ML17313A655
| ML17313A655 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 10/09/1998 |
| From: | Fields M NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | James M. Levine ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| References | |
| TAC-MA3743, NUDOCS 9810150195 | |
| Download: ML17313A655 (15) | |
Text
Mr. James M. Levine Senior Vice President, Nuclear Arizona Public Service Company Post Office Box 53999 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999 October 9, 1998
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENTTO OPERATING LICENSE FOR PALO VERDE NULEARGENERATING STATION'UNIT NO. 3 (TAC NO. MA3743)
Dear Mr. Levine:
The enclosed notice has been forwarded to the Arizona Repubic for publication. This announcement relates to your application dated October 6, 1998, for an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-74 for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Unit 3.
A separate notice willbe published later in the Eml~glfh~ipZ concerning the license amendment.
Docket No. STN 50-530
Enclosure:
Public Announcement ccw/encl: See next page Document Name:
PV.NEW Sincerely, Original Signed By Mel B. Fields, Project Manager Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DIBS'.."
'-Docket PUBLIC PDIV-2 Reading EAdensam (EGA1)
WBateman MFields EPeyton ACRS OGC OPA MLesar PGwynn, Region IV PHarrell, Region IV BHenderson, Region IV OFC NAME DATE PDIV-2 EWey Pn 10/ ~ /98 PDIV-2 MF' 10/
/98 OGC*
STurk 10/9 /98 10/ 9 /98 10/
/98 OPA/RIV*'DIV-2 BHenderson WB OFFICIALRECORD COPY
- No legal objection
- Concurrence received by telephone 98iOi50i95 98i009 PDR ADQCK 05000530 P
Mr. James M. Levine October 9, 1998 cc w/encl:
Mr. Steve Olea Arizona Corporation Commission 1200 W. Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Mr. David Summers Public Service Company of New Mexico 414 Silver SW, ¹1 206 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 Douglas Kent Porter Senior Counsel Southern California Edison Company Law Department, Generation Resources P.O. Box 800
- Rosemead, California 91770 Senior Resident Inspector USNRC P. O. Box 40 Buckeye, Arizona 85326 Regional Administrator, Region IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harris Tower & Pavillion 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 Chairman, Board of Supervisors ATTN: Chairman 301 W. Jefferson, 10th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Mr. Aubrey V. Godwin, Director Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency 4814 South 40 Street Phoenix, Arizona 85040 Mr. Robert D. Bledsoe Southern California Edison Company 14300 Mesa Road, Drop D41-SONGS San Clemente, California 92672 Mr. Robert Henry Salt River Project 6504 East Thomas Road Scottsdale, Arizona 85251 Terry Bassham, Esq.
General Counsel El Paso Electric Company 123 W. Mills El Paso, Texas 79901 Mr. John Schumann Los Angeles Department of Water 8 Power Southern California Public Power Authority P.O. Box 51111, Room 1255-C Los Angeles, California 90051 Ms. Angela K. Krainik, Manager Nuclear Licensing Arizona Public Service Company P.O. Box 52034 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2034 Mr. John C. Horne, Vice President Power Supply Palo Verde Services 2025 N. Third Street, Suite 220 Phoenix, Arizona 85004
PUBLIC NOTICE NRC STAFF PROPOSES TO AMENDTHE OPERATING LICENSE FOR PALO VERDE, UNITNO. 3 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-74, issued to Arizona Public Service Company (APS or the licensee) for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) Unit 3 located in Maricopa County, Arizona.
The proposed amendment would clarify the power level threshold at which certain reactor protective system (RPS) instrumentation trips must be enabled and may be bypassed, and clarify that this level is a percentage of the neutron fluxat rated thermal power (RTP) ~ The bypass power level, 1E-4% RTP, would be specified as logarithmic power instead of thermal power. The intent of (and the implementation of) the 1E-4% RTP RPS instrumentation bypass threshold level in the technical specifications (TS) has always been that this power level is neutron power, which would be indicated by logarithmic power, and is not the heat transfer from the reactor core to the coolant, including decay heat, which is the thermal power definition in the TS.
This exigent situation for PVNGS Unit 3 exists because the current "THERMAL POWER" and "RATED THERMALPOWER" (RTP) wording in the PVNGS TS, when interpreted literally in its application in TS Table 3.3.1-1 footnote (b), could prevent the resumption of operation of the unit following its current refueling outage.
This exigent situation could not have been avoided because, although this wording has existed in the PVNGS TS since initial licensing, it was not identiTied as a potential source of conflict until APS learned on or about September 24, 1998, of emergency TS amendment requests by Southern California Edison Company, for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, and Entergy Corporation, for the Waterford Nuclear Station.
r
p
~ The literal interpretation of "THERMALPOWER" in TS Table 3.3.1-1 footnote (b) could prevent the return to power operation of a shutdown reactor.
