LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Core Operating Limits Report, Amendment … · 2012-11-18 · LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 C)Imnf *rr~nermnn Anni ic EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pame 4-3 Table 4.1 Coastdown

EMF-2440

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Revision 0

Plant Transient Analysis Page 4-1

4.0 Transient Analysis for Thermal Margin - Extended Operating Domain

This section describes the development of the MCPR and LHGR limits to support operation in

the following extended operating domains:

* Increased core flow (ICF) to 105% of rated flow.

* Power cdastdown to 40% of rated power.

* Final feedwater temperature reduction (FFTR) of up to l 000 F and with ICF. Since FFTR is typically used in connection with coastdown, analyses were performed to support combined FFTR/coastdown operation.

Results of the limiting transient analyses are used to determine appropriate MCPR• limits and

LHGRFACp multipliers for ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel to support operation in the EOD scenarios.

MCPRP limits are established for'both ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel while LHGRFACp multipliers

are only established for the ATRIUM-9B fuel.

As discussed in Reference 9, the MCPR safety limit analysis for the base case remains valid for

operation in the EODs discussed below. Also, the flow-dependent MCPR and LHGR analyses

described in Section 3.4 were performed such that the results are applicable for all the EODs.

4.1 Increased Core Flow

The base case analyses presented in Section 3.0 were performed to support operation in the

power/flow domain presented in Figure 1.1, which includes operation in the ICF region. The

coastdown and combined FFTRPcoastdown analyses are performed in conjunction with ICF to

conservatively maximize the exposure at which a given power level can be attained. As a result,

the analyses performed support operation in the ICF extended operating domain for all

exposures.

4.2 -Coastdown Analysis

Coastdown analyses were performed to ensure that appropriate MCPRP limits and LHGRFACp

multipliers are applied to support coastdown operation. The analyses were performed for

coastdown operation to 40% of rated power using a conservative coastdown rate equivalent to a

10% decrease in rated power per 1000 MWd/MTU increase in exposure. An additional

1000 MWdMTU was added to the EOFP exposure prior to the start of coastdown to provide

operation support for operation at up to 10% of rated power above the equilibrium xenon

coastdown power level. The MCPRP limits and LHGRFACý multipliers are based on results of

c;-a. IA~ gP NA"g'w

EMF-2440 LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Revision 0 Plant Transient Analysis Page 4-1..

LRNB and FWCF analyses. The analyses were performed at cycle exposures consistent with

the assumed coastdown rate. This corresponds to the highest exposure at which the power can

be obtained. The base case coastdown ACPRs for both the ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel as well

as the ATRIUM-9B LHGRFACp results are presented in Table 4.1 for the indicated power/flow conditions. The ATRIUM-9B MCPRp limits and LHGRFACý multipliers for coastdown operation

are presented in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. The GE9 coastdown MCPRp limits are presented in

Figure 4.3.

4.3 Combined Final Feedwater Temperature ReductionlCoastdown

Analyses were performed to support FFTR with thermal coastdown to ensure that appropriate MCPR•, limits and LHGRFACp multipliers are established. The combined FFTRPcoastdown analysis used a 100*F feedwater temperature reduction applied at EOFP to extend full thermal power operation. The coastdown exposure extension discussed in Section 4.2 (1000 MWd/MTU to support operation at up to 10% of rated power above the equilibrium xenon power level) was then applied. LRNB and FWCF analyses were performed to establish MCPRP, limits and , "

LHGRFACp multipliers. TheCycle 9 FFTRlcoastdown ACPR results for both ATRIUM-9B and

GE9 fuel as well as the LHGRFACp results are presented in Table 4.2 for the indicated power flow conditions. The ATRIUM-9B MCPR, limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for combined

FFTR/coastdown operation are presented in Figures 4.4 and 4.5. The GE9 coastdown MCPRp

limits are presented in Figure 4.6.

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 C)Imnf *rr~nermnn Anni ic

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Pame 4-3

Table 4.1 Coastdown Operation I Transient Results

Power/Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated I

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFACp ACPR

LRNB 100 /105 0.31 1.00 0.41

LRNB 80 /105 0.32 1.00 0.35

LRNB 60 /105 0.31 0.99 0.35

LRNB 40 / 105 0.31 0.96 0.31

LRNB 25 /105 0.19 1.13' 0.19

FWCF 100 / 105 0.26 1.08- 0.32

FWCF 80 / 105 0.29 1.08 0.31

FWCF 60 /105 0.34 1.08- 0.36

FWCF 401105 0.44 1.12 0.44

FWCF 25 / 105 0.86 1.08 0.88

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Plant Transient Analysis

LRNB 60/105 0.27 1.01 0.28

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 4-4

Table 4.2 FFTRlCoastdown Operation Transient Results

Power/ Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated I

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFACJ ACPR

LRNB 100D1 105 0.26 1.04 0.29

LRNB 80 / 105 0.25 1.04 0.30

LRNB 40 1 105 0.25 0.99 0.25

LRNB 25/105 0.14 1.18 0.15

FWCF 100/105 0.26 1.09 0.28

FWCF 80 /105 0.30 1.09 0.33

FWCF 60 /105 0.37 1.09 0.40

FWCF 40 / 105 0.50 1.07 0.50

FWCF 25/105 1.10 0.95 1.12

�4( '�

N -I

J

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 4-5

0 10 20 30 40 so To so 7goo• 110 POWN(%of Pmmd)

Power MCPRN ... (%) , Limit

.. 100 - 1.42 60 1.48

-25 ----- 2.05 -. 25 ... 2.20 -- 0' 2.70

"Figure 4.1 Coastdown Power-Dependent MCPR Limits fo"r ATRUM-9B Fuel

2M5

2.

2.m5

225

2.15

a.m 62A5

4D3I 39131101GL •lýl Zi


L

a,.

0 10 20 30 40 50 so 70 so 90 100 110

PowofC% of~ad

Power LHGRFACý (%) Multiplier

100 1.00 60 0.99 25 0.75 25 0.75 0 0.75

Figure 4.2 Coastdown Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRUM-SB Fuel

Siemens Power Corporatfn

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 4-6

I (z ,

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 •1• n'a•wt• JJ•q4A -'~ hI .;

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Paoe 4-7

0 10 20 30 40 50 " s 70 so so 100 110

Vower (%f RzOM

Power MCPRp

(%): Limit

100 1.52

60- 1.54

25 2.05

25. 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 4.3 Coastdown Power-Dependent 'MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

m. OK

rl, l9l" 14 Ibl~ C IZ C ~ l i •O l•- O

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Pac e4-8


285

2.65

2M•

2145

2.2M

2.15

105 t 2.a5,

S1JI5

1.115

1.753

1AS"

1.25

1.15

0 10 20 30 40 50 0

P-W(m %o raft)

70 W0 !0 100 110

Power MCPRN (%) Limit 100 1.42 60 1.56 25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 4.4 FFTRPCoastdown Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRUM-9B Fuel

U

AmRmng Piwmr Cormtfrfi

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9r l V. i|. i i "- i i1; i i&'P ii h

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pae 4-9

a 10 m 30 40 so0 70 so 90 100 1110

Puinr(M.of poe

Power LHGRFACý (%) Muttiplier

100 1.00 -60 0.97

-25 -.- 0.65

.-25 0.65 _ _ _0 0.65

Figure 4.5 FFTRlCoastdown Base Cise Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRUM-9B Fuel

I


EMF-2440 Revision 0 Page 4-10

0 10 2D W0 40 W0 50 so W0 150 110

Pufm rA of Poe

Power MCPRp (%) Limit

100 1.52 60 1.59 25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 4.6 FFTR/Coastdown Power-Dependent MCPR Umits for GE9 Fuel

2.75

2.45

2.2M

12.5 2.15

~1J5 tIM

1.75

.AS

1."5

1.15

EMF-2440 LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Revision 0 Plant Transient Analysis Page 5-1

5.0 Transient Analysis for Thermal Margin- Equipment Out-of-Service

This section describes the development of the MCPR and LHGR operating limits to support

operation with the following EOOS scenarios:

* Feedwater heaters out-of-service (FHOOS) - 100°F feedwater temperature reduction. * 1 recirculation pump loop (SLO). * Turbine bypass system out-of-service (TBVOOS). * Recirculation pump trip out-of-service (No RPT). * Slow closure of I or more turbine control valves.

Operation with I SRV out-of-service, up to 2 TIPOOS (or the equivalent number of TIP

channels) and up to 50% of the LPRMs out-of-service is supported by the base case thermal

limits presented in Section 3.0. No further discussion for these EOOS scenarios is presented in

this section. The EOOS analyses presented in this section also include the same EOOS

scenarios protected by the base case limits.

Results of the limiting transient analyses are used to establish appropriate MCPRp limits and

LHGRFACp multipliers to support operation in the EOOS scenarios. All EOOS analyses were

performed with TSSS insertion times.

As discussed in Reference 9, the base case MCPR safety limit for-two-loop operation remains

applicable for operation in the EOOS scenarios discussed below with the eXception of single

loop operation. Also, the flow-dependent MCPR and LHGR analyses'described in Section 3.4

were performed such that the results are applicable in all the EOOS scenarios.

5.1 Feedwater Heaters Out-of-Service (FHOOS)

The FHOOS scenario assumes a 1000F reduction in the feedwater temperatubre. Operation with

FHOOS is similar to operation with FFTR except that the reduction in feedwater temperature

due to FHOOS can occur at any time during the cycle. The effect of the reduced feedwater

temperature is an increase in'the core subcooling which can 6hange the power shape and core

void fraction'.'Whike the LRNB event is leis severe due to the decrease in steam flow, the FVVCF

event can get worse due to the iricrease in core inlet SzUbcooling.'FWCF analyses were

performed for Cycle 9 to determine thermal limits to support operation with' FHOOS. The ACPR

and LHGRFACý results used to develop the EOC operating limits with FHOOS are presented in

Table 5.1. The EOC MCPRP limits and LHGRFAC6 multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel for FHOOS

EMF-2440 LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Revision 0 Plant Transient Analysis Paoe 5-2

operation are presented in Figures 5.1 and 5.2, and the EOC FHOOS GE9 MCPR: limits are

presented in Figure 5.3.

5.2 Single-Loop Operation (SLO)

5.2.1 Base Case operation

The impact of SLO at LaSalle on thermal limits was presented in Reference 9. The only impact

is on the MCPR safety limit. As presented in Section 3.2, the single-loop operation safety limit is

0.01 greater than the two-loop operating limit (1.12 compared to 1.11). The base case ACPRs

and LHGRFACp multipliers remain applicable. The net result is an increase to the base case

MCPRp limits of 0.01 as a result of the increase in the MCPR safety limit.

5.2.2 Idle Loop Startup

The MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for the startup of an idle recirculation pump are

based on the results of the abnormal startup of the idle recirculation loop analysis and the SLO

MCPR safety limit analysis. As discussed in Section 3.2, the single-loop operation safety limit is

1.12 or 0.01 higher than the two-loop operation limit. The process used for the abnormal stari4j

of the idle recirculation loop analysis for L2C9 is presented in Reference 20. The responses of

the system parameters for the L2C9 analysis are consistent with those presented in Reference

20. The Reference 20 results demonstrated that the lowest power (35%P/47%F) conditions

provide conservative results. Subsequently, the L2C9 analyses were performed at 35%P/47%F.

The limiting exposure was determined to be BOC. The ACPR and LHGRFAC, results for the

abnormal startup of the idle recirculation loop are presented in Table 5.2. Figures 5.4 and 5.5

Spresent the ATRIUM-9B MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for idle loop startup. The GE9

MCPRP limits for idle loop startup are presented in Figure 5.6.

5.3 Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service (TBVOOS)

The effect of operation with TBVOOS is a reduction in the system pressure relief capacity,

which makes the pressurization events more severe. While the base case LRNB event is

analyzed assuming the turbine bypass system out-of-service, operation with TBVOOS has an

effect on the FWCF evenL The FWCF event was evaluated for LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 to support

operation with TBVOOS. The ACPR and LHGRFACp results used to develop the EOC operatirw"

limits with TBVOOS are presented in Table 5.3. The EOC MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp II

0 L-- ch- P


multipliers for ATRIUM-9g fuel for TBVOOS operation are presented in Figures 5.7 and 5.8, and

the EOC TBVOOS GE9 MCPRp limits are presented in Figure 5.9.

5.4 Recirculation Pump Tip Out-of-Service (No RP7)

This section summarzes the development of the thermal limits to support operation with the

EOC RPT inoperable. When RPT is inoperable, no credit for tripping the recirculation pump on

TSV position or TCV fast closure is assumed. The function of the RPT feature is to reduce the

severity of the core power excursion caused by the pressurization transient. The RPT

accomplishes this by helping revoid the core, thereby reducing the magnitude of the reactivity

insertion resulting from the pressurization transient. Failure of the RPT feature can result in

higher operating limits because of the higher positive reactivity in the core at the time of control

rod insertion.

