ML20206S177

Application to Amend License DPR-46,changing Tech Specs Re APRM Scram & Rod Block Instrumentation.Fee Paid

ML20206S177
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	07/02/1986
From:	Kuncl L NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20206S182	List: ML20206S177 ML20206S191
References
NUDOCS 8607070304
Download: ML20206S177 (4)

Text

.

GENERAL OFFICE j Nebraska Public Power District " " "%te#s'eS*d'*0^!s* ***""

July 2, 1986 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation BWR Project Directorate No. 2 Division of BWR Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Mr. Daniel R. Muller ,

Subject:

Proposed Change No. 23 to Technical Specifications Scram and Rod Block Instrumentation Cooper Nuclear Station NRC Docket No. 50-298, DPR-46 In accordance with applicable provisions specified in 10CFR50, Nebraska Public Power District requests that the Technical Specifications for Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) be revised to incorporate various changes to the Scram and Rod Block Instrumentation. A discussion of the proposed change and the applicable revised Technical Specification pages in addition to an evaluation with respect to the requirements of 10CFR50.92 is included in the attachment.

This change has been reviewed by the necessary Safety Review Committee and payment of $150 is submitted in accordance with 10CFR170.12. This proposed change incorporates all amendments to the CNS Facility Operating License through Amendment 100 dated May 20, 1986.

By copy of this letter and attachment the appropriate State of Nebraska Official is being notified in accordance with 10CFR50.91(b).

In addition to three signed originals, 40 copics are also submitted for your use. Should you require additional information, please call.

Sincerely, u

L. G. Kunel Vice-President, Nuclear LGK/grs:lk23/3 cc: II. R. Borchert Department of Health State of Nebraska D DO K bOh98 O<

P pop p g g

Mr. D:ni:1 R. Mullar P:ga 2 July 2,1986 STATE OF NEBRASKA)

)ss PLATTE COUNTY )

L. G. Kuncl, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is an authorized representative of the Nebraska Public Power District, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of Nebraska; that he is duly authorized to submit this request on behalf of Nebraska Public Power District; and that the statements contained herein are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.

L. G. Kunci

}

Subscribpd in my presence and sworn to before me this g. day of

( li0n , 1986.

7 M aO I MUIL GEEEML EARN et M NOTARY PyBLfC COLLEEN M. KUTA

d. My Comm. bp Asg 4. M

4 .

Revised Technical Specifications for APRM Scram and Rod Block Instrumentation Revised Pages: 28 62 31 62a 61 Nebraska Public Power District requests a revision to the Technical Specifications to reflect the actual operation of the APRM scram and Rod Block Monitor (RBM) rod block instrumentation. In particular, the following changes are proposed:

i 1. Add to Note 11 on page 31 that the APRM downscale trip function is automatically bypassed when the IRM instrumentation is operable and not upscale with the reactor mode switch in RUN.

2. On page 28, include Note 12 under the Shutdown, Startup and Refuel i

columns for the APRM downscale trip function since this function is

! automatically bypassed when the mode switch is not in RUN. Note 11 is shifted over to the RUN column where it is applicable.

3. Add Note 20 to pages 28 and 31 to make the trip level setting of the high flux APRM flow bias trip function consistent with Technical Specification 2.1.A.I.a on page 7.

I 4. Delete Action Statement A for when equipment operability is not assured a

on the four APRM functions on page 28. This will leave Statement C as

the sole action item to perform, eliminating a potential source of confusion identified in Inspection Report 50-298/84-10 by Region IV personnel.

5. Delete the words "of indicated scale" from the APRM downscale trip level

setting on page 28. The setpoint is 2.5% of rated thermal power. The

! indicated scale for APRM's is 0% to 125%. Left as is, the phrase "2.5%

of indicated scale" could be interpreted to mean 2.5% of 125% or

. .025 x 125% or 3.125%. To prevent this confusion, the phrase "of i indicated scale" is removed. This will make Table 3.1.1 consistent with the APRM downscale trip setting for rod block on page 61. This is the case because both functions (Rod Scram and Rod Block) get their signal from the same APRM downscale trip unit.

6. Add Note 14 to pages 61 and 62a to make the trip level setting of the APRM upscale flow bias function consistent with Technical Specification 2.1.A.I.d on page 8.

7. Change the trip level setting on IRM downscale for rod block on page 61 from 2.5% to "2.5/125 of Full Scale." This will make the setting consistent with the fact that the IRM has several ranges and no units.

This is illustrated by the given setpoint for IRM upscale of "108/125 of Full Scale."

8. On page 62, delete the last sentence of Note 9, because in actuality there is no connection between the RBM circuitry and the IRM instrumentation. I

- . - . , --_,-., . . _ . _ - _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ , , . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ -._.. ,. _ -,

..m- ~ _

F Evaluation of this Revision with Respect to 10CFR50.92 A. The enclosed Technical Specification ' change is judged to involve no significant hazards based on the following:

1. Does the proposed license amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

Evaluation:

The proposed change will revise the Technical Specifications to reflect the actual operation of various trip functions in the reactor protection and rod block instrumentation and eliminate sources of confusion. The function of these instruments is not affected by this proposed change so no significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated is involved.

2. Does the proposed license amendment create the possibility for a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

Evaluation:

The proposed change does not change the way the reactor protection and rod block instrumentation operate nor their design bases, so the proposed change does not create a new mode of plant operation or the possibility for a new or different kind of accident.

3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Evaluation:

The proposed change does not affect the original safety objectives or safety design bases of the instrumentation. The proposed change will revise Technical Specifications to reflect instrument operation

that has been in effect since plant initial licensing and does not

, involve a reduction in the original analyzed margin of safety.

I 1

i i

l l

l

-- - -- --