ML20042G185

Proposed Tech Specs Correcting Error in Boron Concentration Section,Per Guidance in Generic Ltr 88-16

ML20042G185
Person / Time
Site:	North Anna
Issue date:	05/08/1990
From:	VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:
Shared Package
ML20042G184	List: ML20042G183 ML20042G185
References
GL-88-16, NUDOCS 9005110194
Download: ML20042G185 (6)

Text

--

<+: .

b_

?

p ; .-

Q - : ,. ;

c: . , , . .

l:-

i I {

e n

4 ATTACHMENT 1 i

i PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES FOR NORTH ANNA-UNITS 1 AND 2 7 :. ,

f

-]

sv i

t :s Remove from the previous submittal (Letter Serial No. 90 030, dated March 29, .1990) pages .

91 for Unit 1 and 2 Technical Specifications and insert the attached. l d

.i

]

1 f

l 1

9005110194 900508 PDR ADOCK 05000338 PDC p l

~

, f,3/4.9' REFUEllNG OPERATIONS -

• BORONCONCENTRATION I

-LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.9.1 With the reactor vessel head unbolted or removed, the boron concentration of all filled portions of the Reactor Coolant System and the refueling canal shall be maintained uniform and sufficient to ensure that the more restrictive of the following reactivity conditions is met:  ;

a. Either a Kett of 0.95 or less, or

b. A boron concentration limit as specified in the Core Operating Limits Report.

APPLICABILITY: MODE 6*,

ACTION.

, With the requirements of the above specification not satisfied, immediately suspend all operations involving CORE ALTERATIONS or positiva reactivity changes and initiate and continue boration at 210 gpm of 212,950 ppm boric acid solution or its equivalent until Kett i s -

reduced to s 0.95 or the boron concentration is restored to the limit as specified in the Core Operating Limits Report, whichever is the more restrictive. The provisions of Specification -

3.0.3 are not applicable. -i SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.9.1.1 The more restrictive of the above two reactivity conditions shall be determined prior to: ,

a. Removing or unbolting the reactor vessel head, and l

I

b. Withdrawal of any full length control rod located within the reactor pressure vessel, in excess of 3 feet from its fully inserted position, a

4.9.1.2 The boron concentration of the reactor coolant system and the refueling canal shall be  ;

determined by chemical analysis at least once per 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. i L

~~~

T~The reactor shali be maintained in MODE 6 when the reactor vessel head is unbolted or y removed.

I I

NORTH ANNA - UNIY 1 3/4 91 Amendment No.

___i_

1: . .. .

j ,3/4.9 REFUELING OPERATIONS s 4

.4 WCONCENrrRATION LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.9.1 With the reactor vessel head unbolted or removed, the boron concentration of all filled - L portions of the Reactor Coolant System and the refueling canal shall be maintained uniform and l

' sufficient to ensure that the more restrictive of the following reactivity. conditions is met

• 1

a. Either a Keff of 0.95 or less, or .j l

b.1 A boron concentration limit as specified in the Core Operating Limits Report.

APPLICABILITY: MODE 6*.

ACTION:

.With the requirements of the above specification not satisfied,immediately suspend all operations involving CORE ALTERATIONS or positive reactivity changes and initiate and continue i boration at 210 Opm of 212,950 ppm boric acid solution or its equivalent until Keft is reduced to s 0.95 or the boron concentration is restored to the limit as specified in the Core Operati_ng Limits Report, whichever is the more restrictive. The provisions of Specification . 1 3.0.3 are not applicable. j SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS q

4.9.1.1 The more restrictive of the above two reactivity conditions shall be determined prior j

.to:

a. Removing or unbolting the reactor vessel head, and j i

b. Withdrawal of any full length control rod located within the reactor pressure .{

vessel, in excess of 3 feel from its fully inserted position. '

4.9.1.2 The boron concentration of the reactor coolant system and the refueling canal shall be 3 ~

-determined by chemical analysis at least once per 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.

~

T~fhe reactor shall be rididaIned in MODE 6 when the reactor vessel head is unbolted or l removed.

NORTH ANNA - UNIT 2 3/4 9-1 Amendment No.

ATTACHMENT 2 ~

DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CHANGES and 10 CFR 50.92 SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS DETERMINATION

+ - --

Discussion of Chances License amendment, dated March 29,1990 letter Serial No. 90 030, was submitted to the NRC to incorporate changes permitted by Generic Letter 8818, which provides NRC recommended guidance for the removal of cycle specific par 6 meter limits from

^

Technical Specifications.

The only differences between our previous submittal and the attached change is the replacement of "2 2300 ppm" with "the limit as specified in the Core Operating Limits Report." This change was intended to be included in the previous submittal but was

'left out due to an editorial error. Therefore, the change presented herein is being made for editorial consistency and does not change the intent of the previous p package.

. Technical Specification 3.9.1-is presented below as modified by license amendment request dated March 29, 1990. The highlighted portions modify the previously submitted Technical Specification Change to indicate what is being changed herein.

3.9.1 l- ACTION:

l With the requirements of the above specification not satisfied, immediately suspend all operations involving CORE ALTERATIONS or positive reactivity changes and initiate and continue boration at 210 gpm of 212,950 ppm boric acid solution..

i or its equivalent until Keit is reduced to s 0.95 or the boron L: concentration is restored to e-2300-ppm the limit as specified in the Core Operating Limits Fleport, whichever is the more restrictive. The provisions of Specification 3.0.3 are not applicable. 4 1>

I

L . . . . . , -

Significant Hazards Determination The proposed change to revise the previously submitted licensing ~ amendments (letter -

dated March 29,1990) does not . result in a significant hazards consideration per 10 CFR 50.92.

1. The proposed change does not significantly increase the probability _ of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment ,

important to safety previously evaluated in the safety analysis report. in fact, the l proposed change will have no impact on the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment. The only additional . ,

change is editorial in nature.

2. The proposed amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different  ;

kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. No physical changes or modifications are being made to the plant or its equipment. As noted above, the only changes are editorial in nature. j i

3. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. No physical changes or modifications are being made to the plant or its equipment. No changes are being made to the cycle-specific reload 1 analysis. As previously stated, the only changes are editorial.

I 4

l

.