Analyses were performed for LRNB and FWCF events assuming no RPT. The ACPR and

LHGRFACý results used to develop the EOC operating limits with no RPT are presented in

Table 5.4. The EOC MCPRp limits and LHGRFACý multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel for operation

with no RPT are presented in Figures 5.10 and 5.11, and the EOC no RPT GE9 MCPRF limits are


5.5 Slow Closure of the Turbine Control Valve

LRNB analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of a TCV slow closure. Analyses were

performed closing 3 valves in the normal fast closure mode and 1 valve in 2.0 seconds. Results

provided in Reference 23 demonstrate that performing the analyses with I TCV closing in

2.0 seconds protects operation with up to 4 TCVs closing slowly. Sensitivity analyses below

80% power have shown that the pressure relief provided by all 4 TCVs closing slowly can be

sufficient to preclude the high-flux scram set point from being exceeded. Therefore, credit for

high-flux scram is not taken for analyses at 80% power and below. The 80% power TCV slow

closure analyses were performed both with and without high-flux scram credited. The ACPR and

LHGRFACp results of the analyses performed are presented in Table 5.5.

The MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers are established with a step change at 80% power.

At 80% power, the lower-bound MCPR, limits and upper-bound LHGRFACp multipliers are based on the analyses which credit high-flux scram; the upper-bound MCPRp limt and lower

bound LHGRFACp multipliers are based on analyses which do not credit high-flux scram. While

~m.,eDine .r1mtFIM


the TCV slow closure analysis is performed without RPT on valve position, it does not

necessarily bound the LRNB no RPT or FWCF no RPT events at all power levels because the

slow closing TCV provides some pressure relief until it completely closes. Therefore, the MCPRp

limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for the TCV slow closure EOOS scenario are established using

the limiting of the no RPT results reported in Section 5.4 and the TCV slow closure results.

The EOC MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel for operation with TCV

slow closure are presented in Figures 5.13 and 5.14 and the EOC TCV slow closure GE9

MCPRp limits are presented in Figure 5.15. The limits presented in Figures 5.13 through 5.15

protect the scenario of all 4 TCVs closing slowly.

5.6 Combined FHOOS/TCV Slow Closure and/or No RPT

MCPi• limits and LHGRFACp multipliers were established to support operation with FHOOS,

TCV slow closure and/or no RPT. The TCV slow closure ACPR and LHGRFACý results with

FHOOS become less limiting than the TCV slow closure event with nominal feedwater

temperature since the initial steam flow with FHOOS is lower and produces a less severe j r

pressurization event. Subseque'ntly, no TCV slow closure with FHOOS analyses were

performed. The TCV slow closure results with nominal feedwater temperature are considered in

determining the combined FHOOS/TCV slow closure and/or no RPT MCPRp limits and

LHGRFACp multipliers. The limits were developed based on the limiting of either the TCV slow

closure analysis results discussed in Section 5.5 or the analyses with both FHOOS and no RPT

presented in Table 5.6.

The EOC MCPRp limits and LHGRFAC, multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel with FHOOS/TCV slow

closure and/or no RPT are presented in Figures 5.16 and 5.17, and the EOC GE9 MCPRp limits

for the same EOOS scenario are presented in Figure 5.18. The limits presented in Figures 5.16

through 5.18 protect the scenario of all 4 TCVs closing slowly.

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 5-5LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 r DEI " Ir *ann Anal i

Table 5.1 EOC Feedwater Heater Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power/ Flow . ATRIUM GE9 (% rated/

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFACý &CPR

FWCF 100/105 0.26 1.08' 0.31

FWCF 100181 0.23 1.11 0.28

FWCF 801105 0.30 1.03" 0.36

FWCF 60/ 105 0.40' 0.97* 0.46'

FWCF 401105 0.62' 0.87* 0.69*

FWCF 25 /105 1.03° 0.69' 1.11°

° The analysis results presented are from an ealier cycle exposure. The ACPR and LHGRFAC, results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

a 10110 Z=

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9l-ioll i IdFIWSIeL AI Idliy*a

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Paoe 5-6

0

Table 5.2 Abnormal Recirculation Loop Startup Analysis Results

Power I Flow FCV ATRIUM-9B (% rated I Position % rated) ACPR• LHGRFACý

35147 27% open 1.46t 0.421

& ACPR results for ATRIUM-9B fuel are conservatively applicable for GE9 fuel. SThe analysis results presented are from an earlier cycle exposure. The .CPR and LHGRFACp

results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Page 5-7LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9

01 4r ~emarn Anol ;ee

Table 5.3. EOC Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power / Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated !

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFAC - ACPR

FWCF 10 0/105 .0.32 v1.02 0.41

FWCF 100181 0.31 -0.99- 0.41

FWCF 80/105 0.35 1.00' 0.45

FWCF 80157.2 0.31 1.05 0.41

-FWCF. 60/105 0.41. -' 0.97- 0.51

FWCF 60/35.1 0.15 1.14 0.25

FWCF 40 / 105 0.58' .0.90r 0.65'

FWCF 25/105 0.87* 0.76' 0.97*

" The anatyss results presented are from an earlier cycle exposure. The ACPR and LHGRFACý resuht are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9Md"IIi I rdansIeIIL "63 ma il

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Paoe 5-8

<9

Table 5.4 EOC Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power I Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated I

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFAC, ACPR

LRNB 100 /105 0.40 0.89 0.50

LRNB 100/81 0.32 0.91 0.47

LRNB 801105 0.35 0.94 0.47

LRNB 80157.2 0.30 0.97 0.44

LRNB 601105 0.32 0.99 0.44

FWCF 100/105 0.31 0.97 0.40

FWCF 100181 0.26 0.99 0.35

FWCF 80/105 0.33 1.00* 0.43

FWCF 60/105 0.38 0.97' 0.48

FWCF 40/ 105 0.51' 0.91" 0.59*

FWCF 25/105 0.78' 0.79* 0.87'

" The analysis results presented are from an earlier cycle exposure. The ACPR and LHGRFAC, results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Pawe 5-9LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9

Table 5.5, EOC Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure Analysis Results

Slow Power I Flow ATRIUM-9B GE9 Valve (% rated I

Event Characteristics % rated) &CPR LHGRFACý ACPR

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 100 / 105 0.42 0.93 0.52

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 100 8.1... 0.33 0.97 0.49

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0 sec, 801 105" 0.40 0.96 0.49

LRNB I TCV closing at 2.0 sec B0 / 57.21 0.50 0.97 0.73

LRNB 1 TCV closing at 2.0 sec 801 105't 0.52? 0.86* 0.62

LRNB I TCV, closing at 2.0 sec 80 1 57.2! 0.58 0.92? 0.84

LRNB I TCV closing at 2.0 sec 60/1051 0.61$ 0.83* 0.71S

LRNB I TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 601 35.11 0.63W 0.940 0.86

LRNB I TCV closing at 2.0 sec 40 /I 105t 0.78 0.77* 0.84

LRNB -TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 25/ 1051 0.99 0.70e 0.97$

Scram initiated by high-neutron flux. Scram initiated by high dome pressure

The analysis results presented are from an earlier cycle exposure. The ACPR and LHGRFACP resutts are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.-

$

Mant I ransient Pnaiyz



7-i

Table 5.6 EOC Recirculation Pump Trip and Feedwater Heater Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power I Flow ATRIUM-9B GE9 (% rated I


FWCF 100/105 0.30 0.98 0.39

FWCF 100181 0.25 1.03 0.33

FWCF 801105 0.35 0.98* 0.43

FWCF 60/105 0.42 0.94" 0.51

FWCF

FWCF

40/105 0.61* 0.85*t *1.

25/105 1.01* 0.68*I J.

0.70"

1.09*

The analysis results presented are from an earlier cycle exposure. The ACPR and LHGRFACp results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

LaSaI eUnit 2 Cycle 9 I~3 l.... "r.. .-u a�a n f A V, .1ei u

2.15

2'is t=u=

1.76"

IAS

1.35'

1.25


0 10 20 30 40 s0 s0 _ 70 s0 90 100 110

Pwf" N d ftMr)

Power- MCPRP

(%). Limit

100 1.41 60 1.51 25 2.14 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.1 EOC Feedwater Heaters Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Uimits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

IaiIIf I Ol i843 ;I i 0 i4 iRZuya;



0 10 20 40 50 so 70 60 90 10 110

powmr(% ofRmhom

Power LHGRFACý (%) Multiplier

100 1.00 60 0.97 25 0.69 25 0.69

0 0.69

Figure 5.2 EOC Feedwater Heaters Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

0. U

a'.

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Paqe 5-13LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9

ý0I1 .4 "r,-I M=n Arnhteic

0 10 20 30 40 so so 70 50 90 ¶00 110

pa"I (% d Rd)69

Power MCPRP (%) UIt

100' 1.51

60 1.57 25 2.22 25 2.35

0 9 2.85

Figure 5.3 EOC Feedwater Heaters Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

B.

4M 443410 --


VK%

U U.

z" I

225

213,

2.105

125.

1.75.

1.85"

1AS"

135

12S

1.150 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pm I% of Ratd)

70 s0 9O 100 110

Power MCPRp

(%) Limit

100 2.60 60 2.60 25 2.60 25 2.60

0 2.60

Figure 5.4 Abnormal Idle Recirculation Loop Startup Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-96 Fuel

xJ.


Lkft LO .Reala

EMF-2440 Revision 0 oPage 5-15LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9

11d1 10" V"@ a~~ 31Fe aYO

I *LOOsRoP Re I LHGRFAOP

10 20 30 40 50 60

Power (% of Raed)

1.30

1.25 1.20'

1.15.

1.10

1.05,

1.00 OAS

OmO

0.75

0.70

O.050.60

0.45 j

0431

Power- LHGRFACp (%) Multiplier

100 . .. . 0.40

60-- -0.40

25 --.. 0.40 25 .. .0 _0 . ..... 0.40

Figure 5.5 Abnormal Idle Recirculation Loop Startup Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-91 Fuel

E.

70 W0 90 100 1100

C6._..ftW cv."Or t'*fW"nrAfinn

. I I !I ! I

i

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9*o..s . *e**e5�s*t �

-3 t~

2.45

2452.35'

225

2.15'

2.05

~1AS

1.75

1.A

1.5S

1.45

15

1.25

1.150 10 20 30 40 50 so

Power 1% d R20

70 s0 90 1M 110

Power MCPRI (%) Umit

100 2.60 60 2.60 25 2.60 25 2.60

0 2.60

Figure 5.6 Abnormal Idle Recirculation Loop Startup Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pace 5-16

£f wpRa

K iAMP


Plant Transient Analysis

0 10 20 30 40 so OD To OD 90 1OD 110

POinr M% d Rabd

Power MCPRq (%) Umit

100 - -..••_ . .1.43

60 -1.52

25 V 1.98

25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 5.7 EOC Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

a



a. U

0 10 20 30 40 so 60

Pom •(%of Ramd)

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 0.99

60 0.97

25 0.76

25 0.76

0 0.76

Figure 5.8 EOC Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

70 80 90 100 110

Paae 5-18

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 £•II•..lA "' -• .,I, A1 .•.J •.

IIIL I l-ans "L a l o-i l -.


0 10 2 0 40 50 60 70 so o 100 110

POWA f cIamm

Power MCPRP

(%) Limit

:100 1.52

60 1.62

25 2.08

25 2.20 0 2.70

Figure 5.9 EOC Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPRL'Umits for GES Fuel

1.35

125

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9rldnl I I a2 1 M " 0" cIzy--,

2.o5

1.75'

1.85. I.M 1.55'

IA5'

1.Ms


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 so 100 110

Power MCPRP

(%) Limit

100 1.51

60 1.51 25 1.91 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 5.10 EOC Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

K)j

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 01 "lrrsnei&nM Ar~nst*se

a IZ~ a.e..r5,.2

i 4%n

120*

1.15�

1.10

U IL

0J.90

am I

0.U0

COS -

0.70,

am65

0.60

0 10 20 30 40 s0 6o PC"r (M)

7D W0 90 100 110

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 0.89

60 0.89

25 0.78

25 0.78

0 0.78

Figure 5.11 EOC Recirculation PumpTrip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-98 Fuel

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pacne 5-21

a a1

*

U

* FVCF

I_•11


2.85'

2.55

24S.

2.35

22S

125, 2.15'

2.05

I1.9

lAs

1.75

lAs

1.55

145'

1.35

1.25

1.IS �*

0 10 20 30 40 50 so

POW" (% of RONDO70 s0 90 1W 110

Power MCPRP (%) Limit 100 1.61

60 1.61 25 1.99 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 5.12 EOC Recirculation PumpTrip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

U


&

d FVCF -C o:P

U

U

a UU

EMF-2440 Revision

0

Parle

5-22


FIOIIL I I�5I�'��.

0 10 20 3D 40 so so To ao 90 100 110

F~m M% of Ubft

Power MCPRF

(%) Limit

100 1.53

80 1.61

80 1.69

25 2.10 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 5.13 EOC Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or -Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-98 Fuel

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9r 3C1 IL I V 1 " i& r- ., .

S1.00

0 0.95n

0 10 20 30 40 50 s0 70 s0 go 100 11I

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 0.89

80 0.89 80 0.86 25 0.70 25 0.70

0 0.70

Figure 5.14 EOC Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

LHGR Multipliem for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

J

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Paae 5-24

K)


3. a., U=


0 10 40 s s 70 s0 so 100 110

Pwut(%of 4bMd

Power MCPRp (M) Limit

100 1.63

"80 1.84

80 o-. 1.95 25 - 2.10

-25 2.20 0 --2.70

Figure 5.15 EOC Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure andlor Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

MCPR Umits for GE9 Fuel

Siemens Power Corooration


2.85

2.75'

zw I

1.15• 1.15

7AS

1.tz

4 4�.

