ML16342C924

Summary of 950418 Meeting W/Util in Rockville,Md Re Plans for Extended Fuel Cycles.List of Attendees & Presentation Handouts Encl

ML16342C924
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	05/02/1995
From:	Mark Miller NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	NRC
References
NUDOCS 9505110260
Download: ML16342C924 (84)

Text

l~

~P,S REGS rc 4C 0

Cy nO

~o

++*++

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2DSS&4001 May 2, 1995 LICENSEE:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company FACILITY: Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos.

1 and 2

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON APRIL 18,

1995, TO DISCUSS PLANS FOR EXTENDED FUEL CYCLES On April 18, 1995, the NRC staff met with representatives of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to discuss their plans for extended fuel cycles.

Persons attending this meeting are listed in Attachment 1.

Highlights of the meeting are summarized below.

Attachment 2 contains the licensee's presentation slides.

The licensee indicated that the proposed plans for going to 24-month cycles will be in three phases.

The first is the studies and preparation

phase, the second phase is 19-21 month cycles from 1996 to 2001, and the final phase is implementation of 24-month cycles starting in 2001.

The first of the transition cycles will be 21-month Cycle 8 for Unit 2 starting in March 1996.

The transition cycles will allow the licensee to assess the merits of longer cycles.

The licensee indicated that there will not need to be any fuel-related Technical Specification (TS) changes to support the phase II cycles.

Ultimately, the longer cycles will allow PG&E to conduct one outage every spring when the availability of hydro power increases.

The licensee noted its intent to go to a fuel rod burnup of 66,000 MWd/ton during the 24-month cycles.

The staff noted that it is currently evaluating this burnup level.

Other reload design'issues which the licensee must address in its submittal include l.imits on the moderator temperature coefficient and higher boron levels in the reactor coolant system.

The licensee stated that the 10-12 percent higher fluence level on the critical weld of Unit 1 will have a minor impact on pressure vessel life but that pressure vessel will still be adequate for the remainder of the operating license.

The licensee has begun its accident analyses to support the longer cycles.

For the 24-month cycles, the licensee noted that current loss-of-coolant accident methodology may not support the higher peaking factors but Westinghouse's best estimate technology would.

The staff has not completed its review of this methodology.

The licensee does not believe that there will be a major impact on operation and maintenance.

Surveillance and setpoint changes will be required for the 24-month cycles.

The licensee indicated its intent to provide an amendment request which supports these changes before the 19-21 month cycles of phase II.

The licensee indicated that it will follow the guidance contained in Generic Letter 91-04, "Guidance on Preparation of a License Amendment Request for Changes in Surveillance Intervals to Accommodate a 24-Month Fuel Cycle," and will follow the philosophy that Westinghouse has followed in the past.

9505ii0260 950502 PDR ADQCK 05000275',

P PDR

u May 2, 1995 The lic'ensee'riefly st'ated the"inservice inspection changes that it will request.'.

TheAmerican ~Soc'i'ety..of,; Hech'anical Engineers (ASHE) Code,Section XI allows a maximum,'of'33 percent of; the 10-year interval's inspections to be conductediin any one,40-'month,. period',

and the licensee would like that maximum to:be 40'pere'ent=,to "supp'ort.the,24-'onthcycles.

The licensee would also like to.-'changethe requirement that-,inservice inspections be completed within 120 months, plu's.'or',"minus an accumulation of'2 months over three 40-month periods to 'an accumul.ation <of-24, months. over three 40-month periods.

In discussing~ steam generat'or 'tube inspections, the staff stated that the goal of such'nspections

'is-to demonstrate that the steam generators were operating within thei'r design basis. 'The licen'see needs to use historical results to demonstr'ate that steam generator",in'spections can be extended and discuss how the inspections were performed 'an'd what"technology was used.

The staff also indicated, that the size of any identified defects, more so than the number of tubes pl'ugged, is significant.

The licensee, indicated, that its past Appendix J containment leakage test results were ver'. good and that it did not anticipate a problem supporting a

decreased test frequency.

The licensee plans to begin submitting its needed changes and their technical basis in December 1995 in order to support extension of the October 1997 date when the 18-month surveillances would be due on Unit 2.

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Helanie A. Hiller, Senior Project Hanager Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.

