ML20065M244
| ML20065M244 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1994 |
| From: | Hunger G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20065M248 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-93-05, GL-93-5, NUDOCS 9404250133 | |
| Download: ML20065M244 (14) | |
Text
i e
Statisn Suppirt Depretment 10CFR50.90 '
~I)ECO ENERGY ri=;lrge,n=,x,s e
DOS Chesterbrook Boulevard Wayne, PA 19087-5691 April 15,1994 Docket Nos. 50-277 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 Specifications Change Request 93-28
Dear Sir:
PECO Energy Company hereby submits Technical Specifications Change Request (TSCR) No. 93-28, in accordance with 10CFR50.90 requesting a change to the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications (TS) for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Units 2 and 3. The proposed TS Changes correct a typographical error in Unit 3 TS, reflect the name change of Philadelphia Electric Company to PECO Energy Company, and implement line-item TS improvements recommended by Generic Letter 9345, "Line-Item Technical Specifications Improvements to Reduce Surveillance Requirements for Testing During Power Operation."
The line-item TS improvements propose changes to Surveillance Requirements consistent with the intent of the corresponding recommendations in Generic Letter 93-05 and are compatible with PBAPS operating experience. These proposed changes are also consistent with the corresponding requirements in NUREG-1433,
" Standard Technical Specifications General Electric Plants, BWR/4," the corresponding recommendations in NUREG-1366, " Improvements to Technical Specifications Surveillance Requirements," and the format of the PBAPS TS.
7,,s s ~
% *w U.
L) 9404250133 940415
,%I PDR ADOCK 05ooo277 P
PDR jU g
/
April 15,1994 Page 2
- to this letter describes the proposed changes and provides justification for the changes. Attachment 2 provides the revised Technical Specifications pages. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact us.
Very truly yours,
.0-fi r
G. A. Hunger, Jr., Director Ucensing JLP/eas
Enclosures:
Affidavit, Attachment 1, Attachment 2 cc:
T. T. Martin, Administrator, Region I, USNRC W. L. Schmidt, USNRC Senior Resident inspector, PBAPS R. R. Janati, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
i
?
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ss, j
COUNTY OF CHESTER l
W. H. Smith,111, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
i
)
That he is Vice President of PECO Energy Company; the Applicant herein; that he has read the attached Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of the Technical Specifications Change Request (Number 93-28) for 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 anc' correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
Vice President Subscribed and sworn to before me this /5 day of 1994.
l
,3 r
ttCm.
g< -*/y t
Notary Public scaMNPuth wiW&*#: fink
i l
l ATTACHMENT 1 l
PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION UNITS 2 AND 3 l
Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 Ucense Nos. DPR 44 DPR-56 1
i TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST 93-28 "Name Change and Reduction in Surveillance Requirements during Power Operation" Supporting Information for Changes 4 Pages l
j
f Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 Ucense Nos. DPR-44 l
DPR-56 PECO Energy Company requests that the Facility Operating Ucenses and Technical Specifications (TS) for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Units 2 and 3 be amended as proposed below to correct a typographical error in Unit 3 TS, reflect the name change of Philadelphia Electric Company to PECO Energy Company, and j
implement line-item TS improvements recommended by Generic Letter 93-05, "Line-Item Technical Specifications improvements to Reduce Sunteillance Requirements for Testing During Power OperaSon." By reducing the amount of testing that the TS require during power operation, safety can be improved, equipment degradation can be decreased, and an unnecessary burden on personnel resources can be eliminated.
The proposed changes to Surveillance Requirements for TS Sections 4.3.A.2.a.
4.4.A.2, and 4.4.B.3 are compatible with PBAPS operating experience and is consistent with the intent of the corresponding recommendations in NUREG-1366,
" improvements to Technical Specifications Surveillance Requirements," guidance in Generic Letter 93-05, and the format of the PBAPS TS.
