Pressure Vessel Code The results of the LaSalle 2 Cycle 3 analyses for the postulated MSIV closure with indirect (APRM) scrhm and no relief valve credit are provided in Attachment F. The results indicate that the peak steamline pressure will be 1232 psig and the peak vessel pressure will be 1267 psig, for the MSIV closure at l EOC+190 mwd /ST with Increased Core riow ("Additional information l regarding the Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittal" -

)

Attachment T). These values are within the T.S. Safety Limit of j 1325 pelg for steam dome pressure and the ASME vessel '

over-pressurisation limit of 1375 psig (110 percent of design pressure). Because the calculated values are less than the limits, the pressure response is acceptable.

l l

. . ~7

-4_ . .. .

This analysis was also performed with the safety functions of only 17 of the 18 safety / relief valves operable. This analysis showed only a slight change in pressure and no change  ;

in CPR over the standard reload analysis. The effect of a SRV i I

valve out-of-service was shown to be less than 20 psid. l l

S. LOCAL _TRAKEIENTS I 5.a Rod Withdrawc1 Error (RWE) 1 The RWE has been analysed on a plant / cycle specific basis. l The results of the analysis showed a CPR of 0.19 for a RBM I setpoint of 106% and 0.23 for a RBM setpoint of 110%. Adding the CPR to the Safety Limit of 1.07 yields event LCO values of 1.26 and 1.30, respectively. As discussed in Sections 4.c and 6, the RWE is the limiting event during normal operation, l because typical scram times are less than .687 seconds and well below the value at which the LRNBP becomes limiting.

]

5.b Fuel Loading Error Event No Fuel Loading Error analysis is required for LaSalle 2 i Cycle 3. Neither mislocated nor misoriented bundle events are 1 analysed for BWR-5 teloads. I l

I 1he mislocated bundle accident is only performed for initial cores. Data from past reloads indicate that the probability of mislocating a fuel bundle so that the CPR violates the safety limit is sufficiently small that plant specific analyses are unnecessary. The NRC has given interim approval for this approach (see GESTAR Section S.2.5.4.1).

This misoriented bundle accident is not analysed for C-lattice cores such as LaSalle because the misorientation causes an insignificant CPR change. This is due to uniform water gaps in C-lattice cores vs. D-lattice cores. Proper orientation during core loading is also readily verified j visually. For a more detailed discussion. see GESTAR Section

S.2.5.4.2.

J

6. LIMITIK0 E ER.M ENT The transient MCPR values for Cycle 3 were calculated using GE's 4

advanced reload methods described in Section 2 of this report. The bounding cycle specific transient for this cycle is the Rod Withdrawal Error (RWE) event. In the past, one RBH setpoint has been chosen from the table of analysed setpoints/CPRs to determine the RWE event MCPR limit for the cycle; however, it is proposed to revise the MCPR LCO to be a function of the RBM setpoint in a manner similar to what l

J s

- _ _ - , _ . , - - -___-----pm _

C' i

was used for LaSalle 1 Cycle 3. Specifically, two MCPR limits are plotted on Figure 3.2.1-la. The appropriate limit will be chosen based on the corresponding RBM setpoint. For Cycle 3, a MCPR limit of 1.26 shall be used when the RBM setpoint is 106% (and tau-average is less than .818 seconds). A MCPR limit of 1.30 shall be used when the RBM setpoint is 110%. These values are based on the results of '

the RWE analysis provided in Attachment F.

In addition, an analysis was performed to allow cperation with certain equipment out-of-service. This analydis was previously approved for LIC3 operation. In these modes of operation, MCPR '

penalties are required. The cycle independent MCPR limits with EOC-RPT and Main Turbine Bypass inoperable are provided in Figure

, 3.2.3-1b of the revised Technical Specification 3/4.2.3 in Attachment  !

E. This figure is identical to the corresponding figure approved for L2C3.

7. STABILITY ANALYSIS 1

GE SIL-380 recommendations have been included in tha plant operating procedures and/or Technical Specifications; therefore, no cycle-specific stability analyeis is required. NRC approval for deletion of a cycle-specific stability .nalysis is documented in GESTAR.