0 10 20 30 40 OD OD

Pomr 1% d FW04

70 s0 9o 100 110

Power MCPR, (%) Limit

100 --1.53

80 1.61 80 1.69 25 2.14 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 5.16 EOC Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip and Feedwater Heaters Out-of-Service

Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

4


K-

SI • FVCFNr WT"ftFH= KoF RTmcV I XMRVO6x


125 120

1.15

1.10

.• 1.00 U I

S0.95

0J•

0.75.

0.70'

O.65

. *R I0 10 20 30 40 so s0

Paws( M cRtMd)

70 so 9o 100 110

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 0.89

80 0.89

80 z 0.86

25 0.68

25 0.68

0 0.68


Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

• FVC• No FT v ft FHOOS

* U

011L Jc"Q-_ Z=


I.

a 10 2D 30 40 50 so 70 s0 90 100 110

Pur (% of fd)

Power MCPRp (%) Umit 100 1.63

80 1.84 80 1.95 25 2.22 25 2.35

0 2.85


Power-Dependent MCPR Limts for GE9 Fuel


K)

U

Paoe 5-28

EMF-2440


Plant Transient Analysis Pae 6-1

6.0 Transient Analysis for Thermal Margin - EODIEOOS Combinations

This section describes the transient analyses perform. ed to determine the, MCPR and LHGR

operating limits to support operation in the coastdown and combined FFTR/coastdown extended

operating domains in conjunction with the following EOOS scenarios:

* Feedwater heaters out-of-service (FHOOS) - 100 F feedwater temperature reduction.

* 1 recirculation pump loop (SLO). * Turbine bypass system out-of-service (TBVOOS). * Recirculation pump trip out-of-service (no RPT). * Slow closure of I or more turbine control valves andlof no RPT.

Each of the EOOS scenarios presented also includes the failure of 1 SRV.

Results of the limiting transient analyses are used to establish MCPR: limits and LHGRFACp

multipliers to support operation in the combined EOD/EOOS scenarios. All combined

EODIEOOS analyses were performed with TSSS insertion times.

As discussed in Reference 9, the base case MCPR safety limit for two-loop operation remains

applicable for operation in the combined EODIEOOS scenarios with the exception of single-loop

operation. Also, the flow-dependent MCPR and LHGR analyses described in Section 3.4 remain

applicable in all the combined EODIEOOS scenarios.

6.1 Coastdown With EOOS

The impact of EQOS scenarios on coastdown operation is discussed below. The MCPRp limits

and LHGRFACp values established for.nominal coastdown operation remain applicable for

coastdown operation with 1 safet,/relief'valve out-of-service, up to 2 TIPOOS (or the equivalent

number of TIP channels) and up to 50% of the LPRMs out-of-serivice (Reference 9).

6.1.1 Coastdown With Feedwater Heaters Out-of-Service

The discussion and results presented in Section 4.3 for combined FFTR/coastdown operation

are applicable to coastdown operation with FHOOS.

6.1.2 Coastdown With One Recirculation Loot

The impact of SLO at LaSalle on thermal limits was presented in-Reference 9. The only impact

is on the MCPR safety limit. As presented in'Section 32, the single-loop operation safety limit is


0.01 greater than the to-loop operating limit (1.12 compared to 1.11). The base case

coastdown ,CPRs and LHGRFACý multipliers remain applicable. The net result is an increase

to the base case coastdown MCPRp limits of 0.01 as a result of the increase in the MCPR safety

limit.

6.1.3 Coastdown With TBVOOS

The exposure extension during coastdown can make the effects of the pressurization transients

more severe. The TBVOOS assumption also increases the severity of pressurization events.

The nominal coastdown analysis for the load rejection event is performed assuming the turbine

bypass system is inoperable. Therefore, the impact of the TBVOOS on the load rejection event

is included in the nominal coastdown results.

The FWCF event was evaluated to ensure appropriate MCPRp limits and LHGRFACpvalues are

established to support coastdown operation with TBVOOS. The results of the Cycle 9

coastdown FWCF with TBVOOS analyses for both ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel are presented in

Table 6.1. Figures 6.1 and 6.2 show the ATRIUM-9B MCPRF limits and LHGRFACp multipliers

that support coastdown operation with TBVOOS. The coastdown with TBVOOS MCPRp limigs')

for GE9 fuel are presented in Figure 6.3.

6.1.4 Coastdown Wrth No RPT

To ensure that appropriate MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers are established to support

coastdown operation with no RPT, analyses were performed for LRNB and FWCF events with

RPT assumed inoperable. The results of the Cycle 9 coastdown no RPT analyses for both

ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel are presented in Table 6.2. Figures 6.4 and 6.5 show the

ATRIUM-9B MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers that support coastdown operation with no

RPT. The coastdown with no RPT MCPRp limits for GE9 fuel are presented in Figure 6.6.

6.1.5 Coastdown Withl Slow Closure of the Turbine Control Valve

The slow closure of the turbine control valve event changes the characteristics of the LRNB

event in that no direct scram or RPT occurs on valve position. The effect of the increase in

exposure resulting from coastdown operation can make the event more severe. The ACPR and

LHGRFACý results are presented in Table 6.3. While the TCV slow closure analysis is performr

without RPT on valve position, it does not necessanily bound the LRNB no RPT or FWCF no RPT'

events at all power levels because the slow closing TCV provides some pressure relief until it

EMF-2440



completely closes. Therefore, the MCPRp limits and LHGRFACP multipliers for the coastdown with

TCV slow closure scenario are established using the limiting of the coastdown no RPT results

reported in Section 6.1.4 or the TCV slow closure results.

Figures 6.7 and 6.8 present the ATRIUM-9B coastdown with TCV slow closure and/or no RPT

MCPRt rrnits and LHGRFACý multipliers and Figure 6.9 presents the coastdown with TCV slow

closure and/or no RPT GE9 MCPRP limits.

6.2 Combined FFTRICoastdown With EOOS

The impact of EOOS scenarios on combined FFTR/coastdown operation is discussed below.

The FFTR/coastdown MCPRp limits and LHGRFAC, values established for combined

FF'RJcoastdown operation remain applicable for FFTR/coastdown operation with I safetylrelief

valve out-of-service, up to 2 TIPOOS (or the equivalent number of TIP channels) and up to 50%

of the LPRMs out-of-service (Reference 9).

6.2.1 Combined FFTR/Coastdown With One Recirculation Loon

The impact of SLO at LaSalle on thermal limits was presented in Reference 9S.The only impact

is on the MCPR safety limit. As presented in Section 3.2, the'single-loop operation safety limit is

0.01 greater than the two-loop operating limit (1.12 compared to 1.11). The base case

FFTRPcoastdown ACPRs and LHGRFACp multipliers remain applicable. The net result is an

increase to the base case FFTRicoastdown MCPRp limits of 0.01 as a result of the increase in

the MCPR safety limit.

6.2.2 Combined FFTRPCoastdown With TBVOOS

The exposure extension and decrease in core inlet enthalpy during combined FFTR/coastdown

operation can make the effects of the pressurization transients more severe. The TBVOOS

assumption also increases the severity of pressurization events. The nominal FFTR/coastdown

analysis for the load rejection event is performed assuming the turbine bypass system is

inoperable. Therefore, the impact of the TBVOOS on the load rejection event is included in the

nominal FFTR/coastdown results.

The FWCF event was evaluated to ensure appropriate MCPRP limits and LHGRFACý values are

established to support combined FFTR/coastdown operation with TBVOOS. The results of the

Cycle 9 FFTR/coastdown FWCF with TBVOOS analyses for both ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel are


K) presented in Table 6.4. Figures 6.10 and 6.11 show the ATRIUM-9B MCPRp limits and

LHGRFACý multipliers that support combined FFTR/coastdown operation with TBVOOS. The

FFTR/coastdown with TBVOOS MCPRp limits for GE9 fuel are presented in Figure 6.12.

6.2.3 Combined FFTRPCoastdown With No RPT

To ensure that appropriate MCPRr, limits and LHGRFACp multipliers are established to support

FFTPIcoastdown operation with no RPT, analyses were performed for LRNB and FWCF events

with RPT assumed inoperable. The results of the Cycle 9 FFTR/coastdown no RPT analyses for

both ATRIUM-99 and GE9 fuel are presented in Table 6.5. Figures 6.13 and 6.14 show the

ATRIUM-9B MCPRP limits' and LHGRFACI multipliers that support combined FFTRPcoastdown

operation with no RPT. The FFTRlcoastdown with no RPT MCPRp limits for GE9 fuel are


6.2.4 Combined FFTRlCoastdown With Slow Closure of the Turbine Control Valve

Slow closure of the turbine control valve changes the characteristics of the LRNB event in that

no direct scram or RPT occurs on valve position. While the decrease'in steam flow due to the • "

FFTR tends to lessen the severity of the event, the FFTR/coastdown exposure extension may

have the opposite effect. The iCPR and LHGRFACp results are presented in Table 6.6. While the

TCV slow closure analysis is performed without RPT on valve position, it does not necessarily

bound the LRNB no RPT or FWCF no RPT events at all power levels because the slow closing

TCV provides some pressure rerief until it completely closest.Therefore, the MCPRP limits and

LHGRFACp multipliers for the combined FFTR/coastdown with TCV slow closure scenario are

established using the limiting of the FFTR/coastdown no RPT results reported in Section 6.2.3 or

the TCV slow closure results.

Figures 6.16 and 6.17 present the ATRIUM-9B combined FFTR/coastdown with TCV slow

closure and/or no RPT MCPR, limits and LHGRFACp multipliers and Figure 6.18 presents the

FFTR/coastdown with TCV slow closure and/or no RPT GE9 MCPRp limits.

a-.- F r6===M.=k1.

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pae 6-5

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Diftnt Tr-Jinnt An.l is

Table 6.1 Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service'Analysis Results

Power I Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated /

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFACP &CPR

FWCF 100/105 0.33 1.01 0.42

FWCF 801105 0.37 1.01 0.40

FWCF 601105 0A2 1.00 0A6

FWCF 40/105 0.54 1.00 0.55

FWCF 251105 0.86 1.08 0.88

dL=

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9l'ld11, I i0 ioi•Pia 6-u- y6i-


I

Table 6.2 Coastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power I Flow ATRIUM GE9 .(% rated /

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFACý ACPR

LRNB 100 /105 0.44 0.89 0.56

LRNB 80/105 0.42 0.91 0.45

LRNB 601105 0.39 0.91 0.47

LRNB 401105 0.39 0.87 0.41

LRNB 251105 0.29 1.01 0.28

FWCF 1001105 0.32 0.96 0.42

FWCF 80/105 0.35 0.98 0.38

FWCF 60/105 0.39 0.99 0.44

FWCF 40/105 0.47 0.97 0.48

FWCF 251105 0.86 1.06 0.88

--- N

4

.1

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 DI,.,1 "4 p••ent Anniv c

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Paoe 6-7

Table 6.3 Coastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure Analysis Results

Slow Power / Flow ATRIUM-9B GE9 Valve (% rated I

Event Characteristics % rated) ACPR LHGRFACp ACPR

LRNB I TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 100/ 105' 0.44 0.93 0.55

LRNB 1 TCV closing at 2.0 sec 80/105' 0.45 0.94 0.48

LRNB 1 TCV closing at 2.0 sec 80/ 105, 0.52 0.95 0.55

LRNB 1 TCV closing at 2.0 sec 601 1051 0.59 0.96 0.61

LRNB 1 TCV closing at 2.0 sec 4011051 0.79 0.87 0.78

LRNB 1 TCV closing at 2.0 sec 25/1051 0.99 0.74 0.93

Scram initiated by high-neutron flux Scram initiated by high dome pressure

0

¶

a 193" z


Table 6A FFTR/Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power I Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated i

Event % rated) ACPR LHGRFACý ACPR

FWCF 100/105 0.32 1.03 0.35

FWCF 801 105 0.36 1.03 0.40

FWCF 601105 0.44 1.01 0.47

FWCF 40/105 0.60 1.07 0.59

FWCF 25/105 1.10 0.95 1.12i a h

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Pacie 6-8

i

I-

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Paqe 6-9

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9

Table 6.5 FFTRPCoastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Analysis Results

Power i Flow ATRIUM GE9 (% rated i


LRNB 100I1 105 0.39 0.92 0.41

LRNB 80/105 0.38 0.94 0.44

LRNB 601105 0.40 0.92 0.41

FWCF 100/105 0.32 0.97 0.34

FWCF 801105 0.36- 0.98 0.41

FWCF 601105 0.43 0.96 0.46

FWCF 401105 0.56 0.91 0.56

FWCF 25/105 1.10 0.95 1.12

D ian#| r-n tn |A|n1a1|• l, lu Isv


EMF-2440 Revision 0 Page 6-10. K)

Table 6.6 FFTR/Coastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure Analysis Results

Slow Power I Flow ATRIUM-gB GE9 Valve (% rated I

Event Characteristics % rated) ACPR LHGRFACý ,CPR

LRNB I TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 100 105' 0.39 0.96 0.40

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 80 105* 0.38 0.98 0.42

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 80 105t 0.49 0.98 0.52

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0: sec 60/ 1105 0.60 0.94 0.58

LRNB 1 TCV dosing at 2.0 sec 40 1105t 0.72 0.83

LRNB I TCV closing at 2.0 sec 2511 05t 0.98 0.76 0.83

Scram initiated by high-neutron flux. Scram inifiated by high dome pressure

0

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pane 6-11LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9

-. ~ A .......

