ML18009A771
| ML18009A771 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 12/28/1990 |
| From: | Vaughn G CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18009A772 | List: |
| References | |
| NLS-90-198, NUDOCS 9101090209 | |
| Download: ML18009A771 (14) | |
Text
ACCELERATED DISTRIBUTION DEMONSTRATION SYSTEM REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:9101090209 DOC.DATE: 90/12/28 NOTARIZED: YES FACIL:50-400 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Carolina AUTH.NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION VAUGHN,G.E.
Carolina Power !t'ight Co.
RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Document Control Branch (Document Control Desk)
SUBJECT:
Application for amend to License NPF-63,revising action requirements associated w/Tech Spec 3.1.2.2, "Reactivity Control Flow Paths"
& Tech Spec 3.1.2.4, "Charging Pumps,"
to enable unit to be placed xn hot shutdown.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
A001D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR ENCL SIZE:
TITLE: OR Submittal: General Distribution NOTES:Application for permit renewal filed.
DOCKET 05000400 D
/
05000400 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-1 LA BECKER,D INTERNAL: ACRS NRR/DET/ESGB NRR/DST 8E2 NRR/DST/SICB 7E NUDOCS-ABSTRACT OGC/HDS1 RES/DSIR/EIB EXTERNAL: NRC PDR COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 2
2 6
6 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
0 1
1 1
1 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-1 PD NRR/DET/ECMB 9H NRR/DOEA/OTSB11 NRR/DST/SELB 8D NRR/D SRXB 8E REG FILE 01 NSIC COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
0 1
1 1
1 D
I t,
D NOTE TO ALL"RIDS" RECIPIENTS:
PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE! CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK, ROOM Pl-37 (EXT. 20079) TO ELIMINATEYOUR NAME FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS FOR DOCUMENTS YOU DON'T NEED!
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 24 ENCL 22 D
D
0 j
a I '
r
Carolina Power & Light Company P.O. Box 1551 ~ Raleigh, N.C. 27602 SERIAL:
NLS-90-198 DEC a 8 1990 G. E. VAUGHN Vice President Nuclear Services Department United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTENTION:
Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555'HEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-400/LICENSE NO. NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION ACTION REQUIREMENTS Gentlemen:
In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 50.90 and 2.101, Carolina Power
& Light Company (CP6L) hereby requests a revision to the Technical Specifications for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant.
The proposed amendment revises the Action Requirements associated with Technical Specification 3.1.2.2, Reactivity Control Flow Paths; Technical Specification 3.1.2.4, Charging Puttlps; and Technical Specification 3.7.1.1, Safety Valves.
Currently, these Specifications require the unit to be placed in Cold Shutdown (Mode 5) if the associated equipment cannot be rest:ored to operable status within the time interval allowed by the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO).
- However, the applicability of these Technical Specifications is only Modes 1, 2, and 3.
The proposed amendment requires that the unit be placed in Hot Shutdown (Mode 4) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the specified allowed outage time.
The proposed amendment also establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
Enclosure 1 provides a detailed description of the proposed changes and the basis for the changes.
Enclosure 2 details the basis for the Company's determination that the proposed changes do not: involve a significant hazards consideration.
Enclosure 3 is an environmental evaluation which demonstrates that the proposed amendment meets the eligibilitycriteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9),
therefore pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessments need to be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
9 <010902 K 0>000400 209 90122';
gypi'li
l
'gl 4'i
Document Control Desk NLS-90-198 / Page 2
Enclosure 4 provides the proposed Technical Specification pages.
Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. John Eads at (919) 546-4165.
Yours very tr G.
E. Vaughn JHE/ecc (825HNP)
Enclosures:
1.
Basis for Change Request 2.
10 CFR 50.92 Evaluation 3.
Environmental Evaluation 4.
Technical Specification Pages CC:
Mr. Dayne H. Brown Mr. R. A. Becker Mr. S.
D. Ebneter Mr. J.
E. Tedrow G.
E. Vaughn, having been first duly sworn, did depose and say that the infor-mation contained herein is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and belief; and the sources of his information are officers, employees, contractors, and agents of Carolina Power 6 Light Company.