This TS Change Request for PBAPS, Units 2 and 3, provides a discussion and description of the proposed changes, a safety assessment, information supporting a finding of No Significant Hazards Consideration, and information supporting an i
Environmental Assessment.
The proposed revised pages are provided in Attachment 2. Proposed changes are indicated by vertical bars in the margin of the pages.
We request that, if approved, the changes be effective upon issuance.
Discussion and Descriotion of the Prooosed Chanoes 1.
Revise Unit 3 TS Section 3.3.A.2.f to correct a typographical error to provide clarity concerning control rod operability by requiring that no more than one control rod in any 5x5 array may be inoperable (i.e., changed operable to inoperable).
2.
Revise License Nos. DFRN. and DPR-56, TS Section 6.5.2.2 and 6.9.1.e(2)c, TS Figure 3.8.1 and Environmental TS Section 6.0 to change the name of the owner and licensee of PBAPS Units 2 and 3 to PECO Energy Company.
3.
Revise the frequency in TS Section 4.3.A.2.a to exercise each partially or fully withdrawn operable control rod from every 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> when operating above the RWM low power setpoint if there are three or more inoperable control rods or if there is one fully or partially withdrawn rod which cannot be moved and for which control rod drive mechanism damage has not been ruled out. This corresponds to Generic Letter 93-05 Item 4.2, " Control Rod Movement Test."
/
Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 4.
Revise TS Section 4.4.A.2. to allow for the replacement charge on the explosive valve for the standby liquid control system to be from either the same manufactured batch as the one fired or another batch which has been certified by having one of the batch successfully fired. This corresponds to Generic Letter 93-05 Item 4.3, " Standby Liquid Control System (BWR)."
5.
Revise the frequency in TS Section 4.4.B.3 to functionally test each standby liquid control system pump loop from monthly to at least once per 92 days.
This corresponds to Generic Letter 9345 Item 4.3, " Standby Uquid Control System (BWR)."
Safety Assessment Proposed changes 1 and 2 are administrative in nature. Proposed changes 3,4, and 5 implement line-item TS improvements recommended by Generic Letter 93-05 to reduce Surveillance Requirements for testing during power operation. Reducing the amount of testing during power operation improves safety, decreases equipment degradation, and eliminates an unnecessary burden on personnel resources.
Information Sucoort a Findino of No Significant Hazards Consideration The changes proposed in the Application do not constitute a Significant Hazards Consideration in that:
i) 3e crocosed changes do not involve a significant increase in the orobability or consecuences of an accident oreviousiv evaluated because the proposed changes do not alter the operation of equipment assumed to be an initiator of any analyzed event or assumed to be available for the mitigation of accidents or transients. Proposed changes 1 and 2 are administrative in nature. Proposed change 3 to reduce the requirement to verify insertion capability from every 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to a single verification when one or more control rods are stuck is sufficient to verify that the problem is not generic while providing the benefit of removing a very resource intensive requirement and permits licensed operators to focus on other, more safety significant actions. Proposed change 4 will continue to provide the necessary assurance that replacement charges on the explosive valve of the standby liquid control system will be from a batch from which a sample charge has been tested satisfactorily. Proposed change 5 modifies the allowable interval between surveillance tests for the standby liquid -
control system without reducing the reliability of the system while providing the benefit of reduced wear and tear on the system. Therefore, these proposed changes do not increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
1 Docket Nos. 50-277
~
t 50-278 Ucense Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 ii)
The crocosed chanoes do not create the oossibility of a new or different kind of 1
accident from any accident oreviousiv evaluated because implementation of the l
proposed changes do not involve any physical changes to plant systems, structures, or components. The proposed changes do not allow plant operation in any mode that is not already evaluated. Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated is not created.
iii)
The orocosed chanaes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety because the proposed changes do not affect the manner in which the facility is operated or change equipment or features which affect the operational characteristics of the facility. Proposed changes 1 and 2 are administrative in nature. Proposed change 3 maintains the assurance that when a scram is required that, at a minimum, the assumptions used in the accident analysis will be met. Additionally, if the initial check of control rod insertion is satisfactory, the subsequent checks are not likely to identify similar problems because operating experience shows that a struck rod is rare. Once it has been determined that the same problem is not occurring in other control rods the normal surveillance frequency is sufficient to verify that scram capability is maintained. Proposed change 4 provides added flexibility for providing replacement changes from any batch that has had a charge successfully fired.