However, in light of past stability concerns, CECO requested that GE perform a cycle-specific stability analysis for L2C3. The analysis was performed using standard methodology and is included as Attachment H. The analysis results show a core-wide decay ratio of I

l 0.72 which reflect a decreased stability margin from L2C2 which had ,

been calculated to have a decay ratio of 0.60. As mentioned above, '

full implementation of the SIL 380 recommendations has been completed. The stability calculation results are ircluded for information purposes only.

8. ACCIDEHIS 8.a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA)

GE has analysed the LaSalle units for the Loss of Coolant l Accident (LOCA) with an improved ECCS analysis code package '

called SAFER /GESTR-LOCA. This re-analysis was previously submitted and approved for LIC3.

1 8.b Rod Drop Accident (RDA) 1 I The RDA event has been statistically analysed on a generic 4

basis for plants which implement the Banked Position Withdrawal Sequence (BPWS) and is no longer analyzed on a L. ant cycle i specific basis. The generic analysis provides assurance that the 280 cal / gram enthalpy deposition limit will not be violated.

The generic RDA analysis has been approved by the NRC.

{

i I

8 e

( y) t ) C7 r

. t 8.c Fuel Loading Error Event See Section 5.b.

9.

Operation at greater than rated core flow or above the rated rod line is supported by the Reference 2 analysis which is applicable to both LSCS units for all cycles. Individual transient results are presented in the cycle-specific analyses in-Attachment F. Operation in the Extended Operating Domain covered by these analyses was ,

previously approved for LIC3. {

10. RELIEF VALVE OETd2E-SERYLCE !RVOOS1 ,

P The analysis in Reference 2 considers the effects of the relief function of a safety / relief v.-1ve out-of-service on the LOCA and plant transients. The analysA. concludes that one RV005 has no effect on either the LOCA or the plant transients. The analysis ,

demon- etrates further that the over-pressurisation response is ,

acceptable with one valve's safety function inoperable. This analysis was previously approved for L1C3.

11. EEEDMATER_ HEATERS OUT-OF-SERVICE (EliQQ11 l I

The analysis in Reference 2 was performed to justify operation at or below rated rod line with a 100*F reduction in feedwater temperature. This analysis was previously approved by the NGC in L1C3.

l

12. MAIN _TURBlNFLBIEASS SYSTEM OUT-OF-SERVIDE j Operation with the Main Turbine Bypass System out-of-service was l previously approved by the NRC for L1C3. The implementation of this '

provision for L2C3 is the same as for LIC3.

l

13. RECIRC11LATI0tLPJJMP_.IRIP OUT-OE-SERylcs Operation with the Recirculation Pump Trip (RPT) system out-of-service was previously approved by the NRC for L1C3. The implemontation of this provision for L2C3 is the same as for L1C3.

14. SultiARY_.0E_Rf ALYZ ED_ MODES _DI_DEERAT LQti l

Table 1 summarises the analyzed combined modes operation for the  !

equipment out-of-service and the expanded operating domain analyses. l This summary of the posalble modes of operation was previously j approved by the NRC for L1C3. 4 l

1

1 l

l C. COtiCLU. Slot!

The LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 3 reload as described in the cycle specific 11 censing document (Attachment F), the Extended Operating Domain and Equipment Out-of-Service Analyses (Reference F and Attachment B) and supporting documents is acceptable for use in LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 3. The i T.S. changes described in Attachment D are required. These changes authorized Unit 2 for the same operating prov! t .ons as previously approved for Unit 1. Only minor differences exist in ti.e transient analysis results between Units 1 and 2. .

i l

4 1

I a

e i

a i

l 5102K i

1

~

TABLE 1 OF. ATTACHMENT A

~

ANALYZED COMBINED __ NODES OF OPERATION RECIRCULATION PCHER TLOW SYSTEM STATUS EOD EDOS

^

DLO ELLLA N/A DLO ELLLA RVOO3 4

DLO N/A TWHOOS DLO ELLLA EOC-RPTOOS DLO ELLLA TBOOS DLO ICF N/A DLO ICT RVOOS i DLO ICT + FFWTR N/A DLO rFWTR N/A SLO ELLLA N/A SLO ELLLA RVOOS 1 MOD - Extended Operating Domain EOOS - Equipment Out-of-Service DLO - Dual Loop Operation SLO - Single Loop Operation

, ELLLA - Extended Load Line Analysis j ICT - Increased Core riow i

FrWTR - Final Feedwater Temperaturc Reduction RVOOS - Safety / Relief Valve Out-of-Service i FWHOOS - Feedwater Heater Out-of-Service EOC-RPTOOS - End of Cycle Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service

, TBOOS - Turbine Bypass System Out-of-Service 1

5102K i

i i

1 l

1

o > it ATIACBGMT B

SUMMARY

OF P f /CJiED TEQQiLCAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES LASAtLE COUNTY STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 tiOIK With the exception of minor calculational differences, the l attached prcposed Technical Specification changes for L2C3 are identical to the previously approved changes for LIC3.

