ML20024G799

Forwards Request for Change to Tech Specs of License DPR-22

ML20024G799
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	10/26/1973
From:	Mayer L NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.
To:	Oleary J US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20024G800	List: ML20024G799 ML20024G810
References
NUDOCS 9104300426
Download: ML20024G799 (8)

Text

..

t Begubtmy Dodet Rie-ygy f

NORTHERN STATE 5 POWER COMPANY MIN N E A POL 6 9 M 4NN E sb7A B D 4 01

/nm.fNj %

,/f -

N October 26, 1973

,/

'j 4 39

' 7 / D/d h

Mr. J F O' Leary, Director

'cf.}y[pj b\\

W Directorate of Licensit.g

'6' g -

1p Office of Regulation

% Q)Q,}, g:

",/s s

U S Atomic Energy Commit,sion Wa shington, D C 20545

'&ge

Dear Mr. O'Learv :

MOSTICELLO NUCLEAR GESERATING P1 ANT Docket No. 50-263 License No. DPR-22 change Request Dated October 26, 1973 Attached are three signed originals and 37 conformed copics of a request for change of Technical Specifications, Appendix A, of the Provisional Operating hLicense DPR-22, for the Monticello Nuclear t,cnerating Plant.

This change request has bee.n reviewed by the Monticello Operations Committci. and the Safety Audit Committee.

On August 20, 1071, we submitted a document entitled " Change Request No. 3" which included a compilation of errors and inadequacies of the initial print-ing of the ' icd dr.,

acifications. As pages have since been revised for other reasont. t

'2s from Change Request No. 3 have been incorporated into the revisi "s.

'.e more significant: changes remaining in Change Request No. 3, which war. ant present consideration, are compiled in the attached change request.

The re:naining portions of Change Request No. 3 will be incorporated into later requested changes as in the past.

In this uay Change Request No. 3 will in ef fect be deleted.

0.. September 22, 1973, supplement No. I to Change Request No. 3 was submitted the AEC request to it.chde control rod drop accident considerations and atother topics. We understand that this, supplement is presently under review and should not be considered deleted.

[v,, \\ 'II1/./

\\

Yours very truly, SEP

/

A L 0 M2yer, PE s'

OCT S11973 t-11 Director of Nuclear Support Services g,g

~

/

1n s;: w; l

WCpCLM [

LOMhMV/br cc:

J G Kcppler l

G Charnof f l

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 7gy a

,,n_...,

91043DC426 731026 PDR ADOCK 050C0263 P

PbR l.

C Regulatory Docket File 3

cWN

" ' ",. g gn EXH1B1T A

~~

MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT DOCKET No. 50-263 CHANGE REQUEST DATED OCTOBER 26, 1973 PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS APPENDIX A 0F PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-22 Pursuant te 10CFR50.59, the holders of the abovc-mentioned license hereby propese the following changes to Appendix A, Technical Specifications.

1.

PR0 POSED CilANGE on page 7, TS 2.1.B, change ".... less than 25% of design.... " to read ".... less than 5% of design....

On page 10, Figure 2.1.1, extend the two curves linearly from the pres-ent termination at 25% flow to 5% flow at 187. thermal power (300 MW).

i on page 15, Bases: 2.1, change the first two sentences of the last paragraph to read "The renge in pressure and flow usud fot Specifi-cation 2.1.A was 600 psig to 1250 psig and 5% to 100% flow respec-tively.

Specification 2.1.B requires a restriction on power level when operating below 500 psig or 5% flow."

REASON FOR CRANCE The basis given for fuel cladding integrity safety limits applies to the lower core flow limit of 5% but with less margin than the current lowcr limit of 25% flow.

Following the recirculation pump trip test at Monticello, the operating point was found to be close to the 25%

flow limit lire.

These changes will decrease the chance of a "techni-cal" violation of the Specification and will make the safety limit curve consistent with curves presently in use at other facilities.

2.

PROPOSED CHANGE on page 30 Table 3.1.1, opposite Item 4.c, add ":E[3/125 of full scale" under the column of Limiting Trip Settings.

RFASDA FOR CHANGE This was an omission in previous submittals.

v

/~

EXHIBIT A s 3.

PROPOSED C11ANCE On page 51, Tabic 3.2.1, chat.ge the Item 4 entry to read as follows:

Min No of Opera-Total No of ble or Operating Trip Inst Ch per Inrt Ch per Trip Required Function Settings Trip System System (1,2)

Conditions 1

4.

