ML20072P978

Proposed Tech Specs Altering Table of Values Specifying Min Critical Power Ratio,Operating Limits for Incremental Cycle Core Average Exposure

ML20072P978
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	03/30/1983
From:	POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To:
Shared Package
ML20072P929	List: ML20072P924 ML20072P947 ML20072P978
References
NUDOCS 8304040433
Download: ML20072P978 (13)

Text

.-.a - - . . .. . . . - - . -_ --

't ATTACHMENT I t-PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES RELATED.TO MCPR OPERATING LIMITS 4

i I

u POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT  ;

DOCKET NO. 50-333 DPR-59 4

4 8304040433 720220 p DR ADOCK 05000333 i PDR

O 3.1 (Cont!d) JAFNPP

• MTR Operating Limit for Incremental C. MCPR shall be determined daily during j Cycle Cbre Average Exposure reactor power operation at ) 25% of rated tier-am1. power and following any change in power Fuel Type DOC to BOC-lGHD/t to level or distribution that would cause 1GWD /t before EOC EOC operationwith a limiting control rod pattern as described in the banan for At 11DM trip level setting S = 0.66 W + 394 -

Specification 3.3.D.5.

8x8 1.24 1.26 D. When it is detennined that a, channel has 3

8x8R 1.24 1.25 failed in the unsafe condition, the

P8x0R 1.25 1.28 other 11PS channelar that monitor the

- came variable shall be functionally At HDM trip level setting S = 0.66W + 40% tested inmediately before the trip

. system containing the failure is tripped.

2 8x8 1.24 1.26 'the trip systan containing the unsafe bx8R 1.24 1.26 failure may be placed in the untripped i P8x8R 1.25 1.28 cxrdition during the period in which surveillance testing is being perfonned At HDM trip level setting S = 0.66 W + 41% on the other RPS channels 8x8 1.27 1.27 E. Verification of the limits set forth

8x0R 1.27 1.27 in specification 3.1.D. shall be perfonned l l Pax 0R 1.27 1.28 as follows:

At UDM trip level setting S = 0.66 W + 42t 1. 'Ihe average scran time to notch I

8x8 position 38 shall bes t,' ,i tg 1.31 1.31 8x0R 1.31 1.31 2. 'ihe average scran dme to notch Pax 0R 1.31 1.31 position 38 is determined as follows:

n n TMt='

N1 Y1 Ni'

. i=1 i=1

~

where: n = matjer of surveillance testa performed to date in the cycle, Ni =

ntatjer of active rods measured in Ament! ment flo.g 1

l l

1

1 .

FIGURE 3.1-2a

~

Operating Limit MCPR Vez: 4as [ (Section 4.1.E)

For 8X8 Fuel Types 1.40--

v (V

1.35_ g,3 0 a:

m O

SO

.d e 1.30_, 0' 9

$ 90 86.l.29 3 - (0

'.j '

e goc -

O U

a-(O s s8 soc.to 1.25_

(0,1*

l.20_

i l I I I ~'s l I I I i 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 1 '

L Option B: E=0 Option A:I = 1 47b Amendment No. [

FIGURE 3.1-b Operating Limit MCPR- Versus T (Section 4.1.E) -

For 8X8 R Fuel Types 1.40 _,

3 3 ,s -

ed 1.35 ~ Q 'g .3 c:

x v 96I y 1.30__, go (0 qg6< l'2 s o A C,\ s tn SO

.n j to EOC -

u g ,1 *9,6T goc o 1.25 _

(0 e l*24) 1.20 _,

r l l l l l l 1 l l l l 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 J.0 Y

l l Option B: 'C = 0

, Option A: I =1 i

I Amendment No. fd 47c

FIGURE 3.1-2c Operating Limit MCPR Versus T (Section 4.1.E)

For P8X8 R Fuel Types i

1 gOT 1.40-.

(si (1,1 3 1.35-a:

n.

U z

C 29O v $0' j 1.30_. (0.661 ' g ,

w SO

. . (0 ' SOE

1. BOc go u t ai 4

. o 1.25- 0 l

(0.l*2 1.20__

, L l

i I

l l l l l l l 1 l

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .3 .9 1.0 Y

f Option B: E =0 Option A: T! =l l

Amendment No. 47d 1

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

. - ... .. . - .- . . . - . . . . . . = .- . .- ~-.

ATTACHMENT II PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES RELATED TO

^ '

MCPR OPERATING LIMITS t

r 4

4 8

F i

t l'

t i

1 i

POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

, DOCKET NO. 50-333 DPR-59 i

r k

.?

. . - = _ _ _ _ _ . __. _ ,___ , _ - _.-

. DESCRIPTION OF THE CHANGES LThe table of Minimum 1ritical PoJer Ratio (MCPR) Operating Limits in Section 3.1.B.1 cui page 31 is corrected as follows.

(Uncorrected MCPR limits are indicated with parentheses.)

