ML20006G201
| ML20006G201 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 02/22/1990 |
| From: | Wambach T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Shelton D TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20006G202 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-87-09, GL-87-9, NUDOCS 9003050335 | |
| Download: ML20006G201 (3) | |
Text
.I.
' February 22, 1990 i
s=
^
s L', Docket Ko. 50-346 DISTRIBUTION:
isocuetmas;. NRC & Local PDRs j
-Mr. Donald C. Shelton PDIII-3 r/f JZwolinski i
Vice President - Nuclear PKreutzer TWambach
' Toledo' Edison Company OGC-WF1 DHagan Edison Plaza - Stop 712 EJordan GHill(4) i 300 Madison Avenue WandaJones JCalvo Toledo, Ohio 43652 ACRS(10)
GPA/PA OC/LFMB PDIII-3 Gray
Dear Mr. Shelton:
j
SUBJECT:
CORRECTIONS TO AMENDMENT NOS. 145 AND 146 TO FACILITY OPERATING i
LICENSE N0. NPF-3 On January 25, 1990, the Commission issued Amendment No. 145 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-3 for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1, in response to your application dated September 10, 1987. The amend-ment. changed Technical Specification (TS) 4.0.3 and Bases Section 4.0.'3 in accordance with NRC Generic Letter 87-09.
In revising TS page 3/4 0-2, the existing Section 4.0.4 was inadvertently deleted entirely and Section 4.0.5 was renumbered 4.0.4.
A corrected page
.j 3/4 0-2 is enclosed.
Also, on January 31, 1990, Amendment No.146 was issued in response to your application dated March 7, 1988. That amendment removed the requirement in
.TS 4.6.1.2.a that the third test of each set of three Type A tests be conducted
~ during the same shutdown when the 10-year inservice inspection is being con-
- ducted, and also changed the Bases to reflect the change.
Page B 3/4 6-1, Basis 3/4.6.1.2, first paragraph, third line, contained an error in that a comma was inador^ently used instead of a period. A corrected page B 3/4 6-l'is also enclosed.
Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience these administrative errors may have caused you.
Sincerely,
/s/
Thomas V. Wambach, Sr. Project Manager Project Directorate III-3 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
TS p ges 3/4 0-2 and B 3/4 6-1 I
cc: See next page 145/146/f
/
/
DOCUMENT NAME:
CORRECTION AMD P PDIII-3 70 Office:
LA/ DI I-3 PM/PDIII-3 Surname: P r
TWambach/tg JHenon Date:
/ g /90 y /g90
/),t/90
\\
@d 9003050335 900222 PDR ADOCK 05000346 PDC.
L e
z.)[ wi; f
g UNITED 8TATES -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, _ WASHINGTON, D, C. 20666 5
k*
-February 22, 1990 Docket No. 50-346 Mr. Donald C.: Shelton Vice President - Nuclear Toledo Edison Company Edison Plaza - Stop 712 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43652
Dear Mr. Shelton:
g
SUBJECT:
' CORRECTIONS TO AMENDMENT NOS. 145 AND 146 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 On January 25, 1990, the Connission issued Amendment No.145 to Facility Operating License-No. NPF-3 for.the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1, in response to your application dated September 10, 1987.- The amend-mentchangedTechnicalSpecification(TS)4.0.3andBasesSection4.0.3in Laccordance with NRC Generic Letter 87-09.
'In revising TS page 3/4 0-2, the existing Section_4.0.4 was inadvertently-deleted entirely and Section 4.0.5 was renumbered 4.0.4.
A corrected page 3/4 0-2 is enclosed..
Also, on January 31, 1990, Amendment No.146 was issued in response to your application dated March 7, 1988. That amendment removed the requirement in;
-TS 4.6.1.2.a that the third test of each set of three Type A tests be conducted
-during the same shutdown when the 10-year inservice inspection is being con-ducted,-and also changed ~the Bases to reflect the change.
Page B 3/4 6-1, Basis 3/4.6.1.2 -first paragraph, third line, contained an error in that a comma was inadvertently used instead of a period. A corrected page B 3/4 6-1_is also enclosed.
Please_ accept our ' apologies for any inconvenience these administrative errors may have caused you.
Sincerely.
