ML20198B271

Forwards GE Ltr DSB-97026 from Ds Braden to Jl Lewis of GE, Providing Resolution to Error Found in Topical Rept GENE-A13-00395-01.Corrected Pages to Rept Included

ML20198B271
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	12/26/1997
From:	Graham P NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NLS970228, NUDOCS 9801060252
Download: ML20198B271 (7)

Text

._

p s

P.O. BOX E B SKA 68321 Nebraska Public Power District "NMi e--

-.-_a___,-

NLS970228 December 26,1997 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commi:;sion Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 I

Gentlemen:

Subject:

Corrections to GENE-A13-00395-01 Cooper Nuclear Station, NRC Docket 50-298, DPR-46

Reference:

1. Letter to NLS970001 to Document Control Desk (USNRC) from G. R. Ilorn (NPPD) dated February 10,1997," Proposed Change to CNS Technical Specifications, Implementation of BWR Thermal liydraulie Stability Solution, Cooper Nuclear Station, NRC Docket No. 50-298, License No. DPR-46"

2. GE Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report GENE A13-00395-01, dated November 1996, "Applicatiori of the ' Regional Exclusion with Flow-Biased APRM Neutron Flux Scram' Stability Solution (Option I D) to the Cooper Nuclear Station"

3. Letter DSB-97026 to J. L. Lewis (NPPD) from D. S. Bradca (GENE) dated December 11,1997," GENE Rernonse to NPPD PIR No. 2-18304" By letter dated February 10,1997 (Reference 1), the Nebraska Public Power District (District) submitted a proposed change to the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) Technical Specifications to

~ implement the t ermal hydraulic stability solution (Option I-D). General Electric Nuclear h

Energy (GENE) Licensing Topical Report GENE-A13-00395 01 (Reference 2) was included as an enclosure to that submittal, 6

y During a subsequent technical review, an error was discovered by the District in the topical report and GENE was contacted for resolution. Reference 3 provided resolutio.i to this error and issued corrected pages to the topical report identified as GENE-A13-00395 Errata 11/20/97.

. Reference 3, including the corrected pages, is provided for your use as an enclosure to this letter.

Based on a review cf the ermr and the correction provided, the District concludes there is no impact to the proposed Technical Specifications change submitted under Reference 1.

ill!!lillill llll ll 1

9001060252 971226

~

-PDR ADOCK 05000298 P

PDR Mamm==M_EMEm =1=nb=

22n=='m==42=an===

= = ~ = = -

= = = = = ~

~'= M-=

NLS970228

' December 26,1997 Page 2 of 2 Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me.

Sincerely, PDLn P. D. Graham Vice President of Nuclear Energy

/crm Enclosure cc: Regional Administrator USNRC - Region IV' Senior Project Manager USNRC - NRR Project Directorate IV-1 Senior Resident inspector

-USNRC NPG Distribution

?

l=

AT*ACHMENT 'l LIST OF NRC COMMITMENTS l

Correspondence No: NLS970229 The following table identifies those actions committed to by the Di. strict in this document.

Any other actions discussed in the submittal represent intended or planned actions by the District.

They are described to the NRC for the NRC's information and are not regulatory commitments.

Plc.1se notify the Licensing Manager at Cooper Nuclear Station of any questions regarding this document or any associated regulatory conanitments.

COMMITTED DATE COMMITMENT OR OUTAGE None.

s..

4 asumuser l

PROCEDURE NUMBER 0.42

]

. REVISION NUMBER 5

]

PAGE 9 CF 13 i

GENuclearEnergy oeneral Flectric Company 175 Curtner Avenue San Jase.CA 95125 1088 December 11,1997 DSIk97026 cc: T. Slayton M.G. Farschon G.L. Hayes J.S. Post Mr.J. L. Lewis Reactor Engineering Supenisor Nebraska Public Power District Cooper Nuclear Sation P. O. Box 98 Browmille, Nebraska 68321

SUBJECT:

GENE RESPONSE TO NPPD PIR No. 2-18304

REFERENCES:

1) NPPD PIR No. 2-18304

2) GE Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report, Application of the " Regional Exclusion With Flow-Biased APRM Neutron Flux Scram" Stability Solution (Option I-D) to the Cooper Nuclear Station, GENE-A13-00395-01, Nov.1996

Dear Mr. Lewis:

The following comments are provided based on the results of a review of the subject PIR written by NPPD on GE Nuclear Energy Licensing Topical Report GENE-A13-00395-01.