IIPCI Steam Lines a.

IIPCI liigh 51150,000 2 (4) 2 F

Steam Flow lb/hr with 1

j

$;60 second time delcy b.

HPCI 111gh 6;300,000 2 (4) 2 F

Steam Flow lb/hr j

c.

HPCI Steam

55 2000F 16(4) 16 F

Lipe Area High Temp REASON FOR CHANGC On HPCI initiation, initial steam flow surges cause instrumentation indica-tions in excess of the current trip setting of 150,000 lb/hr.

Testing of this system has shown that normal steam flow indications are reached within 60 seconds after initially exceeding the 150,000 lb/hr trip setting.

The trip setting of 300,000 lb/hr will provide steam line break protection during the time delay period on the 150,000 lb/hr trip.

Wording in the current Technical Specifications is actually inconsistent with the trip system agreed upon with AEC-DL and installed in the plant. This change corrects the wording to be consistent with the existing trip system.

l 4

PROPOSED CHANGE On page 70, Table 3.2.5, opposite entry " Instrumentation That Initiates Rod Block - Table 3.2.3" add "APRM Downscale" and "RBM Downscale" under the Trip Function column and add "- 2/125 of Scale" for each new entry i

under the Deviation column.

I RFAFON FOR CHANGE I

j AEC Change No. 5 to the Technical Specifications included a change in the l

APRM and REM downecale trip settings.

The bases (page 70) lack

=~- -.- - - ~ -

~ _.

/~

(

4 EXHIBIT A j :

l an allowable deviation for the ApRM and RBM downscale trip settings.

Ad-dition of these allowable deviations in the bases are desirable to avoid

)

inadvertent scrams during startup or shutdown due to the current need to set the actual tripc at 5%, to assure that the 3% limit is always main-tained, and thereby creating a narrow interlock overlap between IRM's and APRM's.

i 5.

PROPOSED CHANGE I

on page 92, Figure 3.4.1, con'tinue the lower portion of the curve to terminate at 10.8% at 2895 gallons.

Remove the limit of 11.4%

atit 2700 gallone.

i REASON FOR CllANGE In one of the early draf t ver; ions of the Technical Specifications, the bottom portion of the curve was removed to assure that the required amount of boron would be injected within 100 minutes at a minimum flow of 27 gpm.

Subsequently, the requirements were changed.

The present Specification and bases require a minimum flow of 24 gpm and a pumping time not to exceed 125 minutes.

Restoration of the lower portion of the curve is consistent with the present bases and will allow lower concentrations, thereby reducing minimum temperature requirements and reducing the possibility of crystallization.

6.

PROPOSED CitANGE On page 92, figure 3.4.1, add the following parenthetical statement to the ordinate label:

(as w/o Na2B10016 ' 10110).

2 2

On page 93, Figure 3.4.2, add the following parenthetice' statement to the cissa label:

(as w/o Na2 10 16

• 10 1120).

B 0 REASON FOR CilANGE The proper chemical form of sodium pentaborate for the standby liquid control system was not precisely identified in the Technical Specifica-tions. Addition of the formula for the decahydrate form to Figure 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 is appropriate for clarification.

7.

PROPOSED CllANCE on page 134, Basis 4.6.D, Coolant Leakage, delete the third paragraph and substitute the following paragraph:

"An annual report will be prepared and submitted to the AEC summarizing the primary coolant to drywell leakage measure-n-

r 1

s.

EXHIBIT A

, ments.

Other techniques for detecting leaks and the applicability of these techniques to the Monticello Plant will be the subject of continued study."

REASON FOR CRANCE This basis and the original Technical Specification required a one-thne report after 18 months of plant operation which was to include an eval-untion of the performance of the reactor coolant leakage detection sys-tem.

This reporting requirement Gas fulfilled by a Ictter from L 0 Mayer (NSP) to A Giambusso (AEC) dated December 28, 1972. This report described a systen for bmprovement of the speed of leak detection which was undergoing technical evaluation.

Equipment for this system is on order and will be installed at the firat outage of suf ficient duration to permit its installation.

AEC Change No. 6 to the Monticello Technical Specifications dated April 3,1973 included certain modifications to the reporting requirements under TS 6.7 C, Special Reports.

One of these modifications was to require an annual report on primary coolant leakage to the drywell.

This proposed change is to make the basis consistent with the new reporting requirement.

8.