Proposed change 4 adds flexibility while maintaining the firing reliability in excess of 99.99% for the explosive valves on the standby liquid control system.
Proposed change 5 does not impact any safety analysis assumptions because the frequency of testing is not assumed in any safety analysis and standby liquid control system operability is maintained. in addition, the test frequency reduction provides reduced wear and tear on the system and increased system reliability. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Information Sucoortina an Environmental Assessment An environmental impact assessment is not required for the changes proposed by this Application because the changes conform to the criteria for " actions eligible for categorical exclusion," as specified in 10CFR51.22(c)(9). The proposed changes will have no impact on the environment. The proposed changes do not involve a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, in addition, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupation radiation exposure...
Dock @t Nos. 50-277 50-278 Ucense Nos. DPR-44 DPR-56 Conclusion The Plant Operations Review Committee and the Nuclear Review Board have reviewed the proposed changes and have concluded that the changes do not involve an unreviewed safety question and will not endanger the public health and safety.
1 ATTACHMENT 2 3
PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION l
UNITS 2 AND 3 Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 i
Ucense Nos. DPR-44 4
DPR t TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST 93-28 Ust of Attached Pages i
Unit 2 Unit 3 3
Ucense No. DPR-44 Ucense No. DPR-56 J
APPENDIX A PAGES APPENDIX A PAGES 99 99
.j 116 101 117 116 216e 117 249 216e 256 249
.i 256
~l APPENDIX B PAGE 14 APPENDIX B PAGE 14 y
- i. ;
1
..j
.]
1
4 ATCHIC ENERGY 03 MISSION Washirgton, DC 20545 PEOO ENERGY CEMPANY RJBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS ODMPANY j
DELMARVA FOWER MJD LIGTP OCMPME i
ATINffIC CITY ELECIRIC OJMPMW DOCITP NO. 50-277 EAG DOPIOM ATOMIC KMER STATION, UNIT 2 FACILTTY OPERATING LICENSE Idcense No. DPR-44 Amerdment No.1 1.
The Atamic Energy Commission (the nrmminnlan) haviry fourd that:
A.
The application for license filed by PECO Energ/ Ocarpany, fonnerly Philadelphia Electric Ocmpany, Public Service Electric and Gas Campany, Delmarva Power ard Light Canpany, and Atlantic City Electric Campany (the licensees) complies with the standartis and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the enmminnion's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Qiapter I and all required notifications to other agencies or bodies have been duly made; B.
Construction of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2 (the facility) has been substantially completed in conformity with construction Permit No.
CPPR-37 and the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act and the rules ard regulations of the cmminnion; C.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules ard regulations of the Otxumission; D.
There is reasonable assurance: (1) that the activities authorized by this amended operating license can be conducted without emdangering the health and safety of the public, and (2) that such activities will be carducted in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Cammission; E.
PECO Energy Campany is technically qualified and the licensees are financially qualified to engage in the activities authorized by this amended operatirg license in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Commission; F.
The licensees have satisfied the applicable provisions of 10 CPR Part 140,
" Financial Protection Requirements and Indemnity Agreements," of the Cnmminnion's regulations; G.
The issuance of this operating license will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; H.
After weighing the enviwuumudal, economic, technical, ard other benefits of the facility against environmental costs and considering available alternatives, the issuance of Amendment No. 1 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-44 is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Apperdix D, of the Cammission's regulations and all applicable requirements of said Apperdix D Page 1
have been satisfied; aM I.