InchnicaLJpecificatinn_ Table 2. 2.1-1. Limiting _S.afety S 2 tem Saltingt The reactor protection system APRM flow biased scram trip setpoint )

and all,wable values, for two loop and single loop operation, are revised to '

incorporate the extended load line limit analysed region.

Safety Limit Basel Pages B2-2 and B2-3 are revised and Tables B2.1.2-1 through 62.1.2-4 are beleg deleted. Theate changes remove the input for the GEXL currelation and the GETAB statistical model. CECO considers this information overly detailed for the Technical Specification.

Itchnical Speeltication 344.1.4. Control Rod Proggjg!LCgattgli Surveillance Requirement 4.1.4.la has been revised to require the RWM l to be demonstrated operab7.e prior to reaching 20% of RATED THERMAL POWER when I reducing thermal power, rather than prior to RWH atsto.natie initiation. This change is required since the RWM does not function prict to automatic initiation.

InchaleaLSaneifieaticn_1L4 2.1 Av staga_Elanar_ Linen t_ lit at_Ga na tatio1LRat a 4

'4he LCO, which requires the APLHGR reduction of 0.85 when operating with a single recirculation loop has been deleted, since the SAFER /GESTR-LOCA analysis has shown that the reduction factor is not required. Also, MAPLHGR plots for the two reload fuel types have been added. The MAPLHGR values plotted are the most limiting MAPLHGR values of the 11:aiting lattices (excluding natural Uranium). These plots are being provided for information and will be used in the event that the core monitoring code is inoperable.

The lattice specific MAPLHGR values will be used in the core monitoring code.

/)

t InshniCALSpecification 3/4.2.2, APRM Setpoints The APRM biased simulated thermal power-upscale scram and rod block r trip setpoints have been revised to incorporate the extended load line limit  ;

operating region. Also, the definition of the variable "T" has been revised I I

for clarifichtlon.

I Inshnical_ Specification 3/4.2.3n Minimum critical Power Ratio l The MCPR LCO has been itemised to allow for easier determination of

] the MCPR operating limit. The MCPR limit indicated on Figure 3.2.3"la has j i been revised to reflect the cycle specific MCPR limit based on the RBM  !

setpoint. The Specification provides for the use of two RBM setpolats (106%

i and 110%). This will allow more efficient use of the extended operating domain region. MCPR limits have also been added (rigure 3.2.3-1b) to allow for operation with the End-of-Cycle Recirculation Pump Trip or Main Turbine Bypass systems out of service.

i Isshnical Spicification 3/4.2.4.t_ Linear Heat Gtneration Hata This section has been revised to add the new LMGR limit of 14.4 kw/ft for the GE 8x8EB reload fuel.

IeshnisaLSp.ecification 3/4. 3.4.2. End-of-Cycle RecirculatinnDp Trip SyEiga Inttrumentatlan This specification has been revised to allow indefinite operation with the EOC-RPT System out of service provided the MCPR limit is increased l within two hours to the limit specified in Specification 3/4.2.3, to ansure .

. transient protection.

k  !'

' Te::hnicaLSpec111 cation 3. 3. 6. 2. control Rod withdra'f al _Biock Instrumentation i Satpaints i i

The control rod withdrawa) clock Instrumentation setpe nts (RBM and i APRM upscale) have been revised to reflect the change in the selected setpoint f a based on the Rod W1thdrawal Error. The setpoints chosen for Cycle 3 are 106%

l and 110%. The setpoint during Cycle 2 was 107%. A footnote has been added to a indicate that the RBM setpoint must be clamped at 100% drive flow to prevent 1 the RBM setpolnt from exceeding the analysed vklue. In addition, the APRM l l upscale setpoints have been revised to Include the operating region analysed  ;

i in the extended load line limit anelyses.

