ML19210B076
| ML19210B076 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1977 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19210B073 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911040024 | |
| Download: ML19210B076 (4) | |
Text
/}... -..,7*>e 41TED STATES 4' ' n
- 1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY cO.'.'.M1sslON j,[h'.g,3, wAsmscTon, c. c. 2 mss
=, ts, +,/j j.
g s,..
o....-
SAFETY EVALUAT!0:1 GY THE OFFICE OF !;UCLEAR REACTr0 P O!L ' T i c..
AME!!DPE li !;0. n TO FACILITY OPERATI! G LICE'!SE ';0. DPR-50 t'ETROPOLITAR EnISn!! Crm*;y JERSEY UT3 "L ar En,v;J L ir,HT ' TP.v;Y ii.'i!!S(LV50fA ELECTRIC Cf!"W:Y THREE MILE ISLA'lD !;UCLEA ST AT10*:. U'1IT *:0. 1 DOCKET t:0. 50-289 Introduction By letter dated October 28, 1977, ifetropolitan Edisen Ccmpany (the licensee) recuested amendment of Acpendix A to Facility Ope ' ting License !!c. DPR-50 for Three Mile Island Unit *!o.1 (TMI-1).
The proposed amendment would increase frca 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> the period during which one of a group of redundant components in the emergency core cooling, reactor buildino energency coolinc or reacter building spray systems could be inoperable during co.ler oceration.
The request supersedes a related request submitted by the licensee on September 6,1977.
-Backaround Section 3.3.2 of the T:Q-1 Technical Specifications presently states:
" Maintenance shall be allowed during power operation en any corapenent(s) in the makeuo and purification, decay heat, P3 emergency coolina water, RB spray, CFT pressure instrumentation CFT level instrumentation, BWST level instrumentation, or cooling water systems which will not remove more than one train of each systen from service.
Comoonents shall not be removed frem service so that the affected system train is inoperable for nore than 48 consecutive hours.
If the system is not restored to reet the recuirements of Specifications 3.3.1 within 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />, the reactor shall be placed in a cold snutdown condition within twelve hours."
,- o yvi c
0 I
i 79110400 h
' In addition, Section 3.3.4 states:
" Prior to initiatinc maintenance on any of the components, the duplicate (redundant) ccmoonent snall be tested to assure operability."
In contrast, however, the Bases section for these specifications states; "An allowable maintenance period of up to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> may be utilized if the operability of ecuipment redonde.nt to that removed from service is demonstrated immediately prior to removal."
From the foregoing,it is seen that an inconsistency exists between the basis for the specificaticn and the specification as actuclly written.
That is, a 72 hour8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> maintenance period is discussed in the basis, while the specification refers to a 43 hour4.976852e-4 days <br />0.0119 hours <br />7.109788e-5 weeks <br />1.63615e-5 months <br /> naintenarce period.
The propcsed amendment would renove this inconsistency by changing the maximun allowable maintenance period as stated in the specification to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
Evaluatien The effect of the proposed revision would be to alloa certain saftty-related ccmponents having redundant counterparcs to be cut of scrvice for periods of up to 72 consecutive hours rather than the present limit of 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />.
In order to determine if the croposed ch.nge involves a significant hazards consideration, the following cuestions mst te addressed:
increase in (1) Would the propcsed change involve a significant probability or consequences of an accident previouslj considered; dnd (2) Would the croposed change involve a sianificant decrease in a safety margin.
With respect to question 1 above, chancing the raximum allcwable out-of-service period frcn 43 hours4.976852e-4 days <br />0.0119 hours <br />7.109788e-5 weeks <br />1.63615e-5 months <br /> to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> cces not affect t1e ::rcba-bility of occurrence of an accident previously censidered er the This is because i-is seriousness of the resultinq consecuences.
an administrative change only, and t".erefore could not by itsel' cause an accident nor affect the ability ci the mitioatinn system to perforn their functicns in limiting the consecuences of tne accident.
r : 'l Tj9 su
, With respect to question 2, hcwever, the change wculd increase thc length of time that a redundant ccmcenent wo11a not be available We have investin; ':
and therefore, would affect the safety marnin.
cenerically the effect cf out-of-service periods on systen unavai;-
Factors included in the investication were equipment abilityl/.
failure rates, including single, double and corron mode failures; maintenance outages; equipment testing outages and the interval between testinc; and the need for certain eauipment for different As a result of this investigation, we concluded accident conditiens.
that systen unavailability was relatively insensitive tn outaces in We, therefore, further concluded that the range of 40 to 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br />.
72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> was an acceptable duration for out-of-service periods for the equipcent and type of reactor which are the subiect of this amen 6:ent This conclusion is reflected in the fact that licenses request.
currently being issued by the fluclear Regulatory Commission for reactors similar to Tf!I-l specify an allowabic out-of-service period of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> for the type of equipment under consideration.