0 10 20 30 40' so 6 70 so 90 100 110

Pm M oftflMd)

Power MCPRp

S(%) Limit

100 1.44 60 1.55

-25 - 2.05

-25' 2.20 0-, 2.70

Figure 6.1 Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR'Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

E S.

P-lant, I ransien P, naysis

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Dl,-nt Tmneiant Analvmis

EMF-2A40 Revision 0 Panae 6-12

0 10 20 30 40 so 60 70 s0 90 100 110

Power (% of Rtd)

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 0.99

60 0.97

25 0.73

25 0.73

0 0.73

Figure 6.2 Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

>9

I %A

1.15

1.10

1.5

CL 1.00

0.35

0.30

0.75

0.70

0.5

L VWF ULGFAP

nI WI


ManII I *,I~~ au is e Z.2*

1.15

0 10 20 30 40 so s0 70 so 90 100 110

POW .r(%Ctfmd

Figure 6.3 Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 94"Illi I Idllbl~II IW" "a*7 =

2.05'

2.5

2MS'

2.06' L2MS

1.05

1.45

1.150 io 1 0 2DO 40 50 70 so so 100 110

PWrM % ce iMf)

Power MCPRI

(%) Umit

100 1.55

60 1.55 25 2.05 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 6.4 Coastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel


'<91

EMF-244D Revision 0

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 01 .~4 T.r esiant Anal k IDSEUu~. .

q �I I

IM I

1.20I1.15�

s-la,

U IL

-JOm0

tos

�u. �75.

G."70

am ,"aid

0 10 20 30 40 so I60

Powim % of Rd)

Power' LHGRFAC,ý (%) Multiplier

100 0.88 60 0.88 25 07 25 - 0.75 0 0.75

Figure .6 Coastdoin Re'cir'ulatio-n Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multpliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

FVRF

a aRAC

"70 so so 100 11

a 1=" Z.= -


CL IL.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Po• .(%of Ram)

Power MCPRP (%) Limnit

100 1.67

60 1.67

25 2.05

25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 6.6 Coastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Pace 6-16

0

lie,70 so 60 100 110



245

2.M5

2.15

2.05

IM

1.75

1.65

IAS

1.35

1.150 10 20 30 40 50 so

P•,.% ,of Rat)

70 s0 90 100 110

Power MCPRP (%) Limit

100 - - 1.55

80 ... 1.62 "80 .. 1.70 25 2.15 25 - 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 6.7 Coastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation'Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-SB Fuel


EMF-2440 Revision 0 Page6-18

0 10 20 30 40 50 s0 70 so 90 100 110

Power (% of Rawd)

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 0.88

80 0.88 80 0.85 25 0.68 25 0.68

0 0.68

Figure 6.8 Coastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

1.30

12.

1~.2

1.15

1.10

C. 1.00'

M1S

0.90

0.50

0.50

0.7S

0.70

0.65

0.60

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9rPWdl Ir | sI'eI L ,rn Inyioi


0 10 M 30 40 so 00 70 so s0 10 110

POWMM of Room

Power MCPRN

(%) Limt

100 1.67

80 1.85 80 1.96

25 2.15 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 6.9 Coastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

MCPR Umits for GE9 Fuel

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 r I.l 4,,% *rl,,,lli. i l.# A .. "lIv~

a" I O 'a1 W"ala I " - .2 -a


�Y

0 10 20 30 40 50 so 70 80 sO 1W0 110

Power MCPRp

(%) Limit

100 1.44 60 1.57 25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.10 FFTR/Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

�yJ�

245

115.

IM.

1.75.

IAS

1.25

1.M

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9r aI.SL 0" 1=

a. ¶.W U

�OJ5

-a �

D.AO


0 1o 20 30 40 50 go 70 so o0 100 110

Pow*(% of ad)

Power LHGRFACp (%) Multiplier

100 0.99

60 0.97

25 0.65

25 0.65

0 0.65

Figure 6.11 FFTRlCoastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel


z"5' 2.75'

2.55'

2. 5

0. 2AS

S2.05'

* 1.35,

1m.5 1.75

1.55 1J45


K.)

'U0 10 20 30 40 so 70 so g0 10 110

POUsr(%of Room

Power MCPRq

(%) Umft

100 1.53 60 1.64 25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.12 FFTR/Coastdown Turbine Bypass Valves Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

�y-)


:IM•

215

1IM"

1LO5"

1-!5.

lAS'

1L25•

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pane 6-23

a 10 30 40 W W 70 so W 10 110

Pow" (%o yEwo

Power MCPRO

(%) Limit

100 1.55

60-- 1.56 25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.13 FFTRlCoastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

Mani |I~l~l~ I L wi i 't4 "a lyr


1.30

1.25

1.20

1.15

1.10

1.00

a."

o

0.75

0.70

0.05

0 10 20 30 40 so 60 70 so 90 100 110

Pvwrf% of ra"

Power LHGRFACp.

(%) Multiplier

100 0.88

60 0.88

25 0.65

25 0.65

0 0.65

Figure 6.14 FFTR/Coastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

q

EMF-.2440 Revision 0 Page 6-24

)EMF-2440 Revision

0

Page

6-24


Plant Transient Analysis

225

2.15

2015

1.735

us55

IAS

IM.

0 10 20 W0 40 s0 s0 70

PMrAr fM*Mb)

Power MCPRi (%) iUmit

100 1.67

60 1.67

25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.16 FFTR/Coastdown Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

80 s0 100 110


Mant ran [ en Z2~I

29551 2.75] 2.65

2M55

245

2M' 2.25~

21S

2.05

S1.95

1.85

1.75

.AS

1.45

1.35-

1.15

0 10 2 30 40 50 0 70 00 go 100 110 PowmCrAof d)

Power MCPR• (%) Umit

100 1.55

80 1.62

80 1.70

25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.16 FFTRlCoastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

I*SaruvTCVcakuu *LRMNo MyT •F•€:F Noi WPT

U

0

U,


1.

1.15.

1.10

1.05,

,L 1.0 U

OAS

0.•5

0.70

0.15

0-go'0 10 20 30 40 so 60

POW8 f% of Ad

70 • s o 10 100 110

Power LHGRFACp (%) M Multiplier

100 0.88 80 0.88 80 0.85 25 0.65 25 - 0.65

0 - 0.65

Figure 6.17 FFTR/Coastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel

--.. ,. b4ha# It"WMW6,.,;


*LRH No RPT

* FVCF No RT

LHGRPMACP

%M


Ix

0 10 20 30 40 50 so 70 s0 so 100 110

POW- r, of .M;


100 1.67

80 1.85 80 1.96 25 2.30 25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 6.18 FFTRlCoastdown Turbine Control Valve Slow Closure and/or Recirculation Pump Trip Out-of-Service Power-Dependent

MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel

Siemens Power Comoration

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Paae 6.28

0

K

Ip .

EMF-2440

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 - Revision 0 Plant Transient Analysis - Page 7-1

7.0 Maximum Overpressurization Analysis

This section describes the maximum overpressuri-ation analyses performed to demonstrate

compliance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. The analysis shows that the

safety/relief valves at LaSalle Unit 2 have sufficient capacity and performance to prevent the

pressure from reaching the pressure safety limit of 110% of the design pressure.

7.1 Design Basis

The MSIV closure analysis was performed with the SPC plant simulator code COTRANSA2

(Reference 4) at a powertfnow state point of 102% of uprated power/1 05% flow. Reference 9

indicates that an EOFP + 1000 MWdWMTU exposure is limiting for the overpressurization

analysis. The following assumptions were made in the analysis.

The most critical active component (direct scram on valve position) was assumed to fail. However, scram on high-neutron flux and high-dome pressure is available.

At ComEd's request, analyses were performed to determine the minimum number of the highest set point SRVs required to meet the ASME and Technical Specification pressure limits. It was determined that having the 10 highest set point SRVs operable will meet the ASME and Technical Specification pressure limits. In order to support operation with I SRV out-of-service, the plant configuration needs to include at least 11 SRVs. As per ASME requirements, the SRVs are assumed to operate in the safety mode.

TSSS insertion times were used.

The initial dome pressure was set at the maximum allowed by the Technical Specifications (1035 psia).

* An MSIV closure time of 1.1 seconds was assumed in the analysis.

EOC RPT is assumed inoperable; ATWS (high-dome pressure) RPT is available.

7.2 Pressurization Transients

Results of analysis for the MSIV closure event initiated at 102% power/1 05% flow are presented

in Table 7.1. Figures 7.1-7.5 show the response of various reactor plant parameters to the

MSIV closure event. The maximum pressure of 1346.2 psig occurs in the lower plenum at

approximately 4.4 seconds. The maximum dome pressure of 1319.9 psig occurs at

4.6 seconds. The results demonstrate that the maximum vessel pressure limit of 1375 psig and

dome pressure limit of 1325 psig are not exceeded.


EMF-2440 Revision 0 Page 7-2 0©

Table 7.1 ASME Overpressurization Analysis Results 102%PI105%F

Peak Peak Maximum Maximum Neutron Heat Vessel Pressure Dome

Flux Flux Lower-Plenum Pressure Event (% rated) (% rated) (psig) (psig)

MSIV closure 373.7 136.6 1346.2 1319.9

'0>

m.ni,•v Prmar Cbrnratinn


a W

I.z

0 9.z

UJ W LaJ

TWE.. SECONDS

Figure 7.1 Overpressurization Event at 1021105 MSIVClosuie Key Parameters

Siemens Power Comoration

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 7-3

La


4.0 1 TDAE, SECONDS

Figure 7.2 Overpressurization Event at 102/105 MSIV Closure Vessel Water Level

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 7-4

0 II w N

.z tbJ w

0 m

z

w w L&J w

W (.

in, W I-

..J UJ U)

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 M Tr neint Analv~

TIE, SECONDS

Figure 7.3 Overpressurization Event at 1021105 --MSIV Closure Lower-Plenum Pressure

a"11 @ai L=**~ Y~*

EMF-2440 Revision 0 Peae 7-5

UI)

w

D z

w

0 Li


V. IAJ In

0

D

EMF-2440 Revision 0

Page 7-6 U

4.0 TIME, SECONDS

Figure 7.4 Overpressurization Event at 102/105 MSIV Closure Dome Pressure

IL.


.an i l-a n iL le U ilaiy

1500.0

U)

00 .J

0

L

i/)

500.0,

n0

.0 1.0 2.A0 . _4.0 TIME,- SECONDS

5D06. 7.0

Number off Opening

Bank _________ SRVs - Pressure (psia)

01 "'__NA'

2 2'" 1235.3

3 4 1245.6 -4 4 1255.9

5 .. . _ _ NA

Figure 7.5 Overpressurization Event at 1021105MSIV Closure Safety/Relief Valve Flow Rates

SRV BANK 1 SRV BANK 2 SRV BANK 3 SRV BANK 4 SRV BANK 5

- "--- ------- ----ii

:I ...


8.0 References

1. Letter, D. E. Garber (SPC) to R. J. Chin (CornEd), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Calculation Plan,* DEG:00:031, February 25,2000.

2. XN-NF-80-19(P)(A) Volume 4 Revision 1, Exxon Nuclear Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors: Application of the ENC Methodology to BWR Reloads, Exxon Nuclear Company, June 1986.

3. XN-NF-80-19(P)(A) Volume 1 Supplement 3, Supplement 3 Appendix F, and Supplement 4, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors: Benchmark Results for the CASMO-3G/MICROBURN-B Calculation Methodology, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, November 1990.

4. ANF-913(P)(A) Volume 1 Revision 1 and Volume 1 Supplements 2, 3 and 4, COTRANSA2: A Computer Program for Boiling Water Reactor Transient Analyses, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation. August 1990.

5. ANF-524(P)(A) Revision 2 and Supplements I and 2, ANF Critical Power Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, November 1990.

6. ANF-1125(P)(A) and Supplement I and 2, ANFB Critical Power Correlation, Advanced Nuclear Fuels Corporation, April 1990.

7. XN-NF-80-1 9(P)(A) Volume 3 Revision 2, Exxon Nuclear Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors, THERMEX: Thermal Limits Methodology Summary Description, Exxon Nuclear Company, January 1987.

8. EMF-2323 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Principal Transient Analysis Parameters, Siemens Power Corporation, March 2000.

9. EMF-95-205(P) Revision 2, LaSalle Extended Operating Domain (EOD) and Equipment Out of Service (EOOS) Safety Analysis for A TRIUMT-gB Fuel, Siemens Power Corporation, June 1996.

10. EMF-95-049(P), Application of the ANFB Critical Power Correlation to Coresident GE Fuel at the Quad Cities and LaSalle Nuclear Power Stations, Siemens Power Corporation, October 1995.

11. XN-NF-84-105(P)(A) Volume 1 and Volume I Supplements I and 2, XCOBRA-T: A Computer Code for BWR Transient Thermal-Hydraulic Core Analysis, Exxon Nuclear Company, February 1987.