50-275 and 50-323 Attachments:

l.

Attendance List 2.

Presentation Handouts cc w/atts:

See next page DISTRIBUTION w/attachments:

Docket File PDIV-2 Reading M. Hiller PUBLIC K. Perkins, RIV/WCFO DISTRIBUTION w/attachment 1 only:

W. Russell/F. Hiraglia R.

Zimmerman EGA1 W. Bateman J. Hitchell, EDO E.

Peyton OGC

': '"',',,','. Jordan, AEOD NRC Participants ACRS (4)

Document Name:

DCAPR18-.HTS

'~

OFC PDIV-2 LA,,

PDIV-,2 H

NAHE e

on

"',HHi DATE

-'5 95 5

95 OF<F'IC IAL RECORD,',COPY

-:."'-',~BOOe-."

c I'I ll, g

I

(

A

.I

E K

I K

K

cc w/atts:

NRC Resident Inspector Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.

Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Dr. Richard Ferguson, Energy Chair Sierra Club California 6715 Rocky Canyon Creston, California 93432 Ms. Nancy Culver San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace P. 0.

Box 164 Pismo Beach, California 93448 Ms. Jacquelyn C. Wheeler P.

O.

Box 164 Pismo Beach, California 93448 Managing Editor The Count Tele ram Tribune 1321 Johnson Avenue P. 0.

Box 112 San Luis Obispo, California 93406 Chairman San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Room 370 County Government Center San Luis Obispo, California 93408 Mr. Truman Burns Mr. Robert Kinosian California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness, Room 4102 San Francisco, California 94102 Mr. Steve Hsu Radiologic Health Branch State Department of Health Services Post Office Box 942732 Sacramento, California 94232 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harris Tower

& Pavillion 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 Mr. Peter H. Kaufman Deputy Attorney General State of California 110 West A Street, Suite 700 San Diego, California 92101 Christopher J.

Warner, Esq.

Pacific Gas

& Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Mr. Warren H. Fujimoto Vice President and Plant Manager Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant P. 0.

Box 56 Avila Beach, California 93424 Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee ATTN:

Robert R. Wellington, Esq.

Legal Counsel 857 Cass Street, Suite D

Monterey, California 93940 Mr. Gregory M. Rueger Nuclear Power Generation, B14A Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451 P.O.

Box 770000 San Francisco, California 94106

c I

MEETING ATTENDEES Diablo Canyon Licensing Status Meeting March 10, 1995 Attachment 1

Melanic Hiller Al Lohmeier John Tsao Ken Dempsey Jerry Mauck CliffDoutt Tom Dunning larry Phillips Edward Kendrick larry Kopp Ann Hodgdon Ted Sullivan Dave Terao S.

V. Athavale Dan lurie PG&E Vickie Backman Suresh Kamdar lionel Bates Roger Johnson Mestin house C. R. Tuley R. Howard S.

V. Andre Jeff Bass Jim Brennan

, r

EXTENDED FUEL CYCLE PLANS DIABLOCANYONPOWER PLANT NRC/PG&E MEETING ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND APRIL 18, 1996

1 I

'P

AGENDA Introduction

~ Extended Cycle Plans - Overview

~ Feasibility Study - Key Results

~ Surveillance Extension Program

~ Submittal Schedules

I t

MEETING OBJECTIVES Describe plans for implementing extended fuel cycles

~

Provide estimated schedules for licensing submittals

~

Obtain NRC staff feedback questions/comments/concerns

I

\\

r~.

I I

7

OVERVIEW EXTENDED CYCLEPLANS Diablo Canyon Power Plant Presentation to NRC April 18, 1995 Suresh Kamdar Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company

p4

$4 4

-t(<

7

posed PIan C c'ov

( '

C NCgC c

'(L ( LVCg(%%% P4%

Cc i%i (

C(C F XE(44 Cdg(%

C4 CL C ((((4 (6(% 4 ( (((

i C

((Vo( C4.

'~'%.Wc%( c.'C4.

'.4.((

Goal to attain 24-month long fuel cycles

Phase I: Studies and preparation

'P.hase ll: '20 m-onth'ycles from 1996 to 2001

) '""i Phase Ill:24 m-onth cycles beginning 2007

~ Fallback plan Pr

1

l JP L c e tern,atives v

'v'e '4.

s 4 cevcN vvvv/NkvvSR&c4v'.tv (v'rrvv

'vs

'c4 Nxc(eJ, NOva av';c 'v%4(C sN MA..

