ML17325B183: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 03/29/1989
| issue date = 03/29/1989
| title = Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-58 & DPR-74, Clarifying Response Time Testing Requirements for Power Range Neutron Flux Reactor Trip
| title = Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-58 & DPR-74, Clarifying Response Time Testing Requirements for Power Range Neutron Flux Reactor Trip
| author name = ALEXICH M P
| author name = Alexich M
| author affiliation = INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
| author affiliation = INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
| addressee name = MURLEY T E
| addressee name = Murley T
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
| docket = 05000315, 05000316
| docket = 05000315, 05000316
Line 14: Line 14:
| document type = OPERATING LICENSES-APPLIATION TO AMEND-RENEW EXISTING, TEXT-LICENSE APPLICATIONS & PERMITS
| document type = OPERATING LICENSES-APPLIATION TO AMEND-RENEW EXISTING, TEXT-LICENSE APPLICATIONS & PERMITS
| page count = 9
| page count = 9
| project =
| stage = Request
}}
}}


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:kCCE1KPATEDD1BUI3OYBEM0~STlOYSYSTEMeeREGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM(RIDS)DOCKET0500031505000316RI+RSDD
{{#Wiki_filter:kC CE1K PATED            D1                    BUI3 OY      BE M 0~ S        TlOY      SYSTEM ee REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:8904040229                          DOC.DATE: 89/03/29      NOTARIZED: NO            DOCKET FACIL:50-315 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Indiana                                &  05000315 50-316 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2, Indiana                              &  05000316 AUTH. NAME      .      AUTHOR AFFILIATION ALEXICH,M.P.            Indiana Michigan Power Co.
RECIP.NAME          'ECIPIENT AFFILIATION MURLEY,T.E.                Document Control Branch (Document Control Desk)                                  R


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
Application.
Application. for amends to Licenses'PR-58 & DPR-74,to                                               I clarify response time testing requirements for PRNFRT.
foramendstoLicenses'PR-58
DISTRIBUTION CODE: A001D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR TITLE: OR Submittal: General Distribution ENCL      SIZE:     +R S
&DPR-74,to clarifyresponsetimetestingrequirements forPRNFRT.DISTRIBUTION CODE:A001DCOPIESRECEIVED:LTR ENCLSIZE:TITLE:ORSubmittal:
NOTES:
GeneralDistribution NOTES:COPIESLTTRENCL11RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-1PDCOPIESLTTRENCL1155RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-1LASTANG,J111111111011INTERNAL:
RECIPIENT                          COPIES            RECIPIENT            COPIES ID  CODE/NAME                        LTTR ENCL      ID  CODE/NAME         LTTR ENCL PD3-1 LA                                1      1    PD3-1 PD                1    1 STANG,J                                  5      5                                                  D INTERNAL: ARM/DAF/LFMB                               1      0    NRR/DEST/ADS    7E      1    1            D NRR/DEST/CEB 8H                          1      1    NRR/DEST/ESB    8D      1    1 NRR/DEST/ICSB                            1    .
ARM/DAF/LFMB NRR/DEST/CEB 8HNRR/DEST/ICSB NRR/DEST/RSB 8E-ABSTRACT RElFIE'110111.1111111NRR/DEST/ADS 7ENRR/DEST/ESB 8DNRR/DEST/MTB 9HNRR/DOEA/TSB 11OGC/HDS1RES/DSIR/EIB ACCESSION NBR:8904040229 DOC.DATE:
1    NRR/DEST/MTB    9H      1    1 NRR/DEST/RSB 8E REl  FI  E    '1
89/03/29NOTARIZED:
                      -ABSTRACT 1
NOFACIL:50-315 DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit1,Indiana&50-316DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit2,Indiana&AUTH.NAME.AUTHORAFFILIATION ALEXICH,M.P.
1 1
IndianaMichiganPowerCo.RECIP.NAME
1 1
'ECIPIENT AFFILIATION MURLEY,T.E.
1 NRR/DOEA/TSB OGC/HDS1 RES/DSIR/EIB 11      1 1
DocumentControlBranch(Document ControlDesk)EXTERNAL:
1 1
LPDRNSIC1111NRCPDR11NAZEK)ALL"RIDS"RECIPIENIS'LEASE HELPUSK)REDUCEWASTE!COMI'ACZ'IHEDOCUMENTCONIBDLDESK,RDCMPl-37(EXT.20079)KOELIMINATE YOURNMEFRYDISTRIBUTION LISTSFORDOCUHENZS YOUDON'TNEED!STOTALNUMBEROFCOPIESREQUIRED:
1 0
LTTR22ENCL20 indianaMichiganPowerCompanyP.O.Box16631Coiumbus, OH43216ItlAIEMANA MCHE6'ANPWE5kAEP:NRC:1078 DonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnits1and2DocketNos.50-315and50-316LicenseNos.DPR-58andDPR-74CLARIFICATION OFRESPONSETIMETESTINGREQUIREMENTS FORPOWERRANGENEUTRONFLUXREACTORTRIPU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Attn:DocumentControlDeskWashington, D.C.20555Attn:T.E.Murley1March29,1989
1 1
EXTERNAL: LPDR                                      1      1    NRC PDR NSIC                                    1      1 NAZE  K) ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENIS'LEASE S
HELP US            K)   REDUCE WASTE! COMI'ACZ 'IHE DOCUMENT CONIBDL DESK, RDCM Pl-37 (EXT. 20079) KO ELIMINATE YOUR NME FRY DISTRIBUTION LISTS FOR DOCUHENZS YOU DON'T NEED!
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR                            22  ENCL      20