12. EMF-1 125(P)(A) Supplement 1 Appendix C, ANFB Critical Power Correlation Application for Co-Resident Fuel, Siemens Power Corporation, August 1997.

13. XN-NF-81-58(P)(A) Revision 2 and Supplements 1 and 2, RODEX2 Fuel Rod Therrna( Mechanical Response Evaluation Model, Exxon Nuclear Company, March 1984.

EMF-2440



8.0 References (Continued)

14. LaSalle County Nuclear Station Unit 2 Technical Specifications. as amended.

15. EMF-2437 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Reload AnalysiS, Siemens Power

Corporation, October 2000.

16. EMF-1903(P) Revision 3, Impact of Failed/Bypassed LPRMs and TIPs and Extended

LPRM Calibration Interval on Radial Bundle Power Uncertainty, Siemens Power

Corporation, March 2000.

17. ANF-1 125(P)(A") Supplement 1, Appendix E, ANFB Critical Power Correlation

Determination of ATRIUMT"-9B Additive Constant Uncertainties, Siemens Power

Corporation, September 1998.

18. ANF-1373(P), Procedure Guide for SAFLIM2, Siemens Power Corporation, February 1991.

19. Letter, D. E. Garber (SPC) to R. J. Chin (CornEd), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Transient Power History Data for Confirming Mechanical Limits for GE9 Fuel,, DEG:00:185, August 3, 2000D....

20. Letter, D. E. Garber (SPC) to R.-J. Chin (CornEd), 'LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 8 Abnormal Idle

Recirculation Loop Startup Analysis,' DEG:99:070, March 8, 1999.

21. Letter, D. E. Garber (SPC) to R. J. Chin (CornEd), "Description of Measured Power Uncertainty for POWERPLEXo Operation Without Calibrated LPRMs,' DEG:00:061, March 7, 2000.

22. Letter, J. H. Riddle (SPC) to R. J. Chin (CornEd), "Scram Surveillance Requirements for MCPR Operating Limits," JHR:96:397, October 8, 1996.'

23. EMF-2277 Revision 1, LaSalle Unit I Cycle 9 Plant Transient Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 1999.

24. Letter, D. E. Garber (SPC) to R. J. Chin (CornEd), "Extension of LPRM Calibration Interval to 2500 EFPH," DEG:00:088, April 17, 2000.

EMF-2440 LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Revision 0 Plant Transient Analysis Page A-1

Appendix A Power-Dependent LHGR Limit Generation

The linear heat generation rate (LHGR) operating limit is established to ensure that the steady

state LHGR (SSLHGR) limit is protected during normal operation and that the protection against

power transient (PAPT) LHGR limit is protected during an anticipated operational occurrence

(AOO). To ensure that the LHGR operating limit provides the necessary protection during

operation at off-rated conditions, adjustments to the SSLHGR limits may be necessary. These

adjustments are made by applying power and flow-dependent LHGR multipliers (LHGRFACP and

LHGRFACI, respectively) to the SSLHGR limit. The LHGR operating limit (LHGROL) for a given

operating condition is determined as follows:

LHGROL = min [LHGRFACp x SSLHGR, LHGRFACf x SSLHGRJ

The power-dependent LHGR multipliers (LHGRFACp) are determined using the heat flux

excursion experienced by the fuel during AQOs. The heat flux ratio (HFR) is defined as the ratio

of the maximum nodal transient heat flux over the maximum nodal heat flux at the initiation of 'x

the transient. The HFR Provides a measure of the LHGR excursion during the transient. The

PAPT limit divided by the SSLHGR limit provides an upper limit for the HFR to ensure that the

PAPT LHGR limit is not violated during an AOO. LHGRFACp is set equal to the minimum of the

PAPTISSLHGR ratio over HFR, or 1.0. Based on the ATRIUM-9B LHGR limits presented in

Reference A-i, LHGRFACp is established as follows:

PAPT = 1.35

SSLHGR

HFR = Q,

LHGRFACP = min LHFR 'I"

In some cases, the established MCPR limit precludes operation at the SSLHGR limit. This

allows for a larger LHGR excursion during the transient without violating the PAPT LHGR 5mimkJ

This approach was used to provide less restrictive LHGRFACp multipliers for some cases.

EMF-2440 LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Revision 0 Plant Transient Analysis Page A-2

References

A.1 EMF-2404(P) Revision 1, Fuel Design Report for LaSalle 2, Cycle 9 ATRIUM'rA-9B Fuel Assemblies, Siemens Power Corporation, September 2000.

Siemen Pow Corvoration


EMF-2440 Revision 0

Controlled Distribution

Richland

D. E. Garber (12 copies)

Uncontrolled Distribution

E-Mail Notification

D. G. D. B. O.C. M. E. J. M. J. G. R. R. P.D.

Carr McBumey Brown Garrett Haun Ingham Schnepp Wimpy

4'.'

Simens Power Corporation

Technical Requirements Manual - Appendix J L2C9 Reload Transient Analysis Results

Attachment 4

ARTS Improvement Program Analysis, Supplement 1 (Excerpts)

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 August 2002


TOP/MOP and MAPFACp Requirements

Equipment Out of Service

No EOOS RPT OOS TBV OOS No EOOS RPT OOS TBV OOS

TOP

24.9 30.3 28.7 50.1 57.1 62.7

MOP

25.2 30.6 30.0 52.0 59.0 64.5

Calculated MAPFACp

1.0 1.0 1.0

0.83 0.83 0.79

1.0 1.0 1.0

0.61 0.61 0.61

(a) Based on the GE9/10 LHGR Improvement Report, the MAPFACs are applied to LHGR (Reference 19)

Uý


Limiting AOO

LRNBP LRNBP FWCF FWCF FWCF FWCF

Power

100 100 100 25 25 25

Generic MAPFACp

August 2002


Attachment 5

TCV Slow Closure Analysis (Excerpts)



Table 4. - TOP and MOP Values for the Off-rated Transient Events

LRNBP, One TCV Slow LRNBP, All TCV Slow Closure at 50%/s, 3 TCV Fast Closure at 19%/s

Closure

Calculated TOP 26.17 49.27

Calculated MOP 26.17 55.30

Adjusted MOP 60.83

Required MOP 38.0

Required MAPFAC 0.62

Limiting MACFAC 0.60 (a)

Note: (a) Based on Figure 3.2-2 in COLR.

(b) Based on the GE9/10 LHGR Improvement Report, the MAPFACs are applied to LHGR (Reference 19).



?ITu culp, I

i6s.� i

5�

II1 [SIMI2

.II lta m , i1r eszcins

Figure 1. LRNBP from Rated Power, All TCV Fast Closure, Direct Scram, EOC-RPT


'U

S

a

I LEVEL( NcH.-N[i-S[P-$l] 2 VEss[R STEAifLOu 3 u ) I S I E I oAf LOWt

M~ 19.i U

August 2002


IlK ulLIKmsI IlK 151Cl13

I

Ill ISICOl9l 11K slgllli

Figure 2. LRNBP from Rated Power, One TCV Slow Closure(50O/6second)/mhree TCV Fast Closure, Flux Scram, EOC-RPT OOS


I-

!

August 2002

1I.8

m

i

S.

U

T1m 111111

Figure 3. LRNBP from 50% Power, One TCV S-low Closure(500/o/second)fIhree TCV Fast Closure, Flux Scram



I NEUrc 00 FLU3 2A SULRFCE PEAT FLU 3 COR I MT| FLOWl

I V1S I;EL PRESS PISIPS]) 2 SAF IT VALVE FLOM B REt IEF VALVE FLOW

0.I

RIK fugiml

IRK lUlM

80.4.

RIK 1"IM11

I Wt ) BE (ACTIVITY

D OP ILLAtl tAC I IVITY

AV Iff l flur;I?

9.0.

16.4i

August 2002


I NIEU 00 FLUX 2 AVE SURFACE HEA1 FLUX 5 COD . InL FLOiW

I"LIP

I LIV L4I1CH-R[F-SEP-SKWTI 2 VIS EL $TE&NFLCU I vUR UL S'iDRFLOI

• •. rrr jani~ ;, mu

e.0

III I Itg aIi

I

"I"

I rot I RACTIVITY 2 DOP Lfl REACTIVIZTY

L.II~~ SCR- LREACTIVIrTY ,

-u°1

-41.'

TIR IK91011111

Figure 4. LRNBP from 500/6 Power, All TCV Closure at 19%/second, Pressure Scram


m

U

I S •EL Pl SI E1S6IPSI3 2 SAF I1 VALVE FLmui 3 REL IF VALVE FLOW a gave cc€ wag r ri alU

August:2002

•D

UW.0


Attachment 6

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity


Framatome ANP Richland, Inc. Proprietary

FRAMATOME A-iIP

March 22, 2001 DEG:01:046

Dr. R. J. Chin Nuclear Fuel Services (Suite 400) Exelon Corporation 1400 Opus Place Downers Grove, IL 60515-5701

Dear Dr. Chin:

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity

Ref: 1: LaSalle County Nuclear Station Unit 2 Technical Specifications, as amended.

Ref: 2: EMF-2440 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Plant Transient Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 2000.

Ref: 3: EMF-2437 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Reload Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 2000.

Ref: 4: Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Base Case Operating Umits for Proposed ITS Scram Times,* DEG:01:014, January 18, 2001.

Ref 5: Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "Transmittal of Condition Report 9191," DEG:01:038, February 27, 2001.

Exelon has proposed replacing the current Technical Specifications (Reference 1) with Improved Technical Specifications (ITS) during LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 (L2C9) operation. The operating limits for L2C9 (References 2 and 3) are established consistent with the scram times presented in Reference 1 and are not consistent with the proposed ITS surveillance times. Exelon has requested that FRA-ANP perform analyses to support a mid-cycle transition to the ITS for base case operation and one equipment out-of-service (EOOS) scenario. Reference 4 described the determination of analytical scram times consistent with the ITS and provided base case operating limits. Reference 5 identifies an error in the fuel thermal conductivity used in the transient analyses for LaSalle, including the analyses provided in Reference 4.

Framatome ANP Richland, Inc.

2101 Horn Rapids Road Tel: (509) 375-8100 Richland, WA 99352 Fax: (509) 375-8402


Dr. R. J. Chin DEG:01:046 March 22, 2001 Page 2

'-I

The attachment provides the L2C9 base case and slow TCV closure/FHOOS and or no RPT transient analysis results and operating limits using the analytical scram times and the corrected fuel thermal conductivity. The base case operation limits provided in the attachment supercede those transmitted in Reference 4.

Very truly yours,

David Garber

Project Manager

slg

Enclosure

cc: P. Kong


DEG:01:046 Attachment Page A-1 \J

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected

Fuel Thermal Conductivity

Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.1.3.3 of the current LaSalle Unit 2 Technical Specifications

(Reference 1) specifies the average scram insertion times of all operable control rods. The average

control rod insertion times must not exceed the scram times f6r the requirements of LCO 3.1.3.3 to

be met. Exelon is planning to implement Improved Technical Specifications (ITS) for LaSalle Unit 2

during Cycle 9. The scram surveillance times in the proposed ITS are slightly more restrictive than

those presented in Reference 1. Additionally, the surveillance requirement for the ITS is that each

rod must meet the scram times. The LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 (L2C9) operating limits (References 2

and 3) are based on the average scram times presented in Reference 1. Therefore, the limiting

transient analyses used to set the operating limits provided in References 2 and 3 must be

reanalyzed with revised scram times in order to support the mid-cycle implementation of the ITS.

FRA-ANP provided proposed ITS surveillance scram times to Exelon in Reference 4, Table 1. The

Reference 4 analytical scram times are presented in Table 1 for completeness.

FRA-ANP informed Exelon of an error in the fuel thermal conductivity used in COTRANSA2

calculations (Reference 5). The analysis results presented in Tables 2 and 3 include the effect of the

corrected fuel thermal conductivity.

Reference 9 provided a disposition of LOCA and UFSAR events for ITS scram times for LaSalle.

The Reference 9 disposition remains applicable.

Base Case Operation

Reference 4 provided base case operating limits for the proposed ITS scram times. After

Reference 4 was issued, FRA-ANP informed Exelon of an error in the fuel thermal conductivity used

in COTRANSA2 calculations (Reference 5). The analyses provided in Reference 4 have been

reanalyzed using the corrected fuel thermal conductivity. The results of these analyses are

presented in Table 2.


DEG:01:046 Attachment Page A-2

Figures 1 and 2 present the revised base case MCPRp limits for the ATRIUMTM-9B* and GE9 fuel,

respectively. The sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR (1.11 per Reference 2) and the ACPR results

from Table 2 are also presented in Figures 1 and 2.

The Reference 2 base case LHGRFACp multipliers and the LHGRFACp results from Table 2 are

presented in Figure 3. Review of Figure 3 shows that all of the ATRIUM-9B LHGRFACp results are

above the LHGRFACp multipliers, and therefore, the Reference 2 base'case LHGRFACp multipliers

remain applicable for the proposed ITS scram times.

TCV Slow Closure/FHOOS and/or No RPT

Exelon requested that FRA-ANP provide operating limits for the most limiting equipment out-of

service (EOOS) scenario provided in Reference 2. Review of the Reference 2 limits shows that the

most limiting two-loop operation EOOS scenario is TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT.

The TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits consider transient analysis results from.the

following scenarios: TCV slow closure (up to all four valves), EOC RPT OOS. FHOOS, and a

combination of FHOOS and EOC RPT OOS. (Note: TCV slow closure analyses with FHOOS are

bound by TCV slow closure analyses at nominal feedwater temperature, and therefore, no specific

analyses are required for this scenario.) In order to reduce the workscope required to establish new

limits, only a subset of the analyses reported in Reference 2 have been reanalyzed. 'Review of

Figures 5.16, 5.17 and 5.18 in Reference 2 show that the TCV slow closure analyses are limiting for

all power levels above 25% power, the FWCF no RPT with FHOOS is limiting at 25% power.

Additionally, these figures show that there is considerable margin between the analysis results and

the limits at power levels of 400 and 60%.

Table 5.5 of Reference 2 was reviewed to determine which specific TCV slow closure analyses

required reanalysis to establish the limits. Tables 5.1 (FHOOS) and 5.4 (EOC RPT OOS) of

Reference 2 were also reviewed since the limits are applicable for EOC RPT OOS or FHOOS only.

Table 3 presents the analysis results required to adequately establish the slow TCV closurefFHOOS

and/or no RPT limits.

Figures 4 and 5 present the revised slow TCV closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT MCPRp limits for the

ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel, respectively. The sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR (1.11 per

Reference 2) and the ACPR results from Table 3 are also presented in Figures 4 and 5.

ATRIUM is a trademark of Framatome ANP.



Figure 6 presents the revised slow TCV closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT LHGRFACp multipliers for

the ATRIUM-9B fuel.

The MCPR, limits and LHGRFACp multipliers provided in Figures 4-6 protect operation with up to

four TCVs closing slowly, EOC RPT OOS, FHOOS and any combination of up to four TCVs closing slowly, EOC RPT OOS and FHOOS. The only equipment out-of-service scenarios provided in Reference 2 not explicitly protected by the slow TCV closureIFHOOS and/or no RPT limits are single-loop operation (discussed below), turbine bypass valves OOS, and abnormal startup of an idle

loop.

Comparison of turbine bypass valves OOS and the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits in Table 2.2 of Reference 3 shows the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits clearly bound the turbine bypass valves OOS limits. Consequently, applying the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits will protect operation with the turbine bypass OOS.

No analyses were performed to address the abnormal startup of an idle loop limits with ITS scram times and the corrected fuel thermal conductivity.

Single-Loop Operation

Figures 1-3 provide the two-loop operation (T'LO) MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for base case operation. Reference 7 indicates that the consequences of base case pressurization transients in single-loop operation (SLO) are bound by the consequences of the same transient initiated from

the same power/flow conditions in TLO and that the TLO base case ACPRs and the LHGRFACp multipliers remain applicable for SLO. Reference 2 indicates the L2C9 TLO safety limit MCPR is 1.11 and the SLO safety limit MCPR is 1.12. Since the TLO ACPR results are applicable to SLO, the

SLO ATRIUM-9B and GE9 MCPRp limits can be determined by adding 0.01 to the base case operation MCPRp limits provided in Figures I and 2 to account for the increase in safety limit MCPR.

The base case LHGRFACp multipliers shown in Figure 3 remain applicable for SLO.

The conclusion that TLO ACPR results generally bound SLO results has been demonstrated for both

base case operation and some equipment out-of-service scenarios for other BWRs. Although

specific L2C9 analyses for a combination of TCV slow closure/FHOOS'and/or no RPT in SLO have

not been performed, FRA-ANP expects the TLO operation ACPR results would remain applicable ini

SLO for this scenario. Therefore, SLO MCPRp limits for TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT

can be determined by adding 0.01 to the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT MCPR, limits



reported in Figures 4 and 5 to account for the increase in safety limit MCPR. The Figure 6 TCV slow

closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT LHGRFACp multipliers remain applicable for SLO.

GE9 Mechanical Limits

Reference 6 provides an evaluation of the GE9gmechanical limits for L2C9. An evaluation of the GE9

mechanical limits for the rated power analyses reported in Tables 2 and 3 was performed. It has

been demonstrated that the maximum nodal power ratio history curve for the analyses are bound by

the previously approved L2C9 curve. Therefore, it is FRA-ANP's position that no further evaluation

of the GE9 mechanical limits is required.

References

1. LaSalle County Nuclear Station Unit 2 Technical Specdifications, as amended.

2. EMF-2440 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Plant Transient Analysis, Siemens Power "Corporation, October 2000.

3. EMF-2437 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Reload Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 2000.

4. Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Base Case Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times," DEG:01:014, January 18, 2001.

5. Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), 'Transmittal of Condition Report 9191,' DEG:01:038, February 27, 2001.

6. Letter, D. E- Garber (SPC) to R. J. Chin (CornEd), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Transient Power History Data for Confirming Mechanical Limits for GE9 Fuel," DEG:00:185, August 3, 2000.

7. EMF-95-205(P) Revision 2, LaSalle Extended Operating Domain (EOD) and Equipment Out of Service (EOOS) Safety Analysis forATRIUMh-9B Fuel, Siemens Power Corporation, June 1996.


9. Letter D. E. Garber (SPC) to R. J. Chin (ComEd), "Evaluation of Improved Technical Specification Scram Times at Dresden, LaSalle and Quad Cities Station," DEG:99:195, July 26, 1999.



Table I Proposed ITS Scram Insertion Times

if 4

" The 0.20-second delay is considered a nominal value that cannot be verified by the plant Therefore, the transient analysis calculations are performed to bound a range of no delay (linear insertion from start signal to notch 45) to a delay value just before notch 45. This is consistent with the information provided in Reference 8.



Table 2 Base Case Transient Analysis Results With Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity

I Peak Peak Power ATRIUM-9B ATRIUM-9B GE9 Neutron Flux Heat Flux I Flow ACPR LHGRFACp-- ACPR (% rated) (% rated)

LRNB

FWCF - -

* The analysis results presented are from an exposure prior to EOC. The ACPR and LHGRFACp results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.


DEG:01:046 Attachment Page A-'7 ,

Table 3 EOOS Transient Analysis Results With Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity

Slow TCV Closure

100/105" 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.42

80 / 57.2* 1 TCV dosing in 2.0 seconds 0.51

80 / 105t 2 TCV dosing in 2.0 seconds 0.544

80 / 57.2t 2 TOY closing in 2.0 seconds 0.59

25 / 105"t 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 1.00 9,LRNB

No RPT

100/105 iNA o0.40 0.89 0.51

FWCF With FHOOS

251105 I NA 1.06* 0.6813: 1.13:

FWCF No RPT With FHOOS

25/105 7 I NAI 1. 0.67* 1.11*

Scram initiated by high neutron flux. Scram initiated by high dome pressure. The analysis results presented are from an exposure prior to EOC. The'ACPR and LHGRFACp results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

t 4t -


DEG:01:046

Z75

Z65

Z55

2-45

2.35

225

.15

a.205

S1.95

1.8,"

CL 7O

1.65-

Attachment Page A-8

0 10 20 30 40 50 , 60 70 80 90 100 110

PMer(% of Rtd

Power MCPRp (%) •Limit

S.-100 1.41 60 1.48 25 1.93

25- -2.20 0 -2.70

Figure 1 EOC Base.Case Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel With Proposed ITS :Scram Times and

- Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity


DEG:01:046

ZS•

24!

Z3M

Z2M

2.15

.Z05

1.95

Attachment Page A-9

0 10 20 30 40 so SO 70 80 90 100 110

Poer(%ofRMd)

Power MCPRp

(%) Limit

100 1.51

60 1.53

25 2.01

25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 2 EOC Base Case Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel With Proposed ITS Scram Times and

Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity

Framatorne ANP Richland, Inc. Proprietary

DEG:01:046

1.3C

1.25

1.20

1.15

1.10

1.05

0. 1.00 ,.)

0 095

3non

Attachment Page A-10

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 100 110

Power (% of Rated)


100 1.00 60 1.00

25 0.77

25 0.77

0 0.77

Figure 3 EOC Base Case Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel With Proposed ITS Sciram Times and'

Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity-


DEG:01:046 Attachment Page A-1I

.,J

a.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power MCPRp (%) Umit

100 1.53 80 1.62 80 1.70 25 2.17

25 2.35

0 2.85

Figure 4 EOC Slow TCV Closure/FHOOS and/or No RPT Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel With Proposed ITS Scram Times and


L-


DEG:01:046

245

2.85

2.7I Z15

1.55.

2.45"

2.35

2.25

1* 2.15

1.96'

1.85"

1.75" 1.855' 1.56"

1.45'

1.35"

1.15"


0 10 20 30 40 50 60

POW Mr( of RPadM

Power MCPRp

(%) Limit

100 1.63

80 1.86

80 1.96

25 2.24

25 2.35

0 -- 2.85

70 80 9o 100 110

Figure 5 EOC Slow TCV Closure/FHOOS and/or No RPT Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for GE9 Fuel With Proposed ITS Scram Times and

-Corrected-Fuel Therrtl Condutivity.. ,........

*LRNBNobF'TT

*FVCFNOFtPTvI~hFHOOS FVC WtFhU FHOOS

*Skw TCV ~o5uir


DEG:01:046

1.

Attachment Page A-,4 '

0j

30 .

* LRM No RPT

F F•F NoW RPTi h RiOOS A FWCFWi -iOOS

SSlowCvcasure

ILUGRF

0 10 20 30 40 s0 60

Power (% ofRaadem


100 0.89 80 0.89 80 0.85 25 0.67

25 0.67

0 0.67

70 80 90 100 110

Figure 6 EOC Slow TCV Closure/FHOOS and/or No RPT Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel With Proposed ITS Scram Times and


1.15

1.10.

1.05

€•1.00 0

0.95

0.85'

0.75"

0.70

065"

0 0

0

1.

125-


Attachment 7

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Equipment Out-of-Service Operating Limits

Using Nominal Scram Speed And

Exposure Limited to 14,000 MWd/MTU


Framatome ANP, Inc. Proprietary

59FRAMAOME ANP

January 10, 2002 DEG:02:009

Mr. F. W. Trikur Exelon Nuclear Nuclear Fuel Management 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555

,' D'e

* "O',. 6t'•>

Dear Mr. Trikur.

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Equipment Out-of-Service Operating Limits Using Nominal Scram Speed and Exposure Limited to 14,000 MWdlMTU

Reference: 1) Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity," DEG:01:046, March 22,2001.

2) Exelon Task Order, L2C9 TCV Slow Closure Analysis with NSS Insertion Times, NFM-MW-B040, Exelon, November 29, 2001.

Turbine control valve (TCV) testing at LaSalle Unit 2 indicated that some of the turbine control valves do not meet the fast closure criteria. Due to TCV slow closure, the plant must be operated using the more restrictive TCV slow closure equipment out-of-Service (EOOS) MCPRp limits provided in Reference 1. Based on the Reference 1 EOOS MCPRp limits, Exelon expects to run into MCPR margin problems in February 2002. Exelon requested FRAANP (Reference 2) to provide revised ATRIUM Tm-9B EOOS limits that will Improve MCPR margin to support continued operation until a mid-cycle outage to correct the TCV closure rate.

The attachment provides the L2C9 TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT transient analysis results and operating limits based on nominal scram speed and a maximum cycle exposure of 14,000 MWd/MTU. The operating limits in the attachment provide significant additional margin as noted by comparison of the 100% power MCPRp limit of 1.42 versus 1.53 provided in Reference 1. The GE9 operating limits presented in Reference I remain applicable.

Please forward the attachment to Exelon at your earliest convenience.

Very truly yours,

D. E. Garber Project Manager

Framatome ANP, Inc.

Tel: (509) 375-8100 I-. sc-n .--

2101 H=m Rapids Road "8_6ý,,Ai, 1. 1 A f-,,"iiB .%•l



LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Equipment Out-of-Service Operating Limits for Nominal Scram Speed and


Turbine control valve (TCV) testing at LaSalle Unit 2 indicated that some of the turbine control valves

do not meet the fast closure criteria. Due to TCV slow closure the plant must be operated using the

more restrictive TCV slow closure equipment out-of-service (EOOS) MCPRO limits provided in

Reference 1. Based on the Reference 1 EOOS MCPRp limits, Exelon expects to run into MCPR

margin problems in February 2002. Exelon requested Framatomre'ANP, Inc. (FRA-ANP)

(Reference 2) to provide revised ATRIUM1-9B* EOOS limits that will improve MCPR margin to

support continued operation until a mid-cycle outage to correct the TCV closure rate.

MCPR margin was gained in the EOOS operating limits by reanalyzing TCV slow closure/FHOOS

and/or no RPT analyses based on nominal scram speed (NSS) and limiting the cycle exposure over

which the limits are applicable to BOC - 14,000 MWd/MTU.

Scram times corresponding to NSS were taken from the LaSalle Unit 2 plant transient analysis

parameters document (Reference 3). The scram times used are presented in Table I for

informational purposes.