1) The value of 9317 MWD /SF reported as the Base Value r

'he actual cycle exposure in Table 7-1 of GENE-A13-00395-01 is for Cycle 17 crefore, this value must be changed to 10845.7 MWD /ST to reflect the Cycle 16 expoaure. In addition, the 932 MWD /ST value under Description and Criteria (columns 1 and 2) must be changed to 1085 MWD /ST.

2) Table 7-1 of the analysis is provided to determine applicability of the existing analysis to future reloads. This error in Table 7-1 does not refic:t an error in Cycle 17 stability analysis. When 9317 MWD /ST was used in the Table, it was known that this value was for Cycle 17. l.. other words, a wrong value for Cycle 16 was not entered.

But, as mentioned in item 1 above, the Cycle 16 acteal exposure should have been entered instead of the Cycle 17 exposure.

-~

[

E

-In Conclusion, even though tiie Table 7-1 salue of 9317 MWD /ST must be changed to

' 1084r,.7 MWD /ST, this error in Table 7-1 did not affect the stability analysis which was pedormed for Cycle 17 prior to the generation of Table 71. Additionally, all of the

_ data required to perform the analysis oelonged to Cycle 17, such as the Cycle 17 Wrap-up file, ISCOR basedeck, Cycle 0 and Cyclen files for Cycle 17. The Cycle 17 stability analysis was thoroughly verified by qualified GENE Verifiers after being reviewed several times by the GENE Approver. A revised Table 7-1 is enclosed, identified as Errata 11/20/97 to Page 7-1 of the reference 2 document. This revised table has been verified.

Prepared by:

A/OdM b Nader Sadeghi Senior Engineer, Technical Services A

ed by:

/

(Da id S. Bra e Engineering Sc ' ices M tager, Consulting Services

4 GENE A13-00395 ERRATA I1/20/97 7 RELOAD APPLICATION The purpos. of the reload review is to determine the applicability of previous plant-specific calculations to the current fuel cycle. The analysis documented in this report constitutes the baseline for future fuel cycle reload reviews. Table 7-1 tabulates the key parameters which must be evaluated to determine the applicabiity of the analysis docurnented herein.

If some key parameters do not meet the specified criteri% the applicable portions of the analysis must be re-

\\

performed.

Table 7-1. Parameters for Re!oad Review Evaluation Regional Exclusion Methodology Description Criteria Base Value There are no reactor design changes which No reactor changes would affect the thermal-hydraulic stability of the reactor (e.g., recirculation loop performance)

There are no new plant operating modes (e.g.,

No operating region power uprated, increased load lines) which change would affect the operating region of the reactor The reload fuel design has similar stability Similar to GE9 GE9 grformance as the Cycle 17 futi design 11aling radial peaking factor increases over s 105% of base value 1.47 Cycle 17 by no more than 5%

Reload batch size changes by no more than 27 Within 127 b.mdles 152 bundles bundles (5% of cote size) from the Cycle 17 from base value

(

batch size The Haling cycle exposure changes by no more Within 1942 9420.5 MWD /ST than 942 MWD /ST (10% of base value) from MWD /ST from base the Cycle 17 Haling cycle exposure value The actual cycle exposure of the previous cycle

- Within 1085 10845.7 MWD /ST' changes by no more than 1085 MWD /ST(10%

MWD /ST from base of base value) from the Cycle lfz actual cycle value exposure 4

7-1

GENE A13-00395-01 Table 7-1. Parameters for Reload Review Evaluation (continued)

Detect and Suppress Methodology Parameter Description Value OLMCPR(100/100)

MCPR Operating Limit at rated flow on the 21.23 g

rated licensing procedure flow-control line AMCPR(2RPT)

MCPR increase due to fbw runback from a 2 0.3874 2RPT OLMCPR (100/45)

MCPR Operating Limit at 45% of rated flow on 21.41 the rated licensing procedure flow-control line

1. LPRMs Number ofinstalled LPRMs 2124 APRM assignment LPRM assignment to APRMs in 6 channels, No APR51 design etc.

change APRM trip @ NC Flow-biased APRM trip power level (nominal s 62.0% ofrated value) et natural circulation (2381 Mwt) power A @ NC Average power level on the rated licensing 2 46.0% rated power procedure now-control line at natural circulation Tu,y Total delay time (20 msec APRM response s 854 msee time,50 msec RPS processing time,784 msec delay before start of control rod motion and for 2 feet of control rod insertion)

Fuel Design Fuel Design which is covered by the Generic GE7, GE8, GE9, DIVOM Curve for Core-Wide Mode GE10, gel 1, or Oscillations GE12 7-2

_ _