==DearDr.Murley:==
indiana Michigan Power Company P.O. Box 16631 Coiumbus, OH 43216 ItlAIEMANA MCHE6'AN PWE5k AEP:NRC:1078 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Units  1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74 CLARIFICATION OF RESPONSE TIME TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR POWER RANGE NEUTRON FLUX REACTOR TRIP U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:     Document  Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Attn: T.       E. Murley 1
Thisletterconstitutes anapplication foramendment totheTechnical Specifications (T/Ss)fortheDonaldC.CookNuclearPlant.Units1and2.Specifically weareproposing toclarifytheresponsetimetestingrequirements forthepowerrangeneutronfluxreactortrip.Adetaileddescription ofthechange,ourreasonsforrequesting thechange,andouranalysesconcerning significant hazardsarecontained inAttachment 1.Attachment 2includestheproposedrevisedT/Spages.Webelievethattheproposedchangeswillnotresultin(1)asignificant changeinthetypesofeffluents orasignificant increaseintheamountsofanyeffluentthatmaybereleasedoffsite,or(2)asignificant increaseinindividual orcumulative occupational radiation exposure.
March 29, 1989
TheseproposedchangeshavebeenreviewedbythePlantNuclearSafetyReviewCommittee andwillbereviewedbytheNuclearSafetyandDesignReviewCommittee attheirnextregularly scheduled meeting.Incompliance withtherequirements of10CFR50.91(b)(1),
copiesofthisletteranditsattachments havebeentransmitted toMr.R.C.CallenoftheMichiganPublicServiceCommission andMr.GeorgeBruchmann oftheMichiganDepartment ofPublicHealth.S904040229 S90329PDRADOCK05000315PPDCoor Dr.T.E.Murley-2-AEP'NRC:1078 Thisdocumenthasbeenpreparedfollowing Corporate procedures thatincorporate areasonable setofcontrolstoensureitsaccuracyandcompleteness priortosignature bytheundersigned.
Sincerely, M.P.AlichVicePresident ldpAttachments cc:D.H.Williams, Jr.W.G~Smith,Jr.-BridgmanR.C.CallenG.CharnoffA.B.DavisNRCResidentInspector
-BridgmanG.Bruchmann ATTACHMENT 1TOAEP:NRC1078REASONSAND10CFR50.92ANALYSESFORCHANGESTOTHEDONALDC.COOKNUCLEARPLANTUNITS1AND2TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1078 Page1DescritionofChaneThisletterproposestoclarifytherequirements ofTable3.3-2,"ReactorTripSystemInstrumentation ResponseTimes,"byindicating thattherequirements ofFunctional Unit2applytoboththehighandlowpowerrangeneutronflux(PRNF)reactortripsetpoints.
BackroundandReasonsforChaneDuringareviewofourreactortripsysteminstrumentation timeresponsetestingprocedures, itwasobservedthatthetimeresponsetestprocedure forthenuclearinstrumentation systemPRNFreactortriponlyincludedthehighsetpointtrip.SincecreditwastakenforthelowsetpointtripinthesafetyanalysisforbothUnits1and2,thelowsetpointshouldhavebeentimeresponsetested.ItisbelievedthatthelackofspecificdetailintheT/Ssregarding theseparatesetpoints wasacontributing factortothelackoftesting,andwearetherefore submitting theproposedchangesofthislettertoensurethatsufficient detailisincludedintheT/SsforthePRNFreactortrip.Justification forChaneThesechangesareconsidered tobeadministrative innatureandintendedtoclarifytheresponsetimetestingrequirements forthePRNFreactortrip.Nooperability orsurveillance requirements willbereducedasaresultofthischange.AnalsisofSinificantHazardsPer10CFR50.92,aproposedamendment willnotinvolvesignificant hazardsconsideration iftheproposedamendment doesnot:(1)involveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofapreviously evaluated
: accident, (2)createthepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanypreviously evaluated, or(3)involveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Criterion 1ThischangeisintendedtoclarifytheexistingT/Srequirements forthePRNFreactortrip,Nooperability orsurveillance requirements havebeenreduced.Wetherefore believethechangedoesnotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously analyzedorasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.
Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1078 Page2Criterion 2Thechangedoesnotinvolvephysicalmodifications totheplantorchangesinplantoperation.
Thechangetherefore shouldnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanypreviously analyzedorevaluated.
Criterion 3SeeCriterion 1above.Lastly,wenotethattheCommission hasprovidedguidanceconcerning thedetermination ofsignificant hazardsbyproviding certainexamples(48FR14870)ofamendments considered notlikelytoinvolvesignificant hazardsconsideration.
Thefirstoftheseexamplesreferstochangeswhicharepurelyadministrative innature:forexample,changestoachieveconsistency throughout theT/Ss,correction oferrors,orchangesinnomenclature.
Theproposedchangeonlyclarifies thepresentT/S.Wearenotproposing toreduceanypresentrequirements.
Forthesereasons,webelievethattheexamplecitedisapplicable andthattheproposedchangeshouldnotinvolvesignificant hazardsconsideration.