Based on the forecoing, we conclude that the proposed increase in 'the allowable out-of-service period from 49. hours to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> dces not constitute a significant decrease in safety targin, and does not constitute an undue hazard to the health and safety of the public.
Environe. ental Consic':ra tio_n We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a chance in effluent types or total amounts nor an incrc?se in po;ter level and vill not rc: alt in any significant envircnmentc.i N. c t.
Having n:ade this datermination, ua have further ccccludec th:t t" >
amendr.:ent involves ;n action which is insigc.i"icent frc, the s:o:
point of envircr er..a1 im;uc: and, tursuan: ". s I C C F D. : 51. id
'.1 1,
that an environmental in:>nt statement or ntSativo deci3retiu ar" environmental u:.nact appraisal need not be preparua in connection with the issuance uf this amendment.
I
- Liner, "The Impact of Cor:penent Cutaces on ECC3 Unavailability," R. T.
1~/
J. T. Powers, and E. V. Lofgren, SAI-75-5:0 >.A. August 1975, and Amendment, SAI-76-356-WA, May 1976.
^P 7
l "s "o /
Jcd
Conclusion We have concluds d, based on the cor;iderations discusse.' above, tha t:
(i) becit.">e the ar.cr. tent doe s not invcive - s i c. 4 f i c s.,
i r,.
crease in tne prct Dility or consecacnce; of. accida.; ;,revio considerec and c.es nat involve e sign,ficant cc
. ~o
..e-s 2 e..,..,,
margin, tr..e are.;. cnt due3 C30 involv; 2.
s igr.i f R: n ha:3rci :ensia -
ation, (2) tr.ere is rc;scr.ible as:Lrac.cc tnat ti.: he a l.r.
a r. j, _ f e ;,
of, the public m il no be cndangerec Dy operation in the pro m:ea mar..er, and (aj such activities will be conducted in compliar.$nc en ;
with. the Cor..inticn's reculations and ti e issJanct-of this acc T
wilt not be inimical to the ccT;r.On defense ar.d se:urity or to tns health and safety of the public.
~
Dated: cecember 11, 1977
.M
)
-) N
UNITED STATES t;UCLEAR REGULATn?v ccumnirt,
_DCCKET T0. E0-2P3 METPOPOLITA'! EDIS'"; CC"71';Y JERSEY CENTRAL POL.? AT Lif,-T C'" R :
PEN';SYt'!At;; A ELECTRIC CrPt'N NOTICE OF ISSUY:CE ni AE"D"E*;T TO FECILITY OPERATI',G LICENSE The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccnmission (the Con nission) has issued Amendment No. 33 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-50, issued to Metropolitan Edison Company, J"sey Central Pcwer and Light Company and Pennsylvania Electric Company (the licensees),
which revised Technical Specifications for operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1 (the facility) located in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. The amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.
This amendment modifies the provisions of the Technical Specifica-tions to increase from t.8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> the period during which one of a group of redundant cceponents in the emergency core cecling, reactor building emergency cooling cr reactor building spray s37.tems could be inoperable during power operation.
The application for the acendment comolies with the standard:
and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as aranded (~.he The Oce:": si.
n Act), and the Ccr-issien's rules and regulations.
C:..i c s ie" ' -
made apprerricte fir.diny, as required by tre Act and thn
\\Su7 w, m
4 rules and regula*.icn in 10 CF? Chapter I, s;Eich are se* forth in the license amendmer.t.
Prior public notice cf this au ncment wr not required since the arendment dces not involve e sigr.-#icant hazards consiceration.
The Ccmr:ission bs determined that the issuance of this ac e.i Er*
will not result in any sicnificant envircr enta' imtact and that pursuant to 10 CFR 151.5(d)(a) an environmenta' in oact statement or negative declaratien and environmental impact appraisal need nc+
be prepared in connection with issuance of this amendnent.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the application for amendment dated October 28, 1977, (2) Amendnent to License "o. DPR-50, and (3) the Ccmmission's related
. s No. 33 Safety Enluation.
All of these itens are availaole for public inspection at the Commission's Public Docurent Foom,1717 H Streat,
N. W., Washington, D. C. and at the Government Publications Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Box 1601 (Education Building),
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
A copy of items (2) and (3) may be cbt irt upon request addressed to the U. S. Nuclear Regulncry CcTission, Washington, D. C. 2C555, Attention:
Director, Division cf 0:eratin Reactors.
W n>
a f }x ' -t e
'S*'
Dated at Setnesda, Maryland, this FOR tie NUCLEAR REP;LAT0;'v U "' i::^',
g.,;L / D 3-.
Robert F
'eic, Chief Operatinc.eact:rs Scr"cr ='
Division of Crera*.inc Ceatters i537 5a, Au f sf e
.s