TABLE I COMPARISON OF UNCORRECTED AND CORRE0TEP, VALVES.

MCPR-OPERATING-LIMITS FOR INCREMENTAL ~ CYCLE CdRE AVERAGE EXPOSURE BOC TO 1 GWD/t EOC - 1 GWD/t FUEL TYPE BEFORE EOC TO EOC ,

At RBM trip level setting S = 0.66W + 39%

8X8 1.24 (1.22) 1.26 (1.23) 8 X 8R 1.24'(1.22) >

1.26 (1.23)

P8 X 8R 1.25 (1.22) 1.28 (1.25)

At RBM trip level setting S =-0.66W + 40%

8X8 '1.24 (1.24)- 1.26 (1.24) 8 X 8R 1.24 (1.24) 1.26 (1.24)

P8 X 8R 1.25 (1.24)- 1.28 (1.25) r At RBM trip level setting S = 0.66W + 41%

8X8 1.27 (1.27) 1.27 (1.27)

8 X 8R 1.27 (1.27) 1.27 (1.27)

, P8 X 8R 1.27 (1.27) 1.28 (1.27)

,At RBM trip level setting S = 0.66W + 42%

! 8X8 1.31 (1.31) 1.31 (1.31)-

8 X 8R 1.31 (1.31) 1.31.(1.31)

P8 X 8R 1.31 (1.31) 1.31 (1.31) "

. Accordingly, figures 3.1-2a, 3.1-2b and 3.1-2c (pages 47 b, c and d),

depicting MCPR operating limit versus scram time ratio (as defined <

in section 4.1.E), are changed to reflect the new limits. Both corrected and uncorrected curves are plotted for each fuel-type on the.following pages.

h 3

,,--r - . < - ---,,-,~~e-m'-- ,. .---eJ.---- - - + - - - - - < - . - . ~,----+,-...--,---- - - . - --,-4

Comparison of Corrected anc Uncurrected Limits Operating Limit MCPR Versus f (Section 4.1.E)

For 8X8 Fuel Types

= Corrected limits

---

= Uncorrected limits

1. 4 0__ ,

h

& 's-O 's.h .

' 0 1.35 -

./

- f @'9

/

Rh /

W s e -

N 19 @ *3 0T A

! 1.30 _. s g,oV f l O' tn

/

.9 s *T goc '

e (0 / /

M n

/

0 /

h~ <

/ qh2) 1.25 - (0 1 ,

, '\g .69 7'

,/

• • / '

/

g ,s -

$ q,,

30c, ? 6,ge1 ' s.21T 1I 0.1 l . 2 0._

(O.g.2 I I I I i i I I J i 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .g 1.0 L

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

I

Comparicon of Correct ct and Uncorrected Limits Operating Limit MCPR Veruus T (Section.4.1.E) -

For 8X8R Fuel Types

= Corrected Limits

---

= Uncorrected Limits 1.40 -

9 0 *v

@'v$<A 0

1. 3 5__ ,. @ '% 3 s'

/

/

/

l

% /

0<

E /

O 'g .

.$ 1.30_. C A / f E gO / f

'j goge goc" p,

/

0 D '

g6T 0-

• C

.; <e .s - .Oc js.,,,,1.2se, a4 c /

s. -

1.25_ ,-

- c., -

(0 e 1* B.9 O

- g.12u 1.20_.

l l l l l l l 1 l l 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 9 1.0

Compcricon of Corrected and Uncorrected Limits Operating Limit MCPR Versus E (Section 4.1.E)

For P8X8R Fuel Types

= Corrected limits

---

= Uncorrected limits (1,10 1.40-.

(1,1.3

/

1.35_ /

(1e 13 4I 0 /- /

40 e ,' /

S % Soc - , '296) 6/ /

1.30 f

.a o (0.66)'

/

1 a /

./

/ -

0 T- (o,12 / / 2561

/ BOC / (0.600, 1, M / j i

o 1.25 / ,-

S -

(0 e l* goc'h '

3,e-0C

/(O.{.22) .

1.20 __

l l l l 1 I I I i I I I l 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0

[

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

I..-PURPOSE OF THE CHANGES-

~

-Cycle'5 MCPR operating limits given in Section 3.1.B and in Figures 3.1-2 a,-b'and--c have been revised to account for-a nonconservative' error in. computer. calculations of the reactor's response to pressurization transients.: These calculations were originally' submitted in support of Cycle 5 operation by letter dated November 18,'1981 (Reference 1).

~

By telephone and letter. dated February 2, 1983.(Reference.2),.

the General > Electric' Company' informed the Authority of an error discovered in'the carryunder fraction used in input data.for its ODYN computer code. The ODYN' code is used to calculate plant response to transients, and:the results of ODYN analyses are used to

- ' calculate MCPR operating limits for the cycle. Carryunder fraction is defined as,the weight fraction of steam bubbles entrained in recirculating' reactor water.(i.e.,. steam not separated out and sent to the turbine). The.carryunder fraction originally used was that value used~previously-in REDY analyses of pressurization transients.

