ML20030C872
| ML20030C872 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/21/1981 |
| From: | Hovey G Jersey Central Power & Light Co, Metropolitan Edison Co, Pennsylvania Electric Co |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20030C868 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108280292 | |
| Download: ML20030C872 (4) | |
Text
..
g-METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY AND a
~
PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY
~
THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION UNIT II Operating License No. DPR-73 Docket No. 50-320 Technical Specification Change Request No. 29 This Technical Specification Change Request is submitted in support of Licensee's request to change Appendix A to Operating License No. DPR-73 i
for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2.
As a part of this request, proposed replacement pages for Appendix A are also included.
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY By
' Vice Resident and Q
Director, TMI-2 Sworn and subscribed to me this 9 [ day of ct i s esT
, 1981.
h A N O_tu~ d u w Notary Public 0
DARI.A JEA4 P.!RRY NOTARY PUEllC M!D0!iEN POO. DAUTHl'd COUUt
'n CO'M?tWO's (XPiW e, JUN[ 17,1955 fhaner Femwfuno Auucut cn ct totanes i
8108280292 810820 T PDR ADOCK 05000320' P
PDRi
i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF D00KET NO. 50-320 LICENSE NO. DPR-73 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY This is to certify that a copy of Technical Specification Change Request No. 29 to Appendix A of the Operating License for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2, has, on the date given below, been IIIed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and been served on the chief executives of Londonderry Township, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania and Dauphin County, Pennsylvania by deposit in the United States mail, addressed as follows:
Mr. Donald Hoover, Chairman Mr. John E. Minnich, Chairman Board of Supervisors of Board of County Commissioners Londonderry Township of Dauphin County R. D. #1, Geyers Church Road Dauphin County Court House Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY By
/
Vice President and u
Director, TMI-2
O Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (TMI-2)
Operating License No. DPR-73 Docket No. 50-320 I.
Tech. Spec. Change Request No. 29 The licensee requests that the attached page 3.6-1 of the TMI Technical Specifications, Appendix A, replace the existing Technical Specification's page 3.6-1.
II.
Reason for Change This change is requested because prior to completion of the Contain-ment Recovery Service Building and the Containment Air Control Envelope, all equipment brought into the containment will be through personnel air lock No. 2.
With Section 3.6.13 of the Technical Specifications in its present form, the length of the tools and equipment to be taken into containment must be restricted to the distance between the airlock doors.
Allowing this change will enable maximium flexibility in the design of equipment. This in turn, will tend to facilitate operations and minimize time inside containment and, therefore, the radiation dose for any particular operation.
III.
Safety Evaluation Justifying Change The opening of both containment airlock doors will be controlled by procedures that will be previously approved by the on-site NRC Staff.
These procedures would be specific to the equipment transfer and would ensure that the containment airlocks remain open no longer than necessary.
The potential for significant releases of radioactive materials during this short time period is considered to be small for several reasons.
i These reasons are listed below:
1.
During the subject operations, it is likely that the containment will be in a vented mode, which would result in a low amount of unfiltered material available f"; direct release to the environ-l ment from the containment atmosphere, via the airlock.
l 2.
The time both doors are open simultaneously would be of short duration and of a relatively infrequent period.
3.
The driving force for postulated release sources (from the Reacter Coolant System or other liquid sources) would be small 1? not nonexistent because of the low RCS pressure. This low level of driving force would allow adequate response time to establish containment ntegrity, which would limit off-site releases te small amounts, if any.
Based on the above reasons, the licensee feels that the proposed amend-ment does not constitute a hazard to the health and safety of the public.
i I
i
.. IV.
Amendment Class (10CFR170)
The licensee has determined that because the proposed Techr.ical Specification Change would not have any safety significance due to the fact that the opening of the doors are performed under approved procedure for short periods of time and the release mechanisms result in minimal release rates, the proposed request is considered a Class II Amendment, as defined in 10CFR Part 170.
Therefore, enclosed please find a check in the amount of $1,200.00.
l
.