ML20059A536
| ML20059A536 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 12/21/1993 |
| From: | Hunger G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059A539 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9401030008 | |
| Download: ML20059A536 (3) | |
Text
.
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY NUCLEAR GROUP HEADQUARTERS 10 CFR 50.90 955-65 CHESTERBROOK BLVD.
WAYNE, PA 19087-5691 (215) 640-6000 December 21, 1993 Docket.Nos. 50-277 STATION SUPPORT DEPARTMENT 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
SUBJECT:
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Technical Specification Change Request
Dear Sir:
Philadelphia Electric Company (PECo) hereby submits Technical Specification Change Request (TSCR) 93-27, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90, requesting a change to Appendix A of_the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS) Operating Licenses.
The proposed administrative changes revise Table 3.2.F,
" Surveillance Instrumentation," to accurately describe the main stack high range and reactor building roof vent high range radiation monitors, and deletes previously approved TSCR 91-10 for Unit 3 (Amendment No. 168).
TSCR 91-10 requested an emergency temporary change to the Technical Specifications to allow fuel loading to take place without all control rods fully inserted into the core. to this letter describes the proposed changes l
and Attachment 2 contains the revised Technical Specification pages.
If you have any questions concerning this submittal, please contact us.
Sincerely, he i
G.
A. Hunge#, J Director 28013]
Li *""i"9 8* ti "
gk 0
9401030008 931221 DR ADOCK.05000277-eDR g
sg
4 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Jommission December 21, 1993' I
PBAPS Units 2 and 3 Page 2-TSCR 93-27 l
9
Enclosures:
' Affidavit, Attachments cc:
T. T. Martin, Administrator, Region I, USNRC W.
L.
Schmidt, Senior Resident Inspector, PBAPS, USNRC
[
W.
P.
Dornsife, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania p
r t
(,
e
' l 1
l 1
. 1 I
O i
j t
'h s
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
SS.-
e COUNTY OF CHEsPER-l D. M.
Smith, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
That he is Senior Vice President of Philadelphia Electric Company; the applicant herein; that he has road the attached-Technical Specification Change Request (TSCR 93-27) for changes.
to the Peach Bottom Facility Operating Licenses DPR-44 and DPR.
56, and knows the contents thereof: and that the statements and matters set forth therein are true and correct to the best-of his knowledge,.information and belief.
- j, p
h A
a Senior Vice President Subscribed and sworn to beforemethisdl day of }{t.4@
k 1993.
( )
/
,i Ch V
.-ltk h-j g
s Notary Public W A.Santort.PetW NE i
MyOynnssonExpi%. mpy MemTS,C)W
'l 395
.)
l
ATTACHMENT 1 1
l PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION UNITS 2 AND 3 I
Docket Nos.
50-277 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 4
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST 93-27 Main Stack High Range and Reactor-Building Roof Vent High Range-Radiation Monitors" and 1
Deletion of Emergency TSCR 91-10 (Unit 3)
" Temporarily' Allow Fuel' Loading Without All Control Rods Inserted" (Amendment 168)
Supporting Information for Changes t
i b
. 5
.A
TSCR 93-27
- Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44 DPR Philadelphia Electric Company (PECo), Licensee under Facility Operating ',1 censes DPR-44 and'DPR-56 for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Units 2 and 3 respectively,-
requests that the Technical Specifications contained in' Appendix A to the Operating Licenses be amended.
Proposed. changes to the Technical Specifications are indicated by vertical bars in the margins of Unit 2 page 77a and Unit 3 pages 77a and.225.
The-proposed revised pages are contained in Attachment 2.
The proposed changes concern the main stack high range and reactor building roof vent high range radiation monitors and deletion of previously approved TSCR 91-10 (Amendment 168) for Unit 3.
Licensee proposes that the changes be effective as of the issuance date of the license amendments.
Description of Chances Licensee proposes the following changes:
" Main Stack High Range and Reactor Building Roof Vent High Range Radiation Monitors" Page 77a (Table 3.2.F), " Surveillance Instrumentation" (1)
Revise Item 16, " Instrument" column to read:
RR-0-17-051 (2)
Revise Item 16, " Type Indication and Range" column to read:
Recorder 5 to 10"-CPS 10 (Log Scale).
(3)
Revise Item 17, " Instrument" column to read:
RR-2979 (Unit 2)
RR-3979 (Unit 3)
-s I
.TSCR 93-27 Docket Nos. 50-277
- 50-278 License Nos. 'DPR-44 4
DPR-56 (4)
Revise Item 17, " Type Indication and Range" column to'
-l read:
Recorder
')
10 to 10 CPM
~I 7
0 (Log Scale)
" Deletion of Emergency TSCR 91-10 (Unit 3)"
]
Page 225, Section 3.10, " Core' Alterations" i
(1)
Revise Limiting Condition fer Operation (LCO) 3.10.A.1, by deleting reference to L':u. 10.A.2, to read:
"The reactor mode switch shall be locked in the
" Refuel" position during core alterations and the refueling. interlocks shall be operable except as specified.in 3.10.A.5 and 3.10.A.6 below."