The correct fraction should have been the lower value used in

< qualification'of the ODYN code as a_ licensing tool'(Reference 3).

~

In analyses of postulated pressurization transients, a lower

~ carryunder fraction leads to a greater ZiCPR for each fuel type, due primarily to an increase in the rate of pressuri'zation of the

'reactorEvessel. Hence, MCPR operating limits must be raised so that the MCPR values for each fuel type would not fall below fuel safety limits, should a_ pressurization transient occur.

'The' changes required in the MCPR-operating limits of Section 3.1.B were^ determined using results of analyses of the same-

pressurization events for the upcoming Cycle 6 as those analyzed for r Cycle 5. . GETAB initial conditions and calculated-/SCPR's.using the erroneous carryunder fraction were compared for Cycle 5 and Cycle

6. In.all cases, the initial CPR's and the calculated 21CPR's for Cycle 6 were greater than-or equal'to those for Cycle 5. Therefore, the changes in /SCPR calculated for. Cycle 6 using the correct-carryunder fraction bound the changes for, Cycle 5 using the correct fraction.

The largest additional reduction in CPR for pressurization transients in' Cycle 6 using the correct fraction was determined to 1 be 0.03. For conservatism, new MCPR limits for Cycle 5 were thus determined?by adding an increment'of 0.03 to each calculated CPR

- value: tabulated for' pressurization transients, as shown in Table II'.

1he accepted methods-given in the NRC's Safety Evaluation Report on the ODYN code (Reference 4) were then applied to determine the Option A ( C = 1) and Option B ( t = 0) MCPR operr.U ng limits.

b~ <

. . -- l TABLE II CYCLE"6 ACPR FOR CORE-WIDE PRESSURIZATION TRANSIENTS With Erroneous' With Correct Exposure Carryunder Carryunder Transient Range (GWD/t) - Fraction Fraction 8X8R/P8X8R 8X8R/P8X8R

.22/.25 .24/.27

~

Load Rejection EOC-1 to EOC

.Without Bypass BOC to_EOC-1 .20/.22 1 .21/.24 l Feedwater.

! Controller EOC-1 to EOC .19/.21 .21/.23 Failure BOC to EOC-1 .15/.16 .17/.19 i

CYCLE 5 ACPR FOR CORE-WIDE PRESSURIZATION TRANSIENTS With Erroneous With Correct Exposure Carryunder Carryunder Transient Range (GWD/t) Fraction- Fraction 8X8 & 8X8R/P8X8R 8X8& 8X8R/P8X8R Load Rejection EOC-1 to EOC .22/.24 .25/.27 Without Bypass BOC to EOC-1 .18/.21 .21/.24 Feedwater Controller EOC-1 to EOC .17/.19 .20/.22 '

Failure BOC to EOC-1 .15/.16 .18/.~19 1 -

t -- t- -

-u- y-y -w -g._,

III. IMPACT OF THE CHANGES

--Since the MCPR operating limits calculated for pressurization events with.the corrected carryunder fraction were not limiting and are not expected to be limiting at any time during Cycle 5 operation, the proposed changes to the Technical Specifications have no impact-on plant operation. If scram-time surveillance determines that current-operation under Option B is no longer justified, then the corrected MCER operating limits will apply.

IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CHANGES Implementation of the changes, as proposed, will not impact the ALARA or Fire Protection programs at FitzPatrick. Moreover, the changes will not impact the environment.

V. CONCLUSION The incorporation of these changes: a) will not increase the probability or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety as previously evaluated in the Safety Analysis Report; b) will not increase the possibility for an accident or malfunction of a type other than that evaluated previously in the Safety Analysis Report; c) will not reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification .and d) does not constitute an unreviewed safety question.

VI. REFERENCES

1. PASNY letter, J. P. Bayne to T. A. Ippolito, dated November 18, 1981 (JPN-81-92).

2. General Electric letter, C.M. Richards to J. M. Clabby (PASNY), dated February 2, 1983.

-3. NRC memorandum, D.G. Eisenhut to all BWR licensees, dated November 4, 1980 ([[::JAF-80-196|JAF-80-196]]).

4. Safety Evaluation of the ODYN Computer Code, issued with NRC Generic Letter No. 81-08, dated January 29, 1981.

5. FitzPatrick Prompt Reportable Occurrence Report, Corbin A.

McNeill, Jr. to Director of Regulatory Operation - Region I, dated February 3, 1983.

6. FitzPatrick Licensee Event Report No. 83-008/0lT-0, dated February 9, 1983 (JAFP-83-0167).

7. General Electric Thermal Analysis Basis (GETAB),

NEDO-10958-A, January 1977.

8. General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel (GESTAR), NEDO-240ll-A-4, January 1982.