-7 Y 'Wh y
Thomas V. Wambach, St. Project Manager Project Directorate III-3 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
TS pages 3/4 0-2 and B 3/4 6-1 cc: See next page
a,
.f Mr. Donald C. Shelton -
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Toledo Edison Company--
Unit No. 1 1
CCT Dayid E.-Burke, Esq.
The Cleveland Electric-Radiological Health Program l-
. P. O. Box 5000~
1224 Kinnear Road-Illuminating Company Ohio Department of Health E
Cleveland, Ohio: 44101 Columbus, Ohio 43212 1
Mr. Robert W. Schrauder Attorney-General Manager, Nuclear Licensing Department of Attorney Toledo Edison Company General Edison Plaza 30 East Broad Street 300 Madison Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43215 Toledo, Ohio :43652
- t Mr. James W. Harris Director Gerald Charnoff. Esq.
(AddresseeOnly)
.Shaw, Pittman, Potts Division of Power Generation and Trowbridge Ohio Department of Industrial Relations
.2300 N Street N.W.
2323 West 5th Avenue l
Washington, D.C. 20037 P. O. Box 825 L.
Columbus, Ohio.43216 i
Regional Administrator, Region III l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ohio Environmental Protection Agency l
799 Roosevelt Road 1800 Watemark Drive Glen Ellyn,l Illinois 60137 Columbus, Ohio. 43266-0149 President, Board of Mr. Robert B. Borsum County Comissioners of Babcock.8 Wilcox-Ottawa County Nuclear Power Generation Division Port Clinton, Ohio 43452 Suite 525, 1700 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland ' 20852 State of Ohio Public Utilities Comission-Resident Inspector-180 East Broad Street
'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Columbus, Ohio 43266-0573 5503 N. State Route 2 sj Oak Harbor Ohio 43449 L
g w
g p
H GQI 3/), LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION AND SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS l
3/4.0 APPLICABILITY
~~
LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION
.m 3.0.1 Limiting Conditions for Operation and ACTION requireneits'shall be-
?
applicable during the OPERATIONAL MODES or other conditions'.specified for each.
specification.
ll 90 at n 3.0.2 Adherence to the requirements of the Limiting Condition.for Operation and/or associated ACTION within the specified time intervalishall constitute,,
compliance with-the specification. In the event the Limiting Condition for ij Operation is restored prior to expiration of the specified time interval, mil :!
completion of the ACTION statement is not required.
- L t;<'
M lj 3.0.3 When a Limiting Condition for Operation is not met, except'as provided in
~
the associated ACTION requirements, action shall be initiated.within 1: hour.to3 place the unit in a MODE in which the Spe:ification does not" apply to placing'!
l' it, as applicable, in:
l.
At least HOT STANDBY vithin 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />, 2.
At least HOT SHUTDOWN vithin the following 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />, and 3.
At least COLD SHUTDOWN within the subsequent 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
s Where corrective measures are completed that permit operation.under the ACTION requirements, the ACTION may be taken in accordance with the specified time limits as measured from the time of failure to meet the Limiting Condition for Operation. Exceptions to these requirements are stated in the individual Specifications.
3.0.4 Entry into an OPERATIONAL MODE or other specified applicability condition shall not be made unless the conditions of the Limiting Condition for Operation are met without reliance on provisions contained in the ACTION statements unless otherwise excepted. This provision shall not prevent passage through y
OPERATIONAL MODES as required to comply with ACTION statements.
I t.
(
3.0.5 When a system, subsystem, train, component or device;is determined to be inoperable solely because its emergency power source is inoperable, or solely because its normal power source is inoperable, it may beiconsidered OPERABLE for i-the purpose of satisfying the requirements of its applicable Limiting Condition l
for Operation, provided: (1) its corresponding normal or emergency' power source is OPERABLE; and (2) all of its redundant system (s), subsystem (s), train (s),
component (s) and device (s) are OPERABLE, or likewise satisfy the requirements of
(
this specification. Unless both conditions (1) and (2) are satisfied, within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> action shall be initiated to place the unit in a MODEyin which the applicable Limiting Condition for Operation does not apply by placing it as applicable in:
1 1.
At least HOT STANDBY vithin 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />, 2.
At least HOT SHUTDOWN within the following 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />, and 3.