TABLE3.3-2REACTORTRIPSYSTEMINSTRUMENTATION RESPONSETIMESFUNCTIONAL UNIT1.ManualReactorTripRESPONSETIMENOTAPPLICABLE 2.PowerRange,NeutronFlux(HighandLowSetpoint)
==Dear Dr. Murley:==
Lessthanorequalto0.5seconds3.PowerRange,NeutronFlux,HighPositiveRateNOTAPPLICABLE 4.PowerRange,NeutronFlux,HighNegativeRateLessthanorequalto0.5seconds*5.Intermediate Range,NeutronFluxNOTAPPLICABLE 6.SourceRange,NeutronFlux7.Overtemperature deltaTNOTAPPLICABLE Lessthanorequalto6.0seconds8.Overpower deltaT9.Pressurizer Pressure--Low NOTAPPLICABLE Lessthanorequalto1.0seconds10.Pressurizer Pressure--High Lessthanorequalto1.0seconds11.Pressurizer WaterLevel--High NOTAPPLICABLE
 
*Neutrondetectors areexemptfromresponsetimetesting.Responsetimeoftheneutronfluxsignalportionofthechannelshallbemeasuredfromdetectoroutputorinputoffirstelectronic component inchannel.COOKNUCLEARPLANT-UNIT23/43-9AMENDMENT NO.
This letter constitutes an application for amendment to the Technical Specifications (T/Ss) for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant. Units 1 and 2. Specifically we are proposing to clarify the response time testing requirements for the power range neutron flux reactor trip. A detailed description of the change, our reasons for requesting the change, and our analyses concerning significant hazards are contained in Attachment 1. Attachment 2 includes the proposed revised T/S pages.
Q~~}}
We  believe that the proposed changes will not result in (1) a significant change in the types of effluents or a significant increase in the amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite, or (2) a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
These proposed changes have been reviewed by the Plant Nuclear Safety Review Committee and will be reviewed by the Nuclear Safety and Design Review Committee at their next regularly scheduled meeting.
In compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(b)(1), copies of this letter and its attachments have been transmitted to Mr. R. C. Callen of the Michigan Public Service Commission and Mr. George Bruchmann of the Michigan Department of Public Health.
S904040229 S90329                                                        oor PDR ADOCK 05000315 P                        PDC
 