TCV Slow ClosureIFHOOS and/or No RPT

The TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits consider transient analysis results from the

following scenarios: TCV slow closure (up to all four valves), EOC RPT OOS, FHOOS, and a

combination of FHOOS and EOC RPT OOS. (Note: TCV slow closure analyses with FHOOS are

bound by TCV slow closure analyses at nominal feedwater temperature, and therefore, no specific

analyses are required for this scenario.) In order to reduce the workscope required to establish new

limits, only a subset of the analyses reported in Reference 4 have been reanalized. The subset of

analyses reanalyzed is similar to the subset presented in Reference - and is based on results

presented in Reference 4. Review of Figures 5.16, 5.17, and 5.18 in Reference 4 shows that the

TCV slow closure analyses are limiting for all power levels above 25% power; the FWCF no RPT

with FHOOS Is limiting at 25% power. FWCF with FHOOS cases were included in this analysis

resulting in a slightly more limiting case at 25% power than the FWCF no RPT with FHOOS cases.

* ATRIUM Is a trademark of Framatome ANP.


DEG:02:009 Attachment . Page A-2j9

Cases at power levels of 40% and 60% were included in this analysis for completeness even though

Reference 4 shows considerable margin to the limits at these power levels.

Table 2 presents the analysis results used to establish the slow TCV closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT

limits. Figure 1 presents the revised slow TCV closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT MCPRp limits for the

ATRIUM-9B fuel. The sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR (1.11 per Reference 4) and the ACPR

results from Table 2 are also presented in Figure 1.

Figure 2 presents the revised slow TCV closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT LHGRFACp multipliers for

the ATRIUM-9B fuel.

The ATRIUM-9B MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers provided in Figures 1 and 2 protect

operation with any combination of up to four TCVs closing slowly, EOC RPT OOS, and FHOOS up to

a cycle exposure of 14,000 MWd/MTU (NEOC). The only equipment out-of-service scenarios

provided in Reference 4 not explicitly protected by the slowTCV closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT

limits are single-loop operation (discussed below), turbine bypass valves OOS (discussed below), "

and startup of an idle loop. The limits support scram speeds at least as fast as the NSS insertion

times presented in Table 1; the slower technical specification scram speed (TSSS) insertion times

are not supported by these limits.

Comparison of turbine bypass valves OOS and the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits

in Table 2.1 of Reference 4 shows the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT limits clearly bound

the turbine bypass valves OOS limits. Consequently, applying the TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or

no RPT limits will protect operation with the turbine bypass OOS.

No analyses were performed to revise limits for startup of an idle loop.


Figures 1 and 2 provide the two-loop operation (TLO) MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers.

Reference 5 indicates that the consequences of base case pressurization transients in single-loop

operation (SLO) are bound by the consequences of the same transient initiated from the same

power/flow conditions in TLO and that the TLO base case ACPRs and the LHGRFACp multipliers

remain applicabie for SLO. The conclusion that TLO ACPR results generally bound SLO results hal-

been demonstrated for both base case operation and some equipment out-of-service scenarios for

other BWRs. Although specific L2C9 analyses for a combination of TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or

no RPT in SLO have not been performed, FRA-ANP expects the TLO operation ,CPR results would

Framatome ANP, Inc. PrOprietary


remain applicable in SLO for this scenario. Reference 4 indicates the L2C9 TLO safety limit MCPR

is 1.11 and the SLO safety limit MCPR is 1.12. Therefore, SLO MCPRp limits forTCV slow

closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT can be determined by adding 0.01 to the TCV slow closure/FHOOS

and/or no RPT MCPRI limits reported in Figure 1 to account for the increase in safety limit MCPR.

The Figure 2 TCV slow closure/FHOOS and/or no RPT LHGRFACp multipliers remain applicable for

SLO.

References

1. Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity," DEG:01:046, March 22, 2001.

2. Exelon Task Order, L2C9 TCV Slow Closure Analysis with NSS Insertion Times, NFM-MWB040, Exelon, November29, 2001


4. EMF-2440 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Plant Transient Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 2000.

5. EMF-95-205(P) Revision 2, LaSalle Extended Operating Domain (EOD) and Equipment Out of Service (EOOS) Safety Analysis for ATRIUMh' -9B Fuel, Siemens Power Corporation, June 1996.



Table I Nominal Scram Insertion Times (Reference 3)

Position NSS Time

(notch) (sec)

48 0.00

48 0.200*

45 0.380

39 0.680

25 1.680

5 2.680

0 2.804

The 0.20-second delay is considered a nominal value that cannot be verified by the plant Therefore, the transient analysis calculations are performed to bound a range of no delay (linear insertion from start signal to notch 45) to a delay value just before notch 45. This is consistent with the information provided in Reference 3.


Attachment Page A-5) ,DEG:02:009

Table 2 EOOS Transient Analysis Results With Nominal Scram Speed and


Power Slow Valve ATRIUM-9B I ATRIUM-9B

/ Flow Characteristics ACPR LHGRFACp

Slow TCV Closure*

100 / 105" 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.31 0.98

100 181* 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.31 1.00

80 / 105" 1 T6V closing in 2.0 seconds 0.35 0.97

80/ 57.2* 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.40 1.00

8o/105t I TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.54 0.85

80 / 57.27 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.49 0.92

60/ 105t I TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.62 0.83

60135.1t 1 TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.59 0.95

401/ 105t I TCV closing in 2.0 seconds 0.75 0.78

25/ `1051' 1 TCV closing In 2.0 seconds 0.98 0.70

LRNB No RPT

100/105 NA 0.27 0.99

80/105 NA 0.27 1.00

FWCF With FHOOS

40/105 NA 0.61 0.88

25/105* NA 1.02 0.69

FWCF NO RPT •Wth FHOOS

25 /105* NA 1.01 0.68

Scram initiated by high neutron flux. Scram Initiated by high dome pressure.

The analysis result Is from an exposure prior to NEOC (14,000 MWd/MTU). The ACPR and LHGRFACP Pai .i..e or* rnneagruntivaiv nte" tn P1tablish the thermal limits.

t

4


DEG:02:009

2-W

2.70

2.60,

1W•

2.40

2.0'

2M0

2,10,

IM , 1W.0

JO.

1210

1.10

Attachment Page A-6

0 10 20 30 40 50 00 70 ao 9o 100 110 POWK CA of Riftm


100 1.42 80 1.51 80 1.65 25 2.13 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 1 NEOC (14,000 MWd/MTU) Slow TCV Closure/FHOOS andlor No RPT Power-Dependent

MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel With NSS Insertion Times

Framatome ANP; Inc. Proprietary

Attachment Page A-7DEG:02:009

0 10 20 30 40 so 6 70 00 90 100 110

Pewuf t% of Ratem

Power LHGRFACp (%) Multiplier 100 0.98 80 0.97 80 0.85 25 0.68 25 0.68

0 0.68

"Figure 2 NEOC (14,000 MWdlMTU) Slow TCV Closure/FHOOS andlor No RPT Power-Dependent

LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel With NSS Insertion Times


K-)

Attachment 8

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Cycle Extension to 19,300 MWd/MTU


August 9, 2002 DEG:02:125

Mr. F. W. Trikur Exelon Nuclear Nuclear Fuel Management 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555

A FRAMATOME ANP

FRAMATOME ANP, Inc. "e

PAP,4D1 "A42C el

c~ Fe5rs( )

Dear Mr. Trikur:

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Cycle Extension to 19,300 MWdIMTU

Reference: 1) Exelon task order NFM-MW-B080, LaSalle 2 Cycle 9 Coastdown Analysis, July 9, 2002

2) Contract for Fuel Fabrication and Reliated Components and Services dated as of October 24, 2000 between Siemens Power Corporation and Commonwealth Edison Company for LaSalle Nuclear Plant.

In response to Reference 1 analyses have been performed to'support extending 6peration at LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 out to 19,300 MWd/MTU. Limits are established for base case operation and three equipment out-of-service scenarios. The analysis results and operating limits are presented in the attachment.

Very truly yours,

D. E. Garber Project Manager

FRAMATOME ANP, Inc. 2101 Horn Rapids Road - Richland WA 99352 Tel 509-375-8100 Fax 509-375-8402 wwwusframatome-anpcom


An AREVA and Siemens company



LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Cycle Extension to 19,300 MWd/MTU

With Technical Specification Scram Speeds

Exelon has determined that LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 (L2C9) will exceed the current EOC licensing

exposure of 18,458.2 MWd/MTU and requested (Reference 3) Framatome ANP, Inc. (FRA-ANP) to

perform additional analyses to support operation to an exposure of 19,300 MWd/MTU for the

following scenarios:

* Base case operation with TSSS. * FHOOS operation with TSSS. • Operation with no bypass and FHOOS with TSSS. • Operation with any combination of TCV slow closure, no RPT or FHOOS with TSSS.

The current EOC operating limits for LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 were provided in References 1 and 2,

and support operation to a cycle exposure of 18,458.2 MWd/MTU. The limiting analyses from

References 1 and 2 were analyzed to determine the operating limits for the cycle extension to

19,300 MWd/MTU. Additional power/flow state points were analyzed for certain events to ensure

completeness in determining the operating limits. The analyses were performed with the

Reference 4 parameters with the exceptions noted in Reference 3; FFTR/FHOOS temperature

reduction, steam line pressure drop, and recirculation pump torque. This letter report summarizes

the transient analysis results and operating limits to support the L2C9 cycle extension.

Cycle Extension

L2C9 was originally licensed to an EOC cycle exposure of 18,458.2 MWd/MTU. Recent discussions

with Exelon indicate that L2C9 is expected to begin coastdown operation at approximately 17,300

MWd/MTU. Data provided by Exelon indicates that the cycle will extend coastdown operation to an

exposure of approximately 19,020 MWd/MTU. In order to provide some conservatism and flexibility,

additional full power capability was included. L2C9 is conservatively modeled to operate at rated

power to a cycle exposure of 19,300 MWd/MTU.

TSSS Base Case Operation

The base case limits consider transient analysis results from the load rejection with no bypass

(LRNB) and feedwater controller failure (FWCF) events. Reference 1 provided the EOC base case

operating limits for TSSS scram times.

Framatome ANP, Inc.Proprietary


"'-- Table 1 presents the analysis results used to establish the TSSS base case limits for the cycle

extension. Figures 1 and 2 present TSSS MCPRp limits to support base case operation for

ATRIUMTM-9B* and GE9 fuel, respectively. The sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR (1.11 per

Reference 5) and the ACPR results from Table 1 are also presented in the figures. Figure 3 presents

the base case LHGRFACP multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel and the LHGRFACp results from Table 1.

TSSS FHOOS Operation

Exelon requested that FRA-ANP provide a set of operating limits to protect operation forFHOOS.

This set of limits considers transient analysis results from the FWCF with FHOOS and the LRNB with

FHOOS events.

Table 2 presents the analysis results used to establish limits to protect operation in the FHOOS

scenario for the cycle extension. Figures 4 and 5 present TSSS MCPRp limits to support operation

with FHOOS for ATRIUM-9B and GE9 fuel, respectively. The sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR

(1.11 per Reference 5) and the ACPR results from Table 2 are also presented in the figures.

Figure 6 presents the FHOOS LHGRFACp multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel and the LHGRFACp results

K> from Table 2.

TSSS FHOOS and TBVOOS Operation

Exelon requested that FRA-ANP provide a set of operating limits to protect operation in the FHOOS

and TBVOOS scenario. -This set of limits considers transient analysis results from the FWCF with

TBVOOS, FWCF FHOOS with TBVOOS, FWCF with FHOOS and LRNB with FHOOS events.

Reference 2 provided the EOC TBVOOS or FHOOS operating limits for TSSS scram times.

Table 2 presents the analysis results used to establish limits to protect operation in the FHOOS and

TBVOOS scenario for the cycle extension.' Figu'res 7 'and 8 piresent TSSS MCPRp limits to support

operation in the FHOOS and TBVOOS scenario for AT'RIUM-9B and GE9 fuel, respectively. The

sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR (1.11 per Reference 5) and the ACPR results from Table 2 are

also presented in the figures. Figure 9 presents the FHOOS and TBVOOS LHGRFACP multipliers for

ATRIUM-9B fuel and the LHGRFACP results from Table 2.

* ATRIUM is a trademark of Framatome ANP.

* Framatome ANP, Inc. Proprietary


TSSS TCV Slow Closure, No RPT or FHOOS Operation KY

Limits to support operation with any combination of TCV slow closure, no RPT or FHOOS consider

transient analysis results for the following scenarios: TCV slow closure (up to all four valves); EOC

RPT OOS; FHOOS; and a combination of FHOOS and EOC RPT oOS. (Note: TCV slow closure

analyses with FHOOS are bound by TCV slow closure analyses at nominal feedwater temperature.)

Reference 1 provided the EOC TSSS operating limits for the same EOOS scenarios.

Table 3 presents the analysis results used to establish the cycle extension limits for any combination

of TCV slow closure, no RPT or FHOOS. Figures 10 and 11 present TSSS MCPRp limits to support

operation with any combination of TCV slow closure, no RPT or FHOOS for ATRIUM-9B and GE9

fuel, respectively. The sum of the L2C9 safety limit MCPR (1.11 per Reference 5) and the ACPR

results from Table 3 are also presented in the figures. Figure 12 presents the any combination of

TCV slow closure, no RPT or FHOOS LHGRFACp multipliers for ATRIUM-9B fuel and the

LHGRFACp results from Table 3.