At least COLD SHUTDOWN within the subsequent 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
This Specification is not applicable in MODES 5 or 6.
l DAVIS-BESSE, UNIT 1 3/4 0-1 Amendment No. 7N,
135 4
9003030337 900222 E
F;DR ADOCK 03000346 i
F PDC
4 5
g.
.s-r-
1/4.6 CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS BASES 3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT 3/4.6.1.1 CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY Primary CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY ensures that the release of. radioactive materials from the containment atmosphere will.be restricted to those leakage paths and associated leak rates assumed in the safety analyses.
This restriction, in conjunction with the leakage rate limitation..will limit-the. site boundary radiation doses to within the limits of 10 CFR 100 during-accident conditions.-
3/4.6.1.2 CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE The limitations on containment leakage rates ensure that the total containment leakage volume will not exceed the value assumed in the safety analyses at the peak accident pressure of 38 psig, P
- As er a
added conservatism, the measured overall 1 9 grated leakage rate is further limited to < 0.75 L, during performance of the periodic tests a
to account for possible degradation of the containment leakage barriers a
between leakage tests.
The surveillance testing for measuring leakage rates are consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J with the following exemption.. The third test of each Type A testing set need not be conducted when the plant is shutdown for the 10-year plant inservice inspections.
The operational readiness of the vessel is considered proven by the ILRT, and in accordance with license requirements, when completed per the 40 1 10 months frequency.
The special test for the containment purge and exhaust isolation valves is intended to detect gross degrad6 tion of-' seals on the valve seats. The special test is performed in addition to the Appendix J requirements.
3/4.6.1.3 CONTAINMENT AIR LOCyd The limitations on closure and leak rate for the containment air locks are required to meet the restrictions on CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY and containment leak rate.
Surveillance testing of the air lock seals provide assurance that the overall air lock leakage will not become excessive due to seal damage during the intervals between air. lock I
leakage tests.
i DAVIS-BESSE, UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-1 Amendment No. 90,146 9003050339 yong,346y
{DR ADOCK 05000 3
rne s
)
i 1
1' CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS i
qi
]
BASES l
3/4.6.1.4 INTERNAL PRESSURE The limitations on containment internal pressure ensure that 1) the containment structure is prevented from exceeding its design negative pressure differential with respect to the annulus atmosphere of 0.5 psi and 2) the containment peak pressure does not exceed the design pressure of 40 psig during LOCA conditions.
5
)
The maximum peak pressure obtained from a LOCA event is 37 psig.
The limit of 1 psig for initial positive containment pressure will limit the total pressure to 38 psig which is less than the design pressure and i
1s consistent with the-safety analyses.
l 3/4. 6.1. 5 AIR TEMPERATURE The limitations on containment average air temperature ensure that l
the overall containment average air temperature does not exceed the initial temperature condition assumed in the accident analysis for a i
LOCA.
3/4.6.1.6 CONTAINMENT VESSEL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY This limitation ensures that the structural integrity of the contain-ment steel vessel will be maintained comparable to the original design standards for the life of the facility.
Structural integrity is required to ent re that the vessel will withstand the maximum pressure of 38 psig in the event of a LOCA. A visual inspection in conjunction with Type A leakage tests is sufficient to demonstrate this capability.
3/4.6.1.7 CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM The limitation on use of the Containment Purge and Exhaust System limits the time this system may be in operation with the reactor coolant system temperature at,ove 200*F. This restriction minimizes the time that a direct open path would exist from the containment atmosphere to the outside atmosphere and consequently reduces the probability that an accident dose would exceed 10 CFR 100 guideline values in the event of a LOCA occurring coincident with purge system operation. The use of this system is therefore restricted to non-routine usage not to exceed 90 l
hours in any consecutive 365 day period which is equivalent to approximately 1% of the total possible yearly unit operating time, p
3/4.6.2 DEPRESSURIZATION AND COOLING SYSTEMS 3/4.6.2.1 CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM The OPERABILITY of the containment spray system ensures that contain-I ment depressurization.and cooling capability will be available in the event of a LOCA. The pressure reduction and resultant lower containment DAVIS-BESSE, UNIT 1 B 3/4 6-2 Amendment No.135 1
Nkkkkh%
fkb ?W -, +
.. Y
.v t