Dr. T. E. Murley                                  AEP'NRC:1078 This document has been prepared following Corporate procedures that incorporate a reasonable set of controls to ensure its accuracy and completeness prior to signature by the undersigned.
Sincerely, M. P. Al ich Vice President ldp Attachments cc:  D. H. Williams, Jr.
W. G ~ Smith, Jr. - Bridgman R. C. Callen G. Charnoff A. B. Davis NRC  Resident Inspector - Bridgman G. Bruchmann
 
ATTACHMENT 1 TO AEP:NRC 1078 REASONS AND 10 CFR 50.92 ANALYSES FOR CHANGES TO THE DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS to AEP:NRC:1078                                  Page 1 Descri tion of    Chan e This letter proposes to clarify the requirements of Table 3.3-2, "Reactor Trip System Instrumentation Response Times," by indicating that the requirements of Functional Unit 2 apply to both the high and low power range neutron flux (PRNF) reactor trip setpoints.
Back round and Reasons      for Chan e During a review of our reactor trip system instrumentation time response testing procedures,      it was observed that the time response test procedure for the nuclear instrumentation system PRNF reactor trip only included the high setpoint trip. Since credit was taken for the low setpoint trip in the safety analysis for both Units 1 and 2, the low setpoint should have been time response tested.         It is believed that the lack of specific detail in the T/Ss regarding the separate setpoints was a contributing factor to the lack of testing, and we are therefore submitting the proposed changes of this letter to ensure that sufficient detail is included in the T/Ss for the PRNF reactor trip.
Justification for    Chan e These changes    are considered to be administrative  in nature  and intended to    clarify the response time testing requirements for    the PRNF  reactor trip. No operability or surveillance requirements will be  reduced as a    result of this  change.
Anal sis of Si    nificant  Hazards Per 10 CFR 50.92, a proposed amendment will not involve significant hazards consideration      if the proposed amendment does not:
(1)  involve  a significant increase in the probability or consequences    of a previously evaluated accident, (2)  create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated, or (3)  involve a significant reduction in    a margin of safety.
Criterion  1 This change is intended to clarify the existing T/S requirements for the PRNF reactor trip, No operability or surveillance requirements have been reduced. We therefore believe the change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously analyzed or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
to AEP:NRC:1078                                Page 2 Criterion  2 The change does    not involve physical modifications to the plant or changes  in plant operation. The change therefore should not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed or evaluated.
Criterion  3 See  Criterion  1 above.
Lastly,  we note that the Commission has provided guidance concerning the determination of significant hazards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments considered not likely to involve significant hazards consideration. The first of these examples refers to changes which are purely administrative in nature: for example, changes to achieve consistency throughout the T/Ss, correction of errors, or changes in nomenclature. The proposed change only clarifies the present T/S. We are not proposing to reduce any present requirements. For these reasons, we believe that the example cited is applicable and that the proposed change should not involve significant hazards consideration.
 
TABLE  3.3-2 REACTOR  TRIP SYSTEM INSTRUMENTATION RESPONSE TIMES FUNCTIONAL UNIT                                      RESPONSE TIME
: 1. Manual Reactor  Trip                              NOT APPLICABLE
: 2. Power Range, Neutron Flux                          Less than or equal to (High and Low Setpoint)                                0.5 seconds
: 3. Power Range, Neutron Flux, High Positive Rate                                NOT APPLICABLE
: 4. Power Range, Neutron Flux,                         Less than or equal to High Negative Rate                                      0.5 seconds*
: 5. Intermediate Range, Neutron Flux                    NOT APPLICABLE
: 6. Source Range, Neutron Flux                          NOT APPLICABLE
: 7. Overtemperature   delta T                          Less than or equal to 6.0 seconds
: 8. Overpower   delta  T                                NOT APPLICABLE
: 9. Pressurizer   Pressure--Low                         Less than or equal to 1.0 seconds 10.Pressurizer Pressure--High                         Less than or equal to 1.0 seconds 11.Pressurizer Water Level--High                       NOT APPLICABLE
* Neutron detectors are exempt from response time testing. Response time of the neutron flux signal portion of the channel shall be measured from detector output or input of first electronic component in channel.
COOK NUCLEAR PLANT    - UNIT 2            3/4 3-9            AMENDMENT NO.
 