Figures 1-12 provide the two-loop operation (TLO) MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers for the

L2C9 cycle extension. Reference 7 indicates that the consequences of base case pressurization

transients in single-loop operation (SLO) are bound by the consequences of the same transient

initiated from the same power/flow conditions in TLO and that the TLO base case ACPRs and the

LHGRFACp multipliers remain applicable for SLO. The conclusion that TLO ACPR results generally

bound SLO results has been demonstrated for both base case operation and some equipment out

of-service scenarios for other BWRs. Although specific L2C9 analyses for SLO have not been

performed, FRA-ANP expects the TLO operation ACPR results would remain applicable in SLO for

all scenarios. Reference 5 indicates the L2C9 TLO safety limit MCPR is 1.11 and the SLO safety

limit MCPR is 1.12. Therefore, SLO MCPRp limits for base case, FHOOS, FHOOS and TBVOOS,

and any combination of TCV slow closure, no RPT or FHOOS can be determined by adding 0.01 to

the appropriate MCPRP limits reported in the above figures to account for the increase in safety limit

MCPR. The ATRIUM-9B LHGRFACn multipliers in Figures 3, 6, 9, and 12 remain applicable for

SLO.

GE9 Mechanical Limits

References 8 and 9 provided the initial evaluations of the GE9 mechanical limits for L2C9. These

evaluations were updated in References 1 and 2. An evaluation of the GE9 mechanical limits for the



"-•-. rated'power analyses reported in Tables 1-3 was performed. The cycle extension analysis results

are bound by the previous limiting L2C9 GE9 1% strain results presented in References 8 and 9.

Therefore, the adjustments (if any) currently applied to the GE9 fuel limits remain applicable for the

cycle extension.

Licensing Applicability

References 5 and 6 provided the original L2C9 licensing analyses and limits for which FRA-ANP was

responsible to a cycle exposure of 18,458.2 MWd/MTU. 'References 1 and 2 updated portions-of the

licensing analyses and limits for proposed ITS scram speeds and corrected fuel thermal conductivity.

FRA-ANP has performed additional evaluations to determine the applicability of the current licensing

analyses and limits to the L2C9 cycle extension. The evalua'tions demonstrated that the current

analysis results and limits remain applicable for the L2C9 cycle extension with the exception of the

MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers.

The L2C9 operating limits provided in References 1 and 2'remain applicable to a cycle exposure of

18,458.2 MWd/MTU (core exposure of 30,266.2 MWd/MTU). The MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp

"x_- multipliers presented in Figures 1-12 must be used for operation beyond a cycle exposure of

18,458.2 MWd/MTU, and are applicable to a cycle exposure of 19,300 MWd/MTU. The base case

MCPRp limits and LHGRFACp multipliers are valid for any feedwater temperature within the upper

and lower bounds defined by Reference 4, Item 3.12. The other limits support operation with up to a

120OF decrease in feedwater temperature from the nominal value.

Core Hydrodynamic Stability Analysis

The L2C9 stability analysis was updated for the extended cycle exposure of 19,300 MWd/MTU. For

each power/flow point, decay ratios were calculated to determine the highest expected decay ratio

throughout the cycle. Table 4 provides the updated results for the stability decay ratio analysis.

Reference 6 provided the current stability analysis decay ratios. The cycle extension analysis was

based on an updated STAIF methodology previously utilized for LaSalle Unit 1 Cycle 10.

For reactor operation under conditions of single-loop operation, final feedwater temperature reduction

(FFTR) and/or operation with feedwater heaters out of service, it is possible that higher decay ratios

could be achieved than are shown for normal operation.



References

1. Letter, D. E.'Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times and Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity," DEG:01:046, March 22, 2001.

2. Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 NSS Base Case and TBVOOS or FHOOS Operating Limits for Proposed ITS Scram Times with Corrected Fuel Thermal Conductivity," DEG:01:076, May 15, 2001.

3. Exelon Task Order, LaSalle 2 Cycle 9 Coastdown Analysis, NFM-MW-B080, July 9, 2002.


5. EMF-2440 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Plant Transient Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 2000.

6. EMF-2437 Revision 0, LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Reload Analysis, Siemens Power Corporation, October 2000.

7. EMF-95-205(P),Revision 2, LaSalle Extended Operating Domain (EOD) and Equipment Out of Service (EOOS) Safety Analysis for ATRIUM TM-9B Fuel, Siemens Power Corporation, June 1996.

8. Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Transient Power History Data for Confirming Mechanical Limits for GE9 Fuel," DEG:00:185, August 3, 2000.

9. Letter, D. E. Garber (FRA-ANP) to R. J. Chin (Exelon), "Additional Analysis for LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 1% Plastic Strain Compliance for GE9 Fuel," DEG:00:213, September 6, 2000.


Attachment Page A-6

DEG:02:125

Table 1 Base Case Transient Analysis Results

Power ATRIUM-9B ATRIUM-9B GE9

/Flow ACPR LHGRFACP ACPR

LRNB

100/105 0.33 1.000 0.41

80/105 0.32 1.000 0.40*

60 / 105 0.31 1.023 0.37

FWCF

100/105 0.26 1.055 0.32*

80/105 0.30 1.055* 0.36*

60/105 0.37 1.007* 0.42*

40/105 0.53* 0.931 * 0.59*

25 / 105 0.82* 0.776* 0.90*

* The analysis results are from an exposure prior to 19,300 MWd/MTU. The ACPR and LHGRFAC, results

are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.


Attachment Page A-7

Table 2 TBVOOS and FHOOS Transient Analysis Results

Power ATRIUM-9B ATRIUM-9B GE9 /Flow ACPR LHGRFACp ACPR

FWCF With TBVOOS

100/105 0.35 0.971 0.42

80/105 0.38 1.000 0.46*

60/105 0.45 0.964* 0.52*

40/105 0.55 0.957 0.61

25/105 0.74 0.865 0.79

FWCF FHOOS With TBVOOS

100/105 0.33 1.015 0.38

80/105 0.39 1.031 0.44

60/105 0.49 1.007 0.53

40/105 0.65 0.925 0.70

25/105 0.94 0.789 1.00

FWCF With FHOOS

100/105 0.26 1.089 0.29

80/105 0.33 1.098 0.35

60/105 0.43* 0.964* 0.46*

40/105 0.59 0.957 0.62

25/105 1.06* 0.685* 1.13*

LRNB With FHOOS

* The analysis results presented are from an exposure prior to 19,300 MWd/MTU. The ACPR and LHGRFACp results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

DEG:02:125

Framatome ANP.Inc. Proprietary


Table 3 EOOS Transient Analysis Results

Power ATRIUM-9B ATRIUM-9B GE9

/Flow ACPR LHGRFACp ACPR

TCV Slow Closure

100/ 105* 0.49 0.828 0.62

80/ 105" 0.45 0.894 0.54

80 /57.2* 0.51 0.9711 0.751

80/105t 0.57 0.8541 0.66

80/ 57.21 0.591 0.944* 0.85*

60 / 105t 0.50 0.944 0.58

40 / 105t 0.80 0.818 0.87

25/ 105t 1.001 0.754 1.00

LRNB No RPT

100/105 0.46 0.799 0.61

80/105 0.39 0.871 0.49

FWCF No RPT

40/105 0.50 0.964 0.57

25 / 105 0.68 0.871 0.75

FWCF No RPT With FHOOS

40/105 0.61 0.925 0.67

25 /105 1.04* 0.675* 1.111

Scram initiated by high neutron flux. Scram initiated by high dome pressure. The analysis results presented are from an exposure prior to 19,300 MWd/MTU. The ACPR and LHGRFACp results are conservatively used to establish the thermal limits.

t

t



Table 4 Stability Analysis Decay Ratio Results

Power Maximum Maximum / Flow (%) Global Regional

30.1 / 26.6 0.59 0.53

31.6/29.2 0.42 0.50

61.9/45.0 0.67 0.88

73.6 / 50.0 0.73 0.95

78.2 / 60.0 0.52 0.63

82.4 / 60.0 0.57 0.72


DEG:02:125

2.75

2.65

2.55

245

2.35

2.25

2.15

2.05

0. 1.95 U


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (% rated)


100 1.44 60 1.48 25 1.93 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 1 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) Base Case Power-Dependent MCPR Limits

for ATRIUM-9B Fuel with TSSS insertion Times



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (% rated)

Power MCPRp (%) ULmit

100 1.52 60 1.53 25 2.01 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 2 Coastdown (19,300 MWdIMTU) Base Case Power-Dependent MCPR Limits

for GE9 Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times

C.

Framatome ANP, Inc. Proprietary ,

DEG:02:125

1.400

1.350

1.300.

1.250

1.200

1.150

EL 1.100

1 050

- 1.000Z


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (% rated)

Power LHGRFACP (%) Multiplier

100 1.00 60 1.00 25 0.77 25 0.77

0 0.77

--'Figure 3. Coastdown (19,300-MWd/MTU) Base Case Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Power (% rated)


100 1.44 60 1.54 25 2.17 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 4. Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) FHOOS Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for

ATRIUM-9B Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times

C.


DEG:02:125

305

2.95

2.85

275

2.65

2.55

2.45

235

225

2.15 a.

S2.05 1.95

1.85

1.75

1.65.

1.55

1.45

1.35

125

1.15


110

Power (% rated)

Power,. MCPRp (%) Limit

100 . 1.52 60 1.57 25 2.24 25 2.24

0 -2.74

Figure,5 Coastdown,(19,300 MWd/MTU) FHOOS Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for

GE9 Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times-



10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power r/. rated)

Power LHGRFACp

(%) Multiplier

100 1.00 60 0.96 25 0.68 25 0.68

0 0.68

Figure 6 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) FHOOS Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers

for ATRIUM-9B Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times

1.300

1.250

1.200

1.150.

1.100

1.050

= 1.000 U

cc 0.950

-J 0.900

0 850

0800

0.750

0.700-

* FWCF FHOOS

* LRNB FHOOS -LHGRFACp

+ +

C÷

0.650

0600

0

DEG:02:125


DEG:02:125

2 85

2.75

2.65

2.55

2.45

2.35

2.25

2.15

CL2.05 0.

S1.95

1.85

1 75

1.65

1.55

1.45

1.35

1.25

1.15


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (%rated)

Power MCPRp (%) Limit 100 1.46

60 1.60 25 2.17 25 2.20

0 . .. .-2.70

Figure 7 Coastdown (19,300 MWdIMTU) FHoOS and No Bypass Power-Dependent MCPR Limits for ATRIUM-9B Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times



3.05

2.95

2.85

275

2665

2.55

2 45

2.35

2.25

0- 2.15

2.05

1.95

1.85

1.75

165

1.55

1.45

135

1.25

1.15

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Power (%rated)


100 1.53 60 1.64 25 2.24 25 2.24

0 2.74

70 80 90 100 11C

Figure 8 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) FHOOS and No Bypass Power-Dependent MCPR Limits


* -FWCF No Bypass

x FWCF FHOOS No Bypass

* FWCF FHOOSa LRNB FHOOS

- OLMCPR

xx 0÷

-I.

DEG:02:125


DEG:02:125

1.3001

1.250

1.200.

1.150

1.1004

0. U

Ii. C, -J

1.050

1000

0950

0900

0 850

0 800

0.750

0700

0 650

0.6000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (%rated)


100 0.97 60 0.96 25, 0.68 25 0.68

0 0.68

Figure 9 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) FHOOS and No Bypass Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers



* FWCF No Bypass * FWCF FHOOS No Bypass + FWCF FHOOS a LRNB FHOOS

-LHGRFACp

.4

x xx



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (% rated)

Power MCPRp (%) Limit 100 1.60 80 1.62 80 1.70 25 2.17 25 2.20

0 2.70

Figure 10 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) TCV Slow Closure/FHOOS or No RPT Power-Dependent MCPR Limits


0.

0. U


DEG:02:125

3.05|

295

265

2.75

265

2 55

245

2.35

2.25 a. E 2.15

205


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Power (% fated)


100 1.73 80 1.86 80 1.96 25 2.24 25 2.24

0 2.74

Figure 11 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) TCV Slow Closure/FHOOS or No RPT Power-Dependent MCPR Limits_



DEG:02:125

x

A

A

u.O.J -l

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Power (% rated)


100 0.79 80 0.79 80 0.79 40 0.79 25 0.67 25 0.67

0 0.67

70 80 . 90 100 110

Figure 12 Coastdown (19,300 MWd/MTU) TCV Slow Closure/FHOOS or No RPT Power-Dependent LHGR Multipliers for ATRIUM-9B Fuel with TSSS Insertion Times

A Slow TCV + FWCF FHOOS A LRNB FHOOS * LRNB No RPT X FWCFNoRPT 13 FWCF FHOOS No RPT

-LHGRFACp


K)

+

1.300

1 250

1.200

1.150

1.100

1 050

a. 1000U

: 0950

-a 0900.

0 850.

0800

0750

0700*

0650

A

aA

A

A

A

A

A

Documents

LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 Core Operating Limits Report, Amendment … · 2012-11-18 · LaSalle Unit 2 Cycle 9 C)Imnf *rr~nermnn Anni ic EMF-2440 Revision 0 Pame 4-3 Table 4.1 Coastdown