ML18039A791

Informs That by Meeting Test Criteria Established by Test Based on Ansi/Ans 3.5-1985 (License Amends 254 & 214) power- Uprate Simulation Acceptable for Operator Training

ML18039A791
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	05/24/1999
From:	Abney T TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
TAC-M99711, TAC-M99712, NUDOCS 9906080102
Download: ML18039A791 (14)

Text

REGULAT Y INFORMATION DISTRIBUTIO YSTEM (RIDS)

ACCESSION NBR:9906080102 DOC.DATE: 99/05/24 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET ¹ FACIL:50-260 Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2, Tennessee 05000260

~

, 50-296 Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, Tennessee 05000296 AUTH. NAME . AUTHOR AFFILIATION ABNEY,T.E. Tennessee Valley Authority RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Records ManageNhnt Branch (Document Control Desk)

SUBJECT:

Informs that by meeting test criteria established by this test based on ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985 (license amends 254 & 214) power uprate simulation was found to be acceptable for operator training.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: D030D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR ENCL SIZE:

TITLE: TVA Facilities Routine Correspondence NOTES:

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES 0 ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL LPD2-2 LA 1 1 LPD2-2 PD 1 1 DEAGAZIO,A 1 1 INTERNAL: ACRS 1 1 FILE CENTER 0 1 1 OGC/HDS3 1 0 SSEB/SES 1 1 EXTERNAL: NOAC 1 1 NRC PDR 1 1 D

'E NOTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:

PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE. TO HAVE YOUR NAME OR ORGANIZATION REMOVED FROM OR REDUCE THE NUMBER OF COPZES RECEIVED BY YOU OR YOUR ORGANIZATION, CONTACT DISTRIBUTION LISTS THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK (DCD) ON EXTENSION 415-2083 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 9 ENCL 8

4i ~ i Tennessee Valley Authority, Post Office Box 2000, Decatur. Alabama 36609 May 24, 1999 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:

In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-260 Tennessee Valley Authority 50-296 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT (BFN) CLOSURE OF OPERATIONS TRAINING LICENSE CONDITION ASSOCIATED WITH UNITS 2 AND 3 POWER UPRATE OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENTS 254 AND 214 (TAC NOS. M99711 AND M99712)

In a September 8, 1998 letter (Reference 1), NRC issued a license amendment to allow operation of BFN Units 2 and 3 at 3458 megawatts thermal power. As part of the amendment, NRC added the following license condition: "Classroom and simulator training on all power uprate related changes that affect operator performance will be conducted prior to operating at uprated conditions. Simulator changes that are consistent with power uprate conditions will be made and simulator fidelity will be validated in accordance with ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985. Training and the plant simulator will be modified, as necessary, to incorporate changes identified during startup testing."

990i0S010a e~om~

PDR ADQCK 05000260 P POR

1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 May 24, 1999 By letter dated October 1, 1997 (Reference 2), TVA requested a license amendment to allow BFN to operate Units 2 and 3 at the uprated power level of 3458 megawatts thermal. In a March 30, 1998 letter (Reference 3), the staff requested additional information regarding the proposed power uprate license amendment. The letter stipulated that TVA propose a license condition and/or a commitment that certain aspects of operation training be completed prior to operating BFN at uprated conditions. These actions included the following:

(a) Provide classroom and simulator training on all changes that effect operator performance caused by the power uprate modification. All training and the plant simulator will be modified, as necessary, to incorporate changes identified during the startup testing program.

(b) Complete simulator changes that are consistent with ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985. Simulator fidelity will be re-validated in accordance with ANSI/ANS 3 '-1985, Section 5.4.1, "Simulator Performance Testing."

Simulator revalidation will include comparison of individual simulated systems and components and simulated integrated plant steady state and transient performance with reference plant responses using similar startup test procedures.

(c) Complete all control room and plant process computer system changes as a result of the power uprate.

(d) Modify operator training and the plant simulator, as required, to address all related issues and discrepancies that are identified during the startup testing program.

In letter dated April 28, 1998 (Reference 4), TVA provided the requested information. As part of that response TVA committed to complete the requested actions. By letter dated September 1, 1998 (Reference 5), TVA agreed to the previously stated operating. license condition. Accordingly, on September 8, 1998, the NRC issued the license condition as part of the power uprate license amendment.