This footnote specifies that the local power density-high trip and departure from nucleate boiling ratio-low trip may be bypassed when thermal power is less than 1E-4% RTP, and that the bypass must be automatically removed when thermal power is at or above 1E-4% RTP. Since thermal power, as defined in TS Section 1.1, includes decay heat, and decay heat would remain above 1E-4%
RTP for a considerable time after shutdown, the literal interpretation of thermal power would effectively prevent the local power density and departure from nucleate boiling ratio trips from being bypassed during a normal outage, which would prevent low power testing and subsequent startup.
The staff finds the licensee acted in a timely manner and there was not sufficient time to process this amendment request in the routine manner as described in 10 CFR 50.91 without H
causing unnecessary delay in the unit returning to power.'ollowing an initial review of this application against the standards in 10 CFR 50.92, the
.-NRC staff has made a proposed (preliminary) determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards corisideration.
According to 10 CFR 50.92(c), this means that the proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The licensee's analysis of the no significant hazards consideration is presented below:
1.
The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
I
'f The proposed change would replace the words "THERMALPOWER" with "logarithmic power" for the 1E-4% rated thermal power (RTP) level threshold in Table 3.3.1-1 footnotes (a) and (b), surveillance requirement SR 3.3.1.7 Note 2, and Table 3.3.2-1 footnote (d) for the reactor protective system (RPS) instrumentation.
The purpose of the 1'%TP threshold is to (1) specify the power, below which, the logarithmic power level trip is required to be operable and surveilled, and (2) specify the power, above which, the local power density (LPD) and departure from nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR) trips are required to be operable.
For these purposes, the appropriate power threshold should be logarithmic power, which is the power indicated on the logarithmic nuclear instrumentation, and not thermal power. Thermal power is defined in TS section 1.1 as the total reactor heat transfer rate to the reactor coolant, and would include decay heat.
Thermal power would therefore not drop to 1EC% RTP for a considerable period of time after shutdown, and would not provide the plant protective function correlation required at 1E-4% neutron RTP. However, logarithmic power, which is indicated by neutron flux, does provide the plant protective function correlation required at 1EP% neutron RTP for the required reactor trips as required by safety analyses.
The logarithmic power level of 1E-4% neutron RTP nominally correlates to the neutron flux measured by the excore neutron instrumentation that is 1E-4% of the neutron flux at 100% RTP (3876 MWt) measured by the excore neutron instrumentation.
The proposed editorial amendment would also replace "RTP" with "NRTP,"'in Table 3.3.1-1 footnotes (a) and (b), surveillance requirement SR 3.3.1.7 Note 2, and Table 3.3.2-1 footnotes (c) and (d). A definition would be added for NRTP (nuclear rated thermal power) in section 1.1 as the indicated neutron flux at RTP.
These editorial clariTications willreflect the fact that the logarithmic power level of 1E-4% is not a percentage of the "total reactor core heat transfer rate to the reactor, coolant of 3876 MWt,"as RTP is defined in section TS 1.1, but is instead a percentage of the indicated neutron flux at RTP.
An editorial change is also proposed to specify NRTP as the "ALLOWABLE VALUE"parameter for the high logarithmic power level trip setpoint in Table 3.3.1-1 to correct the unintended omission of the trip setpoint parameter during preparation of the improved Technical Specifications.
This change willfillin the omitted parameter with the correct parameter of NRTP that is also consistent with the high logarithmic power trip setpoint parameter in Table 3.3.2-1, These changes do not constitute a physical change to the Unit or make changes in the RPS instrumentation setpoints, system logic or manual actuation.
In addition, these changes do not alter physical plant equipment or the way in which plant equipment is operated.
This change is editorial in that it corrects the TS wording to match the appropriate power parameter that was originally intended and required by safety analyses, and that has been implemented since original licensing of the PVNGS plants. Therefore, these changes do not involve
a signiTicant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change would replace the words "THERMALPOWER" with "logarithmic power" for the 1E-4% RTP level threshold in Table 3.3.1-1 footnotes (a) and (b), surveillance requirement SR 3.3.1.7 Note 2, and Table 3.3.2-1 footnote (d) for the RPS instrumentation.
The purpose of the 1E-4% RTP threshold is to (1) specify the power, below which, the logarithmic power level trip is required to be operable and surveilled, and (2) specify the power, above which, the LPD and DNBR trips are required to be operable.
For these purposes, the appropriate power threshold should be logarithmic power, which is the power indicated on the logarithmic nuclear instrumentation, and not thermal power. Thermal power is defined in TS section 1.1 as the total reactor heat transfer rate to the reactor coolant, and would include decay heat.
Thermal power would therefore not drop to 1E4% RTP for a considerable period of time after shutdown, and would not provide the plant protective function correlation required at 1E-4% neutron RTP. However, logarithmic power, which is indicated by neutron flux, does provide the plant protective function correlation required at 1E-4% neutron RTP for the required reactor trips as required by safety analyses.
