ML20040E374

Application for Amend of License DPR-50,consisting of Tech Spec Change Request 109 Re Testing of Hydrogen Recombiner & Containment Integrity of Reactor Bldg,Per NUREG-0578. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20040E374
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	01/26/1982
From:	Hukill H GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20040E372	List: ML20040E371 ML20040E374 ML20040E376
References
RTR-NUREG-0578, RTR-NUREG-578 NUDOCS 8202040240
Download: ML20040E374 (5)

Text

. - . - _ _ _ _ .

METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY AND PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 Operating License No. DPR-50 Docket No. 50-289 Technical Specification Change Request No. 109 This Technical Specification Change Request is submitted in support of Licensee's request to change Appendix A to Operating License No.

DPR-50 for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1. As a part of this request, proposed replacement pages for Appendix A are also included.

i GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION By s Director, TMI-l Sworn and subscribed to me this e b a day of bnNtLUOLAhl1@2- @

i V 0 L A.0 Notary P ilic ~

5 stay PuW gyg joy LUCRECHTks pr h [' won 8202040240 820126 4

PDR ADOCK 05000289 P PDR

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF DOCKET No. 50-289 LICENSE NO. DPR-50 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION This is to certify that a copy of Technical Specification Change Request No.109 to Appendix A of the Operating License for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station L51t 1, has, on the date given below, been filed 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 Courthouse Middletown, PA 17057 Harrisburg, PA 17120 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION By

' Dife'ctor, TMI-l Dated: January 26, 1982 m

~

~

I. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 109 The Licensee requests the attached change pages replace the follcwing pages of the existing Technical Specifications:

Appendix A Replace pages 3-41, 3-41a, 4-38a II. REASON FOR THE CHANGE REQUEST

' Section 2.1.5 of "TKI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Term Recommendations," NUREG-0578, July 1979, contains a Task Force minority opinion that, "...all operating reactors, which do not already have the capability, be required to provide the capability to add, within a few days after an accident, a hydrogen recombiner system for poet-accident hydrogen control." Section 2.1.4 of " Report in Response to NRC Staff Recommended Requirements for Restart of Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1" contains a description and evalua-tion of design modifications that are required to:

(1) Install at TMI-1 a hydrogen recombiner that was purchased for TMI-2, and (2) Provide structural, piping, and electrical facilities such that a second hydrogen recombiner can be installed after an accident, within the time period available before it is required to be operational.

III. SAFETY EVALUATION JUSTIFYING CHANGE Evaluation l

Present NRC Policy, as reflected in " Standard Technical Specifications for Babcock and Wilcox Pressurized Water Reactors", NUREG-0103, requires l

! Technical Specifications for installed hydrogen recombiners. The proposed Technical Specifications for the hydrogen recombiners have been adopted from the Technical Specifications for TMI-2, specifically, TMI-2 Tech-l l nical Specifications 3/4 6.4.2. The hydrogen recombiner Technical Spec-ifications for TMI-2, based upon NRC's Babcock and Wilcox Standard Tech-nical Specifications, contain:

(1) Limiting Conditions for Operation requiring one operable hydrogen recombiner during startup and power operation, l

(2) Surveillance Requirements for the following inservice inspection program:

+ ,, < , ,

(a) A recombiner functional' test once per 92 days, and

.4

-(b) The following surveillance every 18 months: Channel ca'libration of recombiner instrumentation, visual examin-ation, heater functional test, and heater electrical circuit integrity.

W Itfaddition, the hydrogen recombiner is required to undergo surveillance

, prior to startup following an extended outage.

9 The Limiting Condition for Operation for the hydrogen recombiner is ~

incorporated in draft TMI Technical Specification 3.6, " Reactor Building";

the Surveillance Requirements for the hydrogen recombiner are contained 5 in TMI-l draft Technical Specification 4.4.4, " Hydrogen Recombiner System."

.-Conclusion In conclusion, with regard to the installed hydrogen recombiner and associated Technical Specifications:

('1) 'The probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated have not increased. The use of hydrogen recombiners at TMI-1 would result in lower off-site doses, in the event of a LOCA, when compared with other post-accident hydrogen control tech-niques requiring containment venting.*

(2) No accidents, other than those previously considered, will be

,- introduced. The design and installation features of the hydrogen recombiner are designed so as to preclude the compromising of containment integrity or other safety features.

(3) No safety margins have been reduced. The hydrogen recombiner is a post-accident system that is not operated under normal con-ditions and thus is not involved in consideration of any safety

, margin.

Dased upon the above, we conclude that plant modifications needed for installa-tion of the hydrogen-recombiner(s), and associated Technical Specifications, do not involve any unreviewed safety questions with regard to the criteria of 10CFR Part 50, Section 50.59(a)(2) .

IV. AMENDMENT CLASSIFICATION (10 CFR 170.22)

T This change request involves a single safety !.-vw snd is therefore, con-sidered a class III license amendment. A cr e 2t ;he amount of $4,000.00 is enclosed.

< *The recombiner cooling air is vented directly to the environment. An evaluation involving failure of this cooling air system indicates that the resulting off-site doses'are not significant (see Question'91, Supplement

_f 1, Part 2, Restart Report) k l

V. IMPLEMENTATION.

In order to finalize the necessary procedures and train personnel, an implementation period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the applicable amendment or until cycle 5 criticality, whichever is sooner, is requested.

VI. REFERENCES

1. Restart report, item 11.2.4, Amendment 25._(transmitted per L1L-158, dated May 13, 1981)-

2. .NUREG-0578,. July-1979, Section 2.1.5.

3. NUREG-0103 f-i I-i l,