This letter provides notification that the required training activities required for power uprate implementation have been completed.

0 Ol Ig C

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 3 May 24, 1999 Com leted Actions Prior to operator requalification. training, the training content .was revised to include power uprate parameters.

Engineering and design data was used to revise the training material. Classroom training which included uprated conditions, involved an overview of various aspects of the power uprate (i.e., operating parameter value changes, setpoints and scaling changes, procedure changes, system

.changes,,startup test plan, etc.).

Simulator training was conducted in conjunction with the classroom training. The scenarios utilized included, those that demonstrated changes in plant responses at uprated power including changes in time to achieve critical points for operator actions. The operators were required to respond to the transients using applicable plant procedures.

The BFN simulator was modified to support Unit 3 power uprate implementation. The power uprate modifications were implemented on the simulator using engineering and design analysis prior to installation in Unit 3. Since the simulator reference unit is Unit 2, the installation of power uprate based on Unit 3 design caused some differences between the simulator and its'eference unit. These differences were noted and discussed as part of the classroom training.

Prior to training on the simulator, an acceptance test consistent with American Nuclear Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) 3.5-1985, Appendix B.l.l, was run to bench mark the simulator performance. The thrust of the test was to ensure the simulator heat balance matched the engineering and design analysis data for 105 percent steady-

,state power. Satisfactory completion of each test was accomplished'ith no major problems identified, therefore, the power uprate simulation was determined to be acceptable for operator training.

During the startup of Unit 3, Operations Training Instructors observed control room operators as they transitioned from Mode 4 through Mode 1 to track Unit 3's plant response during the power uprate startup test program. Observations from Unit 3 startup were included in revised Unit 3 and Unit 2 Power Uprate Classroom Training Lesson Plans.

Following startup of Unit 3, actual plant data was collected and a comparison analysis that would identify any performance differences between Unit 3 and the simulator was run. A steady state test was performed on the .simulator that met the intent of ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985; Section 5.4.1. In that test,

U. S.. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Pa.ge 4 May 24, 1999 the simulator values were compared with actual plant reference data. The results indicated that-, the simulator displayed good agreement w'ith. Unit 3 plant data" and no major problems were identified. The results of the testing also assured that the design data used as the basis of the simulator power uprate changes, was. accurate when compared to actual Unit 3 plant data. By meeting the test criteria established by this test based on ANSI/ANS 3..5-1985, the

,power uprate simulation was found to be acceptable for opera'tor training.

There are no commitments made in this letter. If you have any questions, please telephone me at (256) 729-2636.

Si cerel T.

Manager o z.cens'ng and In ustry Aff irs

,cc: See age 6

t ~

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P@~e 5 May 24, 1999 RE FERENCE S 1.. NRC letter to TVA dated September 8, 1998, Issuance of Amendment Power Uprate Browns Ferry Plant, Units 2 and 3

2. TVA letter to NRC dated October 1, 1997, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Units 2 and 3 Technical Specification (TS) Change TS-384 Request For License Amendment For Power Uprate Operation

3. NRC Letter -to TVA dated March 30,, 1998, Browns Ferry Plant, Units 2 and 3 .Request For Additional Information Regarding Technical Specification Change TS 384', Request For License Amendment For Power Uprate Operation (TAC NOS. 'M99711, M99712)

4. TVA letter to NRC dated April 28, 1998, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Response to Request For Additional Information (RAI) Regarding Units 2 and 3 Techni;cal Specification (TS) Change TS 384, Response To The Request For Additional Information Relating To License Amendment For Power Uprate Operation (TAC NOS. M99711, M99712) 5.. TVA letter to NRC dated September 1, 1998, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Units 2 and 3 Technical Specification (TS) NO. 384 Request For License Amendment For Power Uprate Operation, Proposed Operating License Conditions (TAC NOS. M99711, and M99712)

II U.. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Page 6 May 24, 1999

.cc: Mr. Albert W. De Agazio, Senior Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White. Fl'int, North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland .20852-1 Mr. Paul E. Fredrickson, Branch Chi.'ef U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 61 Forsyth Street, S. W,.

Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 NRC Resident Inspector Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 10833 Shaw Road Athens, Alabama 35611

O. 0, 'V I

I