The proposed editorial amendment would also replace "RTP" with "NRTP," in Table 3.3.1-1 footnotes (a) and (b), surveillance requirement SR 3.3.1.7 Note 2, and Table 3.3.2-1 footnotes (c) and (d). A definition would be added for NRTP (nuclear rated thermal power) in section 1.1 as the indicated neutron flux at RTP.
These editorial clariflications willreflect the fact that the logarithmic power level of 1E-4% is not a percentage of the "total reactor core heat transfer rate to the reactor coolant of 3876 MWt,"as RTP is defined in section TS 1.1, but is instead a percentage of the indicated neutron flux at RTP.
An editorial change is also proposed to specify NRTP as the "ALLOWABLE VALUE"parameter for the high logarithmic power level trip setpoint in Table 3.3.1-1 to correct the unintended omission of the trip setpoint parameter during preparation of the Improved Technical Specifications.
'This change willfillin the omitted parameter with the correct parameter of NRTP that is also consistent with the high logarithmic power trip setpoint parameter in Table 3.3.2-1.
These changes do not constitute a physical change to the Unit or make changes in the RPS instrumentation setpoints, system logic or manual actuation.
In addition, these changes do not alter physical plant equipment or the way in which plant equipment is operated.
The proposed change does not introduce any new modes of plant operation or new accident precursors.
This change is editorial in that it corrects the TS wording to match the appropriate power parameter that was originally intended and required by safety analyses, and that
C C
t Ir
)
I has been implemented since original licensing of the PVNGS plants. Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed change would replace the words "THERMALPOWER" with "logarithmic power" for the 1E-4% RTP level threshold in Table 3.3.1-1 footnotes (a) and (b), surveillance requirement SR 3.3.1.7 Note 2, and Table 3.3.2-1 footnote (d) for the RPS instrumentation.
The purpose of the 1E4% RTP threshold is to (1) specify the power, below which, the logarithmic power level trip.
is required to be operable and surveilled, and (2) specify the power, above which, the LPD and DNBR trips are required to be operable.
For these purposes, the appropriate power threshold should be logarithmic power, which is the power indicated on the logarithmic nuclear instrumentation, and not thermal power. Thermal power is defined in TS section 1.1 as the total reactor heat transfer rate to the reactor coolant, and would include decay heat.
Thermal power would therefore not drop to 1E-4% RTP for a considerable.period of time after shutdown, and would not provide the plant protective function correlation required at 1E-4% neutron RTP. However, logarithmic power, which is indicated by neutron flux, does provide the plant protective function correlation required at 1EQ% neutron RTP for the required reactor trips as required by safety analyses.
The proposed editorial amendment would also replace "RTP" with "NRTP," in Table 3:3.1-1 footnotes (a) and (b), surveillance requirement SR 3.3.1.7 Note 2, and Table 3.3.2-1 footnotes (c) and (d) ~ A definition would be added for NRTP (nuclear rated thermal power) in section 1.1 as the indicated neutron flux at RTP.
These editorial clariflications willreflect the fact that the logarithmic power level of 1E-4% is not a percentage of the "total reactor core heat transfer rate to the reactor coolant of 3876 MWt,"as RTP is defined in section TS 1.1, but is instead a percentage of the indicated neutron flux at RTP.
An editorial change is also proposed to specify NRTP as the "ALLOWABLE VALUE"parameter for the high logarithmic power level trip setpoint in Table'.3.1-1 to correct the unintended omission of the trip setpoint parameter during preparation of the Improved Technical Specifications.
This change willfillin the omitted parameter with the correct parameter of NRTP that is also.consistent with the high logarithmic power trip setpoint parameter in Table 3.3.2-1.
l These changes do not constitute a physical change to the Unit or make changes in the RPS instrumentation setpoints, system logic or manual actuation.
In addition, these changes do not alter physical plant equipment or the way in which plant equipment is operated.
This change is editorial in that it corrects the TS wording to match the appropriate power parameter that was originally intended and required by safety analyses, and that has been implemented since
~ \\
~ original licensing of the PVNGS plants. Therefore, this change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
~
Ifthe proposed determination that the requested license amendment involves no significant hazards consideration becomes final, the NRC staff will issue the amendment without first offering an opportunity foi a public hearing.
An opportunity for hearing willbe published in the E~ZglH~igZ at a later date and any hearing request willnot delay the effective date of the amendment.
Ifthe NRC staff decides in its final determination that the amendment does involve a significant hazards consideration, a notice of opportunity for a prior hearing will be published in
'he E~gl Bgi~iaL and, ifa hearing is granted, it willbe held before the amendment is issued.
Comments on the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration may be submitted to William Bateman, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, by collect call to 1-301-415-1372 from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. EST Federal worddays or by facsimile to 1-301-415-3061. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
,Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pick, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Copies of written comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC. All comments received by 4:15 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time on October 19, 1998, willbe considered in reaching a determination.
A copy of the application may be examined at the NRC's Local Public Document Room located at Phoenix Public Library, 1221 N. Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004, and the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
.r" I
t