RA. vMACv v

vive XC4..

Iv 4 v v(v ve v,

. vv

.:. 1995; -

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20M 2002 J F MAMJ J ASOND J F MAMJ J AS OND J F MAMJ J ASOND J F MA MJ J AS OIJ D J F MAMJ J AS OH D J F MA MJ J AS OHD J F MA MJ J AS OND J F MA MJ J AS OHD Unfed;d~

CUrrent18-Month cte

)'c@x~QJcleg104

'vg

~~ >4': Cycle".l)@R'+g

~s~viCycle."'.l2~s 8 IvjXA4J+i~~v

@if; 2):;2'~vOyole';7"..'j',,j'j!

~i,",,:,"Cycle'tr:-:"":=:;,".

'j~,:-'=-:>;,Cycle'.:9".--",;='i

'".;<~'iCycje",10gi~~li;':

~'-".::;:;":,',Cycle';.10'".;:<'4-";;

24-Month cles with Transition '20-month'les Unit1 8N~)%)

"XIIXII Unit2 I',"';-,.',';Y=.",,';Cy'cle:7>>".;:::.':@~

kt'TdkCycter)1$ !Ol~h<kl)~]

[g 24-Month Cydes 20.Month Transition Cydes Qi 18-Month Cyd NPG

rL f

t% 0 I

I

Milestones/Schedule for Extended Cycle Phase II Activities Diablo Canyon Power Plant tD Task Name Sunreillance Extension 1995 M

A M

J J

A S

0 N

D J

F M

1996 J

J A

S 0

N D

J F

M A

M 1997 J

J A

6 0

N D

J Eval. Instrumenl DriftStudy Eval - Surveithnce extension 4

PG&E lAR Preparation NRC Reiiew and Approval NRC Meetings Document Changes STP Updates

+ 4/te Second mtg proposed in October 10/15 10/15 12/31

/4 10 12 13 14 15 16 PM Procedure Changes FSAR Changes Unit 2 Cycle 8 Reload 5% Enrichment tjcense Due Enrichment Order Due Final Reload Design Due Fabrication Reload/21-M Cyde Safety Eva

+ 6/30

+ 5na 1R7 Pa:,g 3/1 3/1 2R7 L::.:;;.;.".t r'""'t

';1 R8 NKN4 p'A%

as':I:::

ff;:;-":3 Ri'i":8 18-Month Surveillances Due PG&E Date: 4/14/95 Task Progress Milestone +

Summary c:t2yeartphase2,mpp

I E.

nded Cycles Key E ects

~ '20 mo-nth'ycles: outages In winter, spnng, fa e Reduced personnel dose and radwaste Fewer refuelings Supports PG8 E sysfem

.I;:- "::

~ 24 m-onth cycles: one outagein spring every year ll

~l X

'I h

M Cw QxVCCM< C<<CCC<< 4Y4<<" '<<44VNcc$M (<<< @CvVNC4dn.<w4VC8%

v.

'NCCS<

CC<<Ce(C<<'CCC<<

<<CC<<,

<<< <<(6 <<

<<swan

'< 4 FEASIBILITYSTUDIES EXTENDEDFUEL CYCLES Diablo Canyon Power Plant Presentation to NRC April 18, 1995 Suresh Kamdar Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company

~i"'+<+~gyF~

$ :d>8

erview 4%<iC<i.

eke i < C(i i'C444aiii~<A 4<ii< XC4 4N w%.

Cw

<C<

44'4

<&VCNWi<<w<<<wew<x v wxi4xx v,

w.w v.'