4 i l I 4

Y t

I "b

Itchnical Sptcification 3/4.4.1. Recirculation System L

1 j

The action statement for single recirculation loop operation requiring l j that the HAPLHGR limit be reduced to 0.85 times the two loop limit has been deleted. This reduction is no longer required since the SATER/GESTR-LOCA i analysis has shown that the peak clad temperatures during a LOCA do not exceed the limits of Appendix K to 10 CFR part 50. The change in Attachment D, "Proposed Technical Specification Changes", reflects a previous Technical {

Specification change submittal.  :

Is.chnical_Sp e c i f i c a tion _3 / 4 . 4 . 2 . Safety / Relief Valves  !

a 1

! As a result of the one safety / relief valve out-of-service analysis, the LCO statement was reworded to reflect that only 17 SRV's are required for f safety valve actuation. The other conditions required were also specified in .

j the LCO statement (i.e., that installed SRV's must be closed and have position [

Indication), because the specification previously did not have a formal way to

, require ACTICH. The addition of the clause "of the above required" in ACTION C refers to installed valves, since any installed valve is required to have position indication per the LCO.

Teshnical_Sp.egiflgation 3/4.6.1.1. Primany_,. Containment Intagtl.ty i

The footnote "See Special Test Exception 3.10.7" has been deleted.

i ItchniggLEpecification 3f_i.7.10. Main Turbine Bypaig_Syl.tta  ;

The specification has been revised to allow indefinite operation with j the main turbine bypass system inoperable per the surveillance requirements, '

l j provided at least four turbine bypass valves are capable of accepting steam i flow and the MCPR limit for this condition of operation is met within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per Specification 3.2.3. If two or more turbine bypass valves are incapable t of accepting steam flow, operation in allowed for only 14 hours1.62037e-4 days <br />0.00389 hours <br />2.314815e-5 weeks <br />5.327e-6 months <br />, provided the .

MCPR limit for this condition of operation is met within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per

Specification 3.2.3.

Te c hnis a LS p ac1 Lic.a t io n_.3La t10,_Sp e ci a LTer_LZ x c ep tio n l f L Lpecifications 3/4.10.4 and 3/4.10.7 have been deleted since these i i tests are only allowed during startup testing and the first fuel cycle, and (

l therefore, are no longer required. '

4 l

l I

I

\

b I

3.ases 3/4.2.1. Average Planard inaar Heat _ Generation Rata ,

I The bases have been revised to delete the reference to a MAPLHGR I multiplier for single loop operation and to include a discussion of the bases l of the APLHGR curves for GE 8x8EB fuel being thermal-mechanical rather than LOCA dependent. The LOCA input parameters have also been ueleted. CECO believes this information is too detailed for the Technical Specifications and no longer fully applicable to this section, since the APIRGR values are no I longer LOCA dependent as a result of the SAFER /GESTR-LOCA analysis.

i Bases 3/4.2.3. Minimum Critical.P.ciar._Ratin The references in this section have been revised to include licensing I

analyses used for LaSalle 2 Cycle 3. The discussion has been revised to incorporate the changes due to the new ODYN methods. A discussion on the proposed RBM setpoint dependent MCPR and MCPR penalties for operation with particular equipment out of service. In addition, the numerical values used in calculating and the actual value of have been rovised to reflect the present values used in ODYN.  !

l l

l Bjlsea 3/4.3.4. R acirculatip.n P ump __Ir.iplcLu at io n I n a t r um e n t ALinn The bases have been revised to include a discussion on the analysis

! which allows the EOC-RPT system to be inoperable.

l Basid 3/4.4.2._JelatyLRelief valves l The bases have been updated to lucorporate the results of the single l SRV out of service analysis, and to reflect the fact that the LCO has been expanded to include a statement requiring GRV's to be closed and to have position indication.

1 l B a s e a_J111410uMa in_Inrhine._Byp a s s__Sys tem The bases have been revised to include a discussion on the analysis which allows continued operation with the main turbine bypass system inoperable.

D_e s i g nla atut ta._ii li L_.Co n t tol_Ro ti_A s s em b11 1 The design features section has been revised to include the design of the ASEA-ATON control rods which may be inserted for Cycle 3.

5102K