PR0p0 SED CRANCE on page 150, TS 4.7.C.1.a-c, delete paragraph a; delete paragraph b; reletter paragraph c as paragraph a and insert it in place of paragraph a; and in new paragraph a, change ".... rate oi 4,000 sefm.... " to read ".... rate of dE 4,000 sc fm.... " Add a acntence at the end of new paragraph a to read, "This surveillance testing should be reported in the semiannual operating reports.

REASON FOR CHANCE The preoperational tests required by existing paragraph a have been conducted.

The additional tests required by existing paragraph b during the first operating cycle have been performed and reported as required in TS 6.7.C.2 in a letter from L 0 Mayer (NSF) to J F O' Leary (AEC) dated July 23, 1973.

The addition of the "2E" sign ahead of 4,000 scfm allows more flexibility in operation and test-ing but still requires demonstration of the specified integrity.

9.

PROPOSED CRANCE en page 164, Basic 4.7, econd paragraph, delete last two sentences, "In addition,.... to the AEC."

Substitute the following sentence:

l 1

r EXHIBIT A

, "A sunnary report of the results of main steam line isolation valve Icakage tests and closure time measurements will be pre-pared and submitted to the AEC following completion of periodic main steam isolation valve Icakage tests."

REASG4 FOR CHANCE This basis and the original Technical Specification required a one-time report after 18 months of plant operation to report on main stema iso-lation valve performance and to include an evaluation of programs at other plants to reduce Icakage.

This reporting requirement was fulfilled by a letter from L 0 Mayer (NSP) to A Giambusso (AEC) dated December 28, 1972 and supplemented by a letter from L 0 Mayer (NSP) to J F O' Leary (AEC) dated June 28, 1973.

AEC Change No. 6 to the Monticello Technical Specifications dated April 3, 1973 included certain modifications to the reporting requirements under TS 6.7.C, Special Reports.

One of these modifications was to require a report of the results of main steam isolation valve leakage tests and closure time measurements with a submittal date of 90 days af ter completion of the periodic main steam isolation valve Icak rate tests.

This proposed change is to make the basis consistent with the new reporting requirement.

10.

PROPOSED CHANGE On page 216, TS 6.7. A.2.1, under Occupational Personnel Radiation Exposure, delete the whole paragraph and substitute the following paragraphs:

" Tabulate the number of personnel exposures for plant per-sonnel (permanent and temporary) in the following exposure increments for the reporting period:

less than 100 mrem, 100 - 500 aren, 500 - 1250 mrem, 1250 - 2500 mrem, above 2500 mrem.

Tabulate the number of personnel receiving more than 500 mrem exposure in the reporting period according to duty

function, i.e.,

routine plant surveillance and inspection (regular duty), routine plant maintenance, special plant maintenance (describe maintenance), routine refueling operations, special refueling operation (describe opera-l tion) and other job related exposures. Annually tabulate 1

the number of personnel receiving more than 2500 mrca and report major cause(s)."

Move TS 6.7. B, Non-Routine Reports, to a new page 216A.

7 l

l l

l i

J r'

s

.)

EXil1 BIT A j

6-REASON FOR CilANCE 1

1 The proposed wording reficcts the current desires of the AEC and is identical to that which has been included in the NSP Prairic Island j

Plant Technical Specifications.

It is highly desirable that TS 6.0, 1

Administrative Ccatrols, be as consistent as possible for each nuc-lear plant operated by a given licensee, i

11.

PROPOSED CHANCE f

on page 62. Tabic 4.2.1 change the calibration frequency entry for the of f Gas Isolation Monitors from "onc.e/3 months" to.

" Note 6."

a REASON FOR CHANGE The proposed wording more precisely defines the method used for the

]

three-month and refueling outage calibrations.

]

12.

PROPOSED CHANGE on page 70, Table 3.2.5, under Trip Function, change " Reactor Low Pressure Permissive" to " Reactor Low Pressure (Pump Start)

Permissive" and change " Low Reactor Pressure Valve Permissive" to " Low Reactor Pressure (Valve Permissive)."

'i REASON FOR CHANGE 4

The proposed wording more precisely defines the trip function and is consistent with the functions listed in Table 3.2.2.

a l

i

)

b i

l 5

r A

(.1 D3tIBIT B 1his exhibit consists of the following pages revised to incorporate the proposed changes:

I Page 7 l

Page 10 Page 15 Page 30 Page 51 Page 62 Page 70 Page 92 Page 93 j

Page 134 Page 150 i

Page 164 Page 216 I

Page 216A i

l l

u i

f i

l i

I l

\\

i i

l i