CC~<<<

i<CCC44@w Feasibility Studies

,-,-,:..:::;;.i Key Findings

-:-'::::-::-"::-'4 Technical Concerns a Conclusions

~ I si'6

, ~

sibilityStudy

((( C

( 4 % %(SAC

((C Cx (

CCW CC4

((4(x(% ( (

@C IV%

'0% Cl CN4(((

C(C(W( A%.((((

% NRC((%

CC((

(((( (

(vgaoXL'4 (

(

( 4 '((C 4'(( C (CC((CO(

'N

'20 m-onth'nd 24-cycle studies complete PGB,E and Westinghouse effort Mostly qualitative - except reload design Areas of assessment

~

Nuclear fuel (reload design analysis)

~ Accident analysis

~

Plant operation and maintenance

~

Surveillance extensionlTechnical Specifications

t C

<<'("jw" a,4i lear Fuel 20-Month Cycles x <<<<<<4 <<<<<<<<<<<

((

(<<< e

<<<( 'O'CC<<<<<( 4 <<< (

<<<(<<<<x <<<<< w4<'<<<<<4+

<<<i'<<<<<<<<<:<<<<i<<%@x

<<<('<(

(<

<6 <<<

<<<<< '<<<<<<<<<'<<<< C

'<<CM<<<4. <<

Dimensional analysis performed for Unit 2 Cycles 8,9 and 10 96 or fewer assemblies replaced each cycle Willuse fullyenriched solid blankets Willuse 132 inc-h 1 5X.IFBAs

~ RCS boron at current levels

~ No fuel related tech spec changes jl<~r4'.

g j.$4= g d4

l

ear Fuel Month Cycle gild 4F~

'i%~C C~

cc@c@v'Lck CVC (Cc(i ( * (

4tg4.

%g( 4%4, CCMcc'L 4(

4LC<QW'ls('(w Cf%C M4, Ct,

'<Ci;i~aC(iVa i%

4C(i '. MC(, CC Reload design

~

Challenging buf feasible reload design

~

High energy cycles, 5% enrichment, 104-108 assm reload, higher burnable absorbers

~

Would need higher peaking factors and MTC limits, Revised Thermal Design Procedure

~

Would result in higher discharge burnups

~

Willhave higher RCS boron

~

Need Advanced fuel design Minoreffect on pressure vessel life

l t

1 lpga~

ident Analysis

+ """'<<<<'C4$4CM CC4<

WCW<x '%(aC~4RC<4%%<<<<x <Nc

'<(<

<<<NORM

(

< 'iA C4<<<W<'<<< 'C 4CdeC~ C<<<C4

( <

<w<

'<<c < CCW<d c< C<<

<<<<<'valuafion included LOCA, non LO-CA, containmentintegrity, SG tube rupture, and energy 8, mass releases

'20 mo-nth'ycles

~

May need fo re-evaluate transients affected by any setpoint changes

~

Integrated safety evaluation would be performed 24 mon-th cycles

~

Would need to re-evaluate fuel parameter dependent transients

~

Margins available except forlarge break LOCA Traditional LOCA methodology may not support needed peaking factors W's Best Estimate technology willsupport needed peaking factors Need higher refueling, RWST, and accumulator boron Hof leg switchover time would decrease

yL

~. ration and Maintenance No significant effects on forced outage rates expected No significant effect on refueling outage length expected MinorImpact on major systems and components and PMs RCS Chemistry

~

Minoreffect on RCS chemistry for '20-month'ycles

~

Elevated lithium levels in RCS forpH control for24-month cycles May need higher boric acid tank and spray additive tank volumes for 24 mon-fh cycles Potential operating issues, but believed to be manageable Reduced radvvaste and personnel dose

I

veillances and Technical cl EcatlonS W,"

<<<ical <<wS si i<<<< i4(: <(<Yn4%V<<'i<<ci<@aCi C

~CD<<

<<4<'C~Ya".Cd((

.< <~~4<<<<CC' i ~ < a<,4 4

4.

<<< v<<(C'iCC'<'CC4<A <.,<

.<<<CS<<<<<<<(

~ (%.4'<('g~:~ ~~

GL 91-04 provides guidance for surveillance extensions Need tech spec changes forsurveillance and setpoint changes for 24 month cycles Surveillance interval extensions for 24 m-onth cycle feasible

~ May need tech spec changes forfuel and boration requirements for 24-month cycles later