My commission expires:
Notary (Seal) qll
~'H I
illa'g 4
Ju
)
I 7 Ct
<<I
/'
'I l'
ENCLOSURE 1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NRC DOCKET NO. 50-400 OPERATING LICENSE NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION ACTION REQUIREMENTS BASIS FOR CHANGE RE UEST Pro osed Chan e
The proposed amendment revises the Action Requirements associated with Technical Specification 3.1.2.2, Reactivity Control Flow Paths; Technical Specification 3.1.2.4, Charging Pumps; and Technical Specification 3.7.1.1, Safety Valves.
Currently, these Specifications require the unit to be placed in Cold Shutdown (Mode 5) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the time interval allowed by the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO).
- However, the applicability of these Technical Specifications is only Modes 1, 2, and 3.
The proposed amendment requires that the unit be placed in Hot Shutdown (Mode 4) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the specified allowed outage time.
The proposed amendment also establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
Safet Evaluation The Bases 'for Technical Specification 3.0.1 included in Generic Letter 87'-09, dated May 4,
- 1987, discusses the intent of Action Requirements.
The Generic Letter 87-09 Bases
- states, in part:
The second type of ACTION requirement specifies a time limit in which conformance to the conditions of the Limiting Condition for Operation must be met.
This time limit is the allowable outage time to restore an inoperable system or component to OPERABLE status or for restoring parameters within specified limits. If these actions are not completed within the allowable outage time limits, a shutdown is required to place the facility in a MODE or condition in which the specification no longer applies.
Currently, the Action Requirements of Technical Specification 3.1.2.2, Reactivity Control Flow Paths; Technical Specification 3.1.2.4, Charging Pumps; and Technical Specification 3.7.1.1, Safety Valves, are more restric-tive than the intent of Technical Specification 3.0.1.
These Technical Specifications are applicable in Modes 1, 2, and 3.
- However, the Action Requirements call for a reduction to Cold Shutdown, Mode 5, if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the allowable outage time.
The proposed amendment requires that the unit be placed in Hot
- Shutdown, Mode 4, upon exceeding the allowable outage time.
This is consistent with the intent of Technical Specification 3.0.1.
Page 1 of 2
The proposed amendment establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
This is consistent with the shutdown requirements in Technical Specification 3.0.3.
The existing Techni-cal Specifications require reaching Cold Shutdown, Mode 5, within 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> of exceeding t'e allowable outage time.
They do not specify when Hot Shutdown, Mode 4, must be reached.
As such, the proposed shutdown schedule is more con-servative than the existing schedule since it requires the unit to be placed in a mode in which the Technical Specification no longer applies sooner than would be necessary under the existing Technical Specifications.
Page 2 of 2
A,
ENCLOSURE 2 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NRC DOCKET NO. 50-400 OPERATING LICENSE NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION ACTION REQUIREMENTS 10 CFR 50 92 EVALUATION The Commission has provided standards in 10 CFR 50.92(c) for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists.
A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facility involves no significant hazards considera-tion if operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment'ould not:
(1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Carolina Power 6 Light Company has reviewed this proposed license amendment request and determined that its adoption would not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The bases for this determination are as follows:
Pro osed Chan e
The proposed amendment revises the Action Requirements associated with Techni-cal Specification 3.1
~ 2.2, Reactivity Control Flow Paths; Technical Specifica-tion 3.1.2.4, Charging Pumps; and Technical Specification 3.7.1.1, Safety Valves.
Currently, these specifications require the unit to be placed in Cold Shutdown (Mode 5) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the time interval allowed by the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO).
- However, the applicability of these Technical Specifications is only Modes 1, 2,
and 3.
The proposed amendment requires that the unit be placed in Hot Shutdown (Mode 4) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the specified allowed outage time.
The proposed amendment also establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
Basis The change does not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:
The proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The requested change does not physically alter the plant in any manner.
The proposed amendment does not introduce any new equipment nor does it require any existing equipment or systems to perform a different type of function than they are currently designed to perform.
The intent of the Action Requirements of Technical Specifications 3.1.2.2, 3.1.2.4, and 3.7.1.1 is to place the unit in a mode in which the associated equipment is not required should that equipment be inoperable for a period Page 1 of 2
CI 6'
~ N H
exceeding the allowed outage time.