Q
  ~ ~}}

Latest revision as of 04:35, 16 November 2019

Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-58 & DPR-74, Clarifying Response Time Testing Requirements for Power Range Neutron Flux Reactor Trip
ML17325B183
Person / Time
Site: Cook  American Electric Power icon.png
Issue date: 03/29/1989
From: Alexich M
INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
To: Murley T
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML17325B184 List:
References
AEP:NRC:1078, NUDOCS 8904040229
Download: ML17325B183 (9)


Text

kC CE1K PATED D1 BUI3 OY BE M 0~ S TlOY SYSTEM ee REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)

ACCESSION NBR:8904040229 DOC.DATE: 89/03/29 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET FACIL:50-315 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Indiana & 05000315 50-316 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2, Indiana & 05000316 AUTH. NAME . AUTHOR AFFILIATION ALEXICH,M.P. Indiana Michigan Power Co.

RECIP.NAME 'ECIPIENT AFFILIATION MURLEY,T.E. Document Control Branch (Document Control Desk) R

SUBJECT:

Application. for amends to Licenses'PR-58 & DPR-74,to I clarify response time testing requirements for PRNFRT.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: A001D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR TITLE: OR Submittal: General Distribution ENCL SIZE: +R S

NOTES:

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL PD3-1 LA 1 1 PD3-1 PD 1 1 STANG,J 5 5 D INTERNAL: ARM/DAF/LFMB 1 0 NRR/DEST/ADS 7E 1 1 D NRR/DEST/CEB 8H 1 1 NRR/DEST/ESB 8D 1 1 NRR/DEST/ICSB 1 .

1 NRR/DEST/MTB 9H 1 1 NRR/DEST/RSB 8E REl FI E '1

-ABSTRACT 1

1 1

1 1

1 NRR/DOEA/TSB OGC/HDS1 RES/DSIR/EIB 11 1 1

1 1

1 0

1 1

EXTERNAL: LPDR 1 1 NRC PDR NSIC 1 1 NAZE K) ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENIS'LEASE S

HELP US K) REDUCE WASTE! COMI'ACZ 'IHE DOCUMENT CONIBDL DESK, RDCM Pl-37 (EXT. 20079) KO ELIMINATE YOUR NME FRY DISTRIBUTION LISTS FOR DOCUHENZS YOU DON'T NEED!

TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 22 ENCL 20

indiana Michigan Power Company P.O. Box 16631 Coiumbus, OH 43216 ItlAIEMANA MCHE6'AN PWE5k AEP:NRC:1078 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316 License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74 CLARIFICATION OF RESPONSE TIME TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR POWER RANGE NEUTRON FLUX REACTOR TRIP U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Attn: T. E. Murley 1

March 29, 1989

Dear Dr. Murley:

This letter constitutes an application for amendment to the Technical Specifications (T/Ss) for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant. Units 1 and 2. Specifically we are proposing to clarify the response time testing requirements for the power range neutron flux reactor trip. A detailed description of the change, our reasons for requesting the change, and our analyses concerning significant hazards are contained in Attachment 1. Attachment 2 includes the proposed revised T/S pages.

We believe that the proposed changes will not result in (1) a significant change in the types of effluents or a significant increase in the amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite, or (2) a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

These proposed changes have been reviewed by the Plant Nuclear Safety Review Committee and will be reviewed by the Nuclear Safety and Design Review Committee at their next regularly scheduled meeting.

In compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(b)(1), copies of this letter and its attachments have been transmitted to Mr. R. C. Callen of the Michigan Public Service Commission and Mr. George Bruchmann of the Michigan Department of Public Health.

S904040229 S90329 oor PDR ADOCK 05000315 P PDC

Dr. T. E. Murley AEP'NRC:1078 This document has been prepared following Corporate procedures that incorporate a reasonable set of controls to ensure its accuracy and completeness prior to signature by the undersigned.

Sincerely, M. P. Al ich Vice President ldp Attachments cc: D. H. Williams, Jr.

W. G ~ Smith, Jr. - Bridgman R. C. Callen G. Charnoff A. B. Davis NRC Resident Inspector - Bridgman G. Bruchmann

ATTACHMENT 1 TO AEP:NRC 1078 REASONS AND 10 CFR 50.92 ANALYSES FOR CHANGES TO THE DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS to AEP:NRC:1078 Page 1 Descri tion of Chan e This letter proposes to clarify the requirements of Table 3.3-2, "Reactor Trip System Instrumentation Response Times," by indicating that the requirements of Functional Unit 2 apply to both the high and low power range neutron flux (PRNF) reactor trip setpoints.

Back round and Reasons for Chan e During a review of our reactor trip system instrumentation time response testing procedures, it was observed that the time response test procedure for the nuclear instrumentation system PRNF reactor trip only included the high setpoint trip. Since credit was taken for the low setpoint trip in the safety analysis for both Units 1 and 2, the low setpoint should have been time response tested. It is believed that the lack of specific detail in the T/Ss regarding the separate setpoints was a contributing factor to the lack of testing, and we are therefore submitting the proposed changes of this letter to ensure that sufficient detail is included in the T/Ss for the PRNF reactor trip.

Justification for Chan e These changes are considered to be administrative in nature and intended to clarify the response time testing requirements for the PRNF reactor trip. No operability or surveillance requirements will be reduced as a result of this change.

Anal sis of Si nificant Hazards Per 10 CFR 50.92, a proposed amendment will not involve significant hazards consideration if the proposed amendment does not:

(1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of a previously evaluated accident, (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Criterion 1 This change is intended to clarify the existing T/S requirements for the PRNF reactor trip, No operability or surveillance requirements have been reduced. We therefore believe the change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously analyzed or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

to AEP:NRC:1078 Page 2 Criterion 2 The change does not involve physical modifications to the plant or changes in plant operation. The change therefore should not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously analyzed or evaluated.

Criterion 3 See Criterion 1 above.

Lastly, we note that the Commission has provided guidance concerning the determination of significant hazards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments considered not likely to involve significant hazards consideration. The first of these examples refers to changes which are purely administrative in nature: for example, changes to achieve consistency throughout the T/Ss, correction of errors, or changes in nomenclature. The proposed change only clarifies the present T/S. We are not proposing to reduce any present requirements. For these reasons, we believe that the example cited is applicable and that the proposed change should not involve significant hazards consideration.

TABLE 3.3-2 REACTOR TRIP SYSTEM INSTRUMENTATION RESPONSE TIMES FUNCTIONAL UNIT RESPONSE TIME

1. Manual Reactor Trip NOT APPLICABLE
2. Power Range, Neutron Flux Less than or equal to (High and Low Setpoint) 0.5 seconds
3. Power Range, Neutron Flux, High Positive Rate NOT APPLICABLE
4. Power Range, Neutron Flux, Less than or equal to High Negative Rate 0.5 seconds*
5. Intermediate Range, Neutron Flux NOT APPLICABLE
6. Source Range, Neutron Flux NOT APPLICABLE
7. Overtemperature delta T Less than or equal to 6.0 seconds
8. Overpower delta T NOT APPLICABLE
9. Pressurizer Pressure--Low Less than or equal to 1.0 seconds 10.Pressurizer Pressure--High Less than or equal to 1.0 seconds 11.Pressurizer Water Level--High NOT APPLICABLE
  • Neutron detectors are exempt from response time testing. Response time of the neutron flux signal portion of the channel shall be measured from detector output or input of first electronic component in channel.

COOK NUCLEAR PLANT - UNIT 2 3/4 3-9 AMENDMENT NO.

Q

~ ~