~4 ~

fl C AS EOFlS

"<<<<we<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

.' "---': < <<<<<e<ec<<c'. - -"'-

e

<<<<<<<<<we 20 month cycles offer economic benefits and smoother transitioning to 24 m-onth cycles 24 m-onth cycles offer economic and other benefits Regulatory requirements for 20 an-d 24 m-onth cycles are believed to be addressable There are no significant technical issues with 20 month cycles 24 mo-nth cycle's technicalissues are believed to be resolvable

l l

SURVEILLANCEEXTENSION PROGRAM EXTENDED FUEL CYCLES DIABLOCANYONPOWER PLANT NRC/PGB E MEETING ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND APRIL 18, 1995 Lionel Bates Pacific Gas and Elaetrio Company

)

1 l

I I

SURVEILLANCEEXTENSION PROGRAM

~

Scope Instrument drift evaluation Surveillance tests Steam generator tube inspections Appendix J Type B and C tests

~

Methodology Generic Letter 91-04 Considerations/experience Expected results

1 I

I

INSTRUMENTDRIFTEVALUATION SCOPE

~

Reactor Protection System (RPS)

~

Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System (ESFAS)

~

Control loops

~

Post Accident/Emergency Operation Procedures (PAMS/EOP)

~

Other safety-related channels for Technical Specification compliance Safety system parameters Safe shutdown

1 t

rt P

l s

I

RPS/ESFAS TRIP/ACTUATIONSCOPE Overtemperature hT (OTAT)

Overpower AT (OPd T)

Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Loop AT RCS Flow Pressurizer level Pressurizer pressure Containment Pressure Steam generator Narrow Range level Steam line pressure 4.16 kV Emergency Bus Level 1 and 2 Seismic Trip Reactor Coolant Pump UV, UF

4 ~

I

~

I

CONTROL LOOP SCOPE

~

Pressurizer pressure control

~

Rod control (Tavg, turbine impulse pressure)

~

Pressurizer level control

~

Steam generator level control

~

Power (secondary calorimetric)

~

RCS flow indication

4

~

l g

~

t

PAMS/EOP

~

Wide range RCS pressure

~

NR steam generator level

~

Wide range steam generator level

~

Pressurizer pressure

~

Pressurizer level

~

Steamline pressure

~

AFWflow

~

Wide range RCS temperature

~

Core exit temperature

~

Reference junction box temperature

~

Wide range containment pressure

~

RWST level

~

Condensate storage tank level

~

Containment recirculation and cavity sump levels

~

RVLIS

~

RCS subcooling margin monitor

~

RHR flow

~

Gammametrics neutron flux meters

~

Containment hydrogen concentration

~

Containment area high range rad monitor

~

~

/

OTHER TECHNICALSPECIFICA TIONS/

SAFETY SYSTEM PARAMETERS

~

Accumulator level

~

Accumulator pressure

~

Boric acid tank level

~

Radiation monitoring instrumentation (area and process)

~

Turbine overspeed protection system

~

Emergency borate flow

~

Charging flow

~

lVlain steamline radiation monitor

~

Plant vent noble gas activity

~

Containment ventilation exhaust radiation

~

Plant vent radiation monitor high range

~

Recombiner instrumentation and control circuits

~

Triaxial time-history and peak accelographs

~

Triaxial response-spectrum recorders

l

~ t I

INSTRUMENTSURVEILLANCE EXTENSION METHODOLOGY

~

Extend surveillance intervals to 24 months

~

Conform to GL 91-04

~

Base information of drift on as-found/as-left analysis

~

Apply high probability and high confidence requirements

~

Project driftto 30 months for functions of extended surveillance

~

Combine 30 month driftwith other errors using W algorithm ISA standard S67.04 Regulatory Guide 1.105 Square Root of Sum of Squares (SRSS) approach

I ~

~ ~

7

~ ~

~

~ ~

~ ~

~ ~

~

~

~

~ ~

~ A

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~ ~

e

~

~ Oi I

~

I

~

~

~

~

~

~

4 J

1

~

t ~

g ~

J

TECHNICALSPECIFICATION CHANGES RELATED TO THE RPS ANDESFAS SETPOINTS

~

Existing format for the RPS and ESFAS setpoints in the Technical Specifications Trip setpoint and allowable values Operability determination is based on evaluation

~

Proposed format for the RPS and ESFAS setpoints in the Technical Specifications One column approach Nominal trip setpoint Operability determination via surveillance procedure and appropriate acceptance criteria