1 (2)
Delete existing LCO 3.10.A.2 and LCO'3.10.A.2.a, along.
with corresponding footnote in " Surveillance Requirements" column.
(3)
Insert proposed LCO 3.10.A.2 to read:
i
" Fuel shall not be loaded into the reactor core unless-all control rods are fully inserted."
2
)
Safety Discussion The proposed administrative changes are intended to clarify the Technical Specifications by revising Table 3.2.F,
" Surveillance Instrumentation," to accurately describe the main i
stack and reactor building roof vent high range radiation monitors and by deleting previously approved emergency TSCR 91-10 (Amendment No. 168), which was in effect during the period prior to completion of tensioning-the reactor vessel head bolts for the j
Unit 3 Cycle 8 refueling outage.
The. main stack and reactor building roof vent high-range radiation recorder was installed in 1982.
Three-pen recorder.
RR-7127 was installed in panel 00C512; however, in March 1987-
'i zo q
b TSCR 93-27 Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278-License Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 modification 1549C removed panel 00C512, including RR-7127, to allow the installation of the new hydrogen chemistry panels 20C810, 30C810 and a new panel 00C512.
The three radiation monitoring input signals.to the previously used radiation recorder RR-7127 were moved to three separate radiation recorders in three separate panels.
The main stack high-range radiation signal which was recorded on recorder.
RR-7127 (green pen) is now recorded on RR-0-17-051 located in panel 00C14.
Reactor building roof vent high-range radiation signal which.was recorded on RR-7127 (red pen U/2) and RR-7127.
(blue pen U/3) are now recorded on RR-2979 (Unit 2) installed in panel 20C10 and RR-3979 (Unit 3) installed in panel 30C10.
At the' time of Modification 1549C, the TS Table 3.2.F was'not affected as it did not indicate tag numbers or pen colors.
Between the time modification 1549C was issued and installed, TSCR 86-10 was approved by the NRC by. amendment No.
'128/131.
TSCR 86-10, which included recorder RR-7127, added tag.
numbers and pen colors to the recorders in Table 3.2.F.
TSCR 86-10 also added columns for " Item" and " Instrument" to Table'3.2.F for clarity.
Therefore, when modification 1549C was installed, a discrepancy existed between the TS and the as-built condition of the plant.
The PDAPS Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC) has developed PORC Position #51 to interpret the Technical Specifications until TSCR 93-27 is approved.
The changes associated with the deletion of TSCR 91-10 (Amendment No. 168) are being proposed because they are no longer necessary.
TSCR 91-10 was originally necessary to minimize delay of fuel inspections while evaluating inspection results and preparing for cleaning activities during the PBAPS Unit 3 Cycle 8 refueling outage.
TSCR 91-10 originally revised TS pages 225,
~
226 and 229.
By letter dated May 25, 1993, PECo submitted TSCR 92-06 which proposed the deletion of TSCR 91-10 (Amendment 168) for'pages 226 and 229; however, page 225 was inadvertently omitt ad.
As a result of conversations with the NRC Project Manager for PBAPS, we are including the proposed changes to page 225 with this TSCR.
The above proposed administrative changes will enhance cafety by eliminating confusion when interpreting the Technical Specifications. -.
TSCR 93-27 Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 No Sianificant Hazards Consideration Licenseo proposes that this application does not involve-significant hazards considerations for the following reasons:
1)
The nronosed chance does not involve a sionificant increase in the probability or consecuences of an accident previously evaluated.
Because the proposed changes are administrative in nature, they do not affect the' initial conditions or precursors assumed in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Section 14.
These changes do not decrease the effectiveness of equipment relied upon to mitigate the previously evaluated accidents.
Therefore, there is no increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
ii)
The proposed chance does not create the nossibility of a new or different kind of accident from'any oreviously evaluated.
The proposed changes do not make any physical changes to the plant or changes to operating procedures.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed changes will not affect the design function or configuration of any component or introduce any new operating scenarios or failure modes or accident initiation.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different. kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
iii) The proposed chance does not involve a sionificant reduction in a marain of safety.
The proposed changes are administrative in nature and are intended.to provide clarification or eliminate confusion when interpreting the Technical specifications.
The proposed changes dci not adversely; affect the assumptions or sequence of events used.in any accident analysis..
ca
l s
TSCR 93-27 Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 j
Therefore, the proposed changes do.not involve a reduction in any margin of safety.
Environmental Impact Assessment An environmental impact assessment is not required for the changes proposed by this-Application because'the changes' conform to the criteria for "actione eligible for categorical. exclusion" as specified in 10 CFR 51.22 (c) (9).
The proposed changes do not involve any systems or equipment that have a direct relationship with the environment.
The changes involve correcting a discrepancy that exists between the TS and the as-built condition of the plant and, the deletion of previously approved TSCR 91-10 as discussed in the previous section.
The Application involves no significant change in the types or.significant increase in.the amounts of any effluent.that may i
i
.be released offsite and there w ll be no signif cant-increase.in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Conclusion The Plant Operations Review Committee'and the Nuclear Review Board have reviewed the proposed changes and have: concluded'that they do not involve an unreviewed safety question and that'they are not a threat to the health and safety of the public.
I
'i h
I
._____._._.___.__--_____.--____--___;