Since the affected Technical Specifications are applicable in Modes 1, 2, and 3, placing the unit in Mode 4 rather than Mode 5 as currently required, fulfills this intent.
In addition, the proposed amendment establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
This is consistent with the shutdown requirements in Technical Specifica-tion 3.0.3.
The existing Technical Specifications require reaching Cold
- Shutdown, Mode 5, within 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> of exceeding the allowable outage time.
They do not specify when Hot Shutdown, Mode 4, must be reached.
As such, the proposed shutdown schedule is more conservative than the existing schedule since it requires the unit to be placed in a mode in which the Technical Specification no longer applies sooner than would be necessary under the existing Technical Specifications.
Thus, it is concluded that the proposed amendment does not increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated because the plant is not physically altered in any manner.
The proposed amendment does not introduce any new equipment nor does it require any existing equipment or systems to perform a different type of function than they are currently designed to perform.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not in any way create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The intent of the Action Requirements of Technical Specifications 3.1.2.2, 3.1.2.4, and 3.7.1.1 is to place the unit is a mode in which the associated equipment is not required should that equipment be inoperable for a period exceeding the allowed outage time.
Since the affected Technical Specifications are applicable in Modes 1, 2,
and 3, placing the unit is Mode 4 rather than Mode 5 as currently required, fulfills this intent.
The proposed amendment establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
This is consistent with the shutdown requirements in Technical Specification 3.0.3.
The existing Technical Specifications require reaching Cold Shutdown, Mode 5, within 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> of exceeding the al'lowable outage'ime.
They do not specify when Hot Shutdown, Mode 4, must be reached.
As such, the proposed shutdown schedule is more conservative than the existing schedule since it requires the unit to be placed in a mode in which the Technical Specification no longer applies sooner than would be necessary under the existing Technical Specifications.
Therefore, it is concluded that the'roposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
Page 2 of 2
ENCLOSURE 3
SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NRC DOCKET NO. 50-400 OPERATING LICENSE NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION ACTION REQUIREMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) provides criterion for and identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for categorical exclusion from performing an environmental assessment.
A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facility requires no environmental assessment if operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not:
(1) involve a significant hazards consideration; (2) result in a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite; and (3) result in an increase in individual or cumulative occupa-tional radiation exposure.
Carolina Power 6 Light Company has reviewed this request and determined that the proposed amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
- Pursuant, to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assess-ment needs to be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
The basis for this determination follows.
Pro osed Chan e
The proposed amendment revises the Action Requirements associated with Technical Specification 3.1.2.2, Reactivity Control Flow Paths; Technical Specification 3.1.2.4, Charging Pumps; and Technical Specification 3.7.1.1, Safety Valves.
Currently, these specifications require the unit to be placed in Cold Shutdown (Mode 5) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the time interval allowed by the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO).
- However, the applicability of these Technical Specifications is only Modes, 1,
2, and 3.
The proposed amendment requires that the unit be placed in Hot Shutdown (Mode 4) if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the specified allowed outage time.
The proposed amendment also establishes the time allowed to reach Mode 4 upon exceeding an allowable outage time as six hours.
Basis The change meets the eligibilitycriteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) for the following reasons:
As demonstrated in Enclosure 2, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
2.
The proposed amendment does not result in a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
Page 1 of 2
The proposed amendment revises the Action Requirements for Reactivity Control Flow Paths, Charging
- Pumps, and Safety Valves to specify that if
~ the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the specified time interval, that the plant be placed in Hot Shutdown (Mode 4) in lieu of the existing requirement to enter Cold Shutdown (Mode 5).
The proposed amendment does not introduce any new equipment nor does it require any existing equipment or systems to perform a different type of function than they are currently designed to perform.
As such, the change cannot affect the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
The proposed amendment does not result in an increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The proposed amendment revises the Action Requirements for Reactivity Control Flow Paths, Charging
- Pumps, and Safety Valves to specify that if the associated equipment cannot be restored to operable status within the specified time interval, that the plant be placed in Hot'hutdown (Mode 4) in lieu of the existing requirement to enter Cold Shutdown (Mode 5).
No additional surveillances or testing result from the amendment.
There-fore, the amendment has no affect on either individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Page 2 of 2