'Ibe receipt, possession, aM use of by-product and rpecial nuclear material as authorized by this license will be in accordance with the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, including 10 CFR Section 30.33, and 70.23 and 70.31.
2.
Amendment No. 1 to Facility Operating License No. DFR-44 issued to the PECD Energy Campany, formerly the Philadelpflia Electric Ccrnpany, Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), Delmarva Power and Light Campany (DP&If), and Atlantic City Electric Campany (ACEC), is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
A.
'Ihis amended license applies to the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 2, a single cycle, forced ciru11ation, boiling water nuclear reactor and associated equignent (the facility), owned by the licensees and operated by PECD Energy Campany. 'Ibe facility is located in Peach Bottcu, York County, Pennsylvania and is described in the " Final Safety Analysis Report" as supplemented and amended (Amendments 1 through 29) and the Envirormental Report as supplemented and amended (Supplements 1 through 6).
B.
Subject to the conditions and requirements incorporatM herein, the Cammission hereby licenses:
(1)
PECD Energy Campany, pursuant to Section 104b of the Act aM 10 CFR Part 50, " Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," to possess, use, and operate the facility and PSE&G, DP&LC, and ACEC to P a n the facility at the designated location in Peach Bottom, York County, Ibnnsylvania in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in this license; (2)
PECD Energy Company, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Part 70, to receive, possess and use at any time special nuclear material as reactor fuel, in accordance with the limitations for storage and anounts required for reactor operation, as describcd in the Final Safety Analysis Report, as supplenented and ameMed, as of December 15, 1975; (3)
PECD Energy Campany, pursuant to the Act ard 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, ard 70 to receive, possess and use at any time any byproduct, source and special nuclear material as sealed neutron sources for reactor startup, sealed sources for reactor instrumentation and radiation monitoring equipment calibration, and as fission detectors in amounts as required; (4)
PECD Energy Company, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70 to receive, possess and use in amounts as required any byproduct, source, or special nuclear material without restriction to chmim1 or physical fonn for sample analysis or instrument calibration or when associated with radioactive apparatus or components; (5)
PECD Energy Campany, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to possess, but not to separate, such byproduct aM special nuclear material as may be produced by operation of the facility.
Page 2
/
i C.
This amended license shall be duwd to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the following Mmion regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I: Part 20, Section 30.34 of Part 30, Sections 50.54 and 50.59 of Part 50, l
and Section 70.32 of Part 70; is subject to all applicable provisions of the 1
Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the (bmmission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified below:
(1)
Maximum Power Invel PECD Energy Company is authorized to operate the Peach Bottom Atmic Power Station, Unit 2, at steady state reactor core power levels not to exceed 3293 megawatts thennal.
(2)
Technical Soccifications The Technical Specifications contain M in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amerdment No.
are hereby incorporated in the license. PECO Energy campany rJiall cperate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
(3)
The licensoea ray perform nodifications to the Iow Pressure Coolant Injection Sys em as described in the licensees' application for license amendment d W 3 July 9, 1975. The licensees shall not operate the j
facility prior to receipt of the nnmmimion's authorization.
(4)
Svsical Protection The licensee shall fully implement ard maintain in effect all provisions of the nenmi mion-approved physical' security, guard training aM qualification, and safeguards contingency plans including amendments made pursuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous Amendments and Search j
Requirements revisions to 10 CFR 73.55 (51 FR 27817 and 27822).and to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The plans, which contain Safeguards Infonration protected under 10 CFR 73.21, are entitled:
" Peach Bottm Atmic Power Station, Units 2 aM 3, Physical Security Plan," with revisions sutraitted through December 16, 1987;
" Peach Bottm Atcmic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Plant Security Personnel Training and Qualification Plan," with revisions submitted through July 9,1986; and " Peach Bottom Atmic Power Station, Units 2 aM 3 Safeguards contirgency Plan," with revisions subnitted through March 10, 1981. Charges made in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55'shall be implemented in accordance with the schedule set forth therein.