~

~

I

~

g y j

P

EXPECTED RES ULTSICONCERNS

~

Insignificant systematic driA

~

DCPP has substantial driftdata for most instrument loops

~

Some RPS/ESFAS loops have new pressure transmitters Pressurizer pressure (Rosemount 1154SH9)

Containment pressure (Rosemount 1154DP6)

Identify usable drift data from other applications or other plants Appropriate extrapolation of vendor's specified drift

~

May have to change some low-design margin setpoints

~

~

SURVEILLANCETES T SCOPE

~

Surveillance test requirements for:

Current tests to be performed during shutdown or every 18 months Current tests on a period affected by cycle extension

~

Test types affected I&C Mechanical Electrical Fire protection Miscellaneous

~ I e

~

~

g s

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

~

Justification for extended surveillance will be discipline or type specific

~

Justification will be selectively based on relevant criteria:

Results of previous surveillance tests Evaluation of degradation mechanism's degree of dependence on time Extrapolation of previous test results to 30 months Vendor/periodic maintenance requirements Basis for surveillance test requirement Relative safety significance of test to system operability System design features which provide redundancy Projected impact on safety analysis and operability Impact of surveillance at power

~

( ~

LI f

~

EXPECTED RESULTS FOR SURVEILLANCETEST EXTENSION DGPP expects that extension of surveillance test interval to 24 months is feasible based on past test/maintenance history.

)

I )

r w

~

g 'i

STEAM GENERA TOR TUBE INSPECTIONS Methodolo

~

Follow GL 91-04 guidance

~

Adopt GL 91-04 inspection frequency Technical Specification wording

~

Update bases section ofTechnical Specification 3/4.5.4

~

Update Technical Specification section on RCS leakage Ex ectations/Considerations

~

Recent inspection sample size was 100%

~

Recent inspection results in both units had been Category C-2 or C-1

~

Last Unit 1 outage inspection had Category C-3 results

)

I

~

e I

APPENDIXJ TYPE B AND C TEST

~ Approach based on current regulations

~ AllAppendix J Type B and C tests (containment penetration and valve leakage tests)

~

25'/o interval extension not applicable

~

Must justify 30 month interval

0

~I

~

APPENDIXJ TYPE B AND C TEST (CONTINUED)

I

~ Approach:

Determine 30 month aggregate Leak Rate

~

Do as-found/as-left for past ILRTs for B and C

~

Extrapolate results to 30 months

~

If necessary, limitacceptable leakage to maintain margin of 40% of L,

~

Identify individual disproportionate leakers

~

Develop individual alternate acceptance criteria

I

~

'h 4

I ~

~

~ 4 l

EXPECTED RESULTS

~

Extrapolated aggregate leak rate for type B and C tests expected to be within Technical Specification limitof 0.6 L,

~

Ifextrapolated leak rate is not within limit, reviseTechnical Specification limitto maintain margin

~

~

a

~)

~ ~

Y%

SCOPE OF SUBMITTALS

~

1995 - 1997 Changes needed to support 20-month cycles (each change for 24-months)

Primarily surveillance interval increases Possibly some setpoint changes Staggered over 12-14 month period

~

1998 - 2000 Additional changes needed for 24-month cycles Expected to primarily involve fuel and boration requirements

(

I ~

0

) ~t

1995 - 1997 SUBMITTALS December 1995 - First Amendment Request

~

TS surveillance interval increases for:

Instrument functional tests Trip actuation device tests Instrument response tests Setpoint evaluations/changes for:

Remote shutdown monitoring Accident monitoring April 1996 - Second Amendment Request

~

TS surveillance interval increases for:

AC/DC sources Ventilation systems for the control room, auxiliary buildings, and fuel building

rq

~~

v r )'j

1995-1997 SUBMITTALS Cont'd September 1996 - Third Amendment Request

~

TS surveillance interval increases for:

Fluid systems functional tests Miscellaneous specifications

~

Setpoint evaluations/changes for:

RPS/ESFAS protection channels January 1997 - Fourth Amendment Request

~

TS surveillance interval increases for:

Containment penetrations Miscellaneous specifications

~

Setpoint evaluations/changes for:

Remaining safety-related functions September 1997 - Alllicense amendments need to be issued October 1997 month surveillances due (Unit 2 Cycle 8)

0

~" S II

't