(5)
The licensee may proceed with and is required to complete the modifications identified in Paragraphs 3.1.1 through 3.1.16 of the NRC's Fire Protection Safety Evaluation (SE), dated May 23, 1979 for the facility. These modifications will be completed in accordance with the schedule in Table 3.1 of the SE aM supplements thereto.
In addition, the licencee shall submit the additional information identified in Table 3.2 of this SE in accordance with the schedule contained therein.
Page 3
~
3 '.
This amended license is subject to the followirg conditions for the protecticn of the environment:
'A.
Upon completion of the licensees' " smoke tests'," the licensees shall release all procedures, data, and analysis bearirg on the calculation of X/Q to the Regulatory Staff as soon as possible but no later than initial fuel loadiry for Peach Bottom Unit 3.
Usirq the " smoke test" results to re-calculate X/Q and usirq the other assumptions previously used by the Regulatory Staff (or realistic refinements thereof), the Regulatory Staff shall re-calculate the potential radiciodine thyroid dose to a child via the milk pathway at the points of maximum concentration at or beyond the site boundary where dairy _
caws are present or could be pastured. If this calculated dose based on the combined operation of Peach Bottom Units 2"and 3 exceeds 15 mren/ year, then the licensees shall install for operation no later than the next refueling cycle for each unit the r-ary equipment to reduce the projected dose to' such levels.
B.
If the actual milk sample measurements taken at the nearby farms in accordaroe with the Technical Specifications, predict a dose to a child's thyroid, based on actual combined operation of Unit 2 and 3, that exceeds 15 mrutVyear, licensees shall install for operation no later than the next refueling cycle for each unit the r-ary equipment to reduce the projected dose to such levels.
C.
To the extent matters related to thermal discharges are treated therein, operation of Peach Bottcan Atomic Ibwer Station Unit No. 2 will be _ governed by-NPDES Permit No. PA 0009733, as now in effect and as hereafter amended.
Questions pertaining to conformance thereto shall be referred to and shall be 1
determined by the NPDES Permit issuing or enforcement authority, as I
appropriate.
D.
In the event of any Itodification of the NPDES IMrmit related to thermal discharges or the estClishment (or amendment) of alternative effluent limitations established pursuant to Section 316 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the licensees shall inform the NRC and analyze any associated charges in or to the Station, its components, its operation or in the discharge of effluents therefrom. If such charge would entail any modification to this license, or any Technical Specifications which are part of this license, or present an unreviewed safety question or involve an environmental impact different than analyzed in the Final Enviwuwdwl Statement, the licensees shall file with the NRC, as applicable, an appropriate analysis of any such change on facility safety, and/or an analysis of any such change on the environmental impacts and on the overall cost-benefit balance for facility operation set forth in the Final Environmental.
Statement and a request for an amerdment to the operating license, if required '
by the commission's regulations. As used in this Condition 3.(d), Final Environmental Statement means the NRC Staff Final Environmental Statement related to Operation of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units Nos. 2 and 3 dated April 1973, as modified by (1) the Initial Decision of the Atomic Safety -
and Licensirq Board dated September 14, 1973, (2) the Supplemental Initial Decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board dated June 14, 1974, (3) the Decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensity Appeal Board dated July 5, 1974, (4) the Memorardum and OIder of the (T=nhion dated Atqust 8,1974, (5) any further modification resulting frun further review by the Ageal Board and by Page 4
the rheinnian, if any,. ard (6) any Dwiwanimiall Impact Appraisal which has been or may be issued by the NRC since the FIS was published in April 1973.
4.
This license is effective as of the date of issuance ard shall expire at midnight on August 8, 2013.
FOR 'IEE A'ICMIC DERGY COMISSION Original Signed by R. C. DeYoung, for A. Giambusso, Deputy Director for Reactor Projects Directorate of Licensing Attachments:
Appendices A and B -
'Ibchnical Specifications Date of Issuance: October 25, 1973 Page 5