ML20065S225

Application for Amend to License DPR-16,consisting of Tech Spec Change Request 196 Re Tech Spec Change to Page 4.13-2

ML20065S225
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	12/17/1990
From:	Fitzpatrick E GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML18057B505	List: ML20065S212 ML20065S225
References
NUDOCS 9012200151
Download: ML20065S225 (5)

Text

- - _ - _ -

GPU Nuclear Corporation Nuclear l

GP.d  ;::en:r388 Forked River. New Jctsey 087310388 609 971 4000 Wnter's Daoct Dial Number:

December 17, 1990 The Honorable Debra Madensky Mayor of Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road Forked River, New Jersey 08731

Dear Mayor Madensky:

Enclosed herewith is one copy of Technical Specification Change Request No.

196 for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generation Station Operating License.

This document was filed with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Deccaber 17 , 1990.

Very truly yours, 9(I E. E. Fitz a rick Vice President and Director oyster Creek EEF/DJD/ pip (TSCR196)

Attachment GPU Nuclear Corporation is a subsidiary of General Publ.c UtAttes Corporation 9012200151 901217 PDR ADOCK 05000219

_ _ _ _ _ _ ?pa_ _ _- ___ _ ___

.- i GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Provisional Operating Licence No. DPR-16 Technical Specification Change Roquest No. 196 Docket No. 50-219 Applicant submito, by this Teclnical Specification change Request No. 196 to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications, a change to page 4.13-2.

By /

E. E. Fitzpatrick Vice President and Director Oyster Creek Sworn and subscribed to before me this (} day of 1990.

8 0.$tu<&

Notary Public of NJ anna W hhteefNew Mycemene n, aa $ eg-i l

l l

, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-219 GPU Nuclear Corporation )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a copy of Technical Specification Change Request No.

196 for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications, filed with the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on December 17, 1990 has this day of Dec ember 17, 1990 , been served on the Mayor of Lacey

-Township, Ocean County, New Jersey by deposit in the United States mail, addressed as follows:

The Honorable Debra Madensky Mayor of Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road Forked River, NJ 08731 By E. E. Fitzpatr'ick Vice President and Director Oyster Creek

~~ . . .

e

, OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-16 DOCKET NO. 50-219 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 196 Applicant hereby requests the Commission to change Appendix A to the above captioned license as below, and pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91, an analysis concerning the determination of no significant hazards consideration is also presented:

1.0 SECTIONS'TO BE CHANGED Technical Specification Table 4.13-1, Item 1 2.0 EXTENT OF CHANGE Technical Specification Table 4.13-1, Item 1 is revised to extend the channel calibrations for the Primary and Safety Valve Position Indicator (Primary Detector), the Relief and safety Valve Position Indicator (Backup t Indications), and the Relief Valve Position Indicator (Common Header Temperature Element) from once per 18 months to once per 24 months. The legend to Table 4.13-1 is revised for designation "B" to identify once per 24 months.

3.0 CHANGES REOUESTFQ The. requested' change is shown on the attached Technical Specification Page 4.13-2.

'4.0 DISCUSSION The purpose of this Tect ,1 cal Specification change is to revise the Technical Specifications to accommodate implementation.of the 24-month plant refueling cycle by changing the surveillance interval for Technical Specification surveillance requirements which will expire prior to the currently scheduled 13R refueling outage date. The following discussion pupports the Technical Specification change identified in Section 3.0 above.

Technical Specification Table 4'.13-1, . Item 1 currently requires that channel calibrations be performed for the Primary and Safety Valve Position Indicator (Primary Detector), the Relief and Safety Valve Position Indicator (Backup Indications), and the Relief Valve Position Indicator

'(Common Header Temperature Element) once per 18 months. This surveillance checks the Accustic valve Monitoring System (VHS) signal conditioner output, pre-amp voltage, channel sensitivity, and alarm setpoints; and replaces the thermocouple backup indicators with twenty-three (23) new calibrated thermocouples (21 - Relief and Safety Valve Position Indicators, 2.- Relief Valve Position Indicators on Common Header). This accident monitoring instrumentation'is a Regulatory Guide 1.97, Type D parameter in that Relief and Safety Valve' Position indication provides information to indicate'the operation of a safety system. Sound produced by fluid flowing

L through tha discharga piping if th2 valva 10 opsn or leaking is datected by the Acoustic VMS, as the primary method of position indication.

Thermocouples installed in each Safety / Relief valve tail piece are used to indicate if a valve is leaking or to verify that a valve is open, as a secondary method of position indication.

The indicators provide closed /not closed status and are not required by the operators to perform any specific manual actions other than to close an open relief valve. The safety function of the periodic surveillance is to assure acceptable system availability by detecting failed componente. The proposed change will extend the interval between successive calibrations from 18 months to 24 months. Evaluation of the most recent refueling outage calibration results indicates no deviations. Technical Specifications also require monthly checks of this instrumentation. The monthly checks of the Acoustic VMS verifies that all alarms and indications are received, checks channel sensitivity, pre-amp voltage, and accelerometer resonance. The monthly checks of the Relief and Safety Valve thermocouple position indicatore verify that a temperature reading is obtainable and compares the average safety valve temperature for each steam header, and compares the temperature readings of the downcomer thermocouples. Evaluation of the last eighteen (18) of those monthly channel checks for each of the 21 channels do not indicate any significant deviatione. Ten (10) complete monthly channel checks of each of the 21 channels showed that the acoustic VMS for one or two channele at the most, needed a minor adjustment or fuse replacement. The Acoustic VMS supplier (Babcock & Wilcox) has recommended that the system be calibrated approximately every five (5) years.

The proposed surveillance interval change from 18 months to 24 months will have no effect on the availability of the Relief and Safety Valve Position Indicator Accident Monitoring System since the instrumentation has demonstrated reliabte operation and Technical Specification required monthly channel checks allow the operatore to verify instrument channel performance. Therefore, the proposed change has no effect on the safety function of the Relief and Safety Valve Position Indicator Accident Monitoring System.

5.0 DFTERMINATION GPUN has determined that this Technical Specification Change Request involves no significant hazards consideration as defined by NRC in 10 CFR 50.92.

1. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The proposed amendment extends the interval between successive surveillance from 18 months to 24 months. This change does not involve any change to the actual surveillance requirements, nor does it involve any change to the limits and restrictions on plant operations. The Relief and Safety Valve Position Indication instrumentation provides a monitoring function only and is not required for the operators to take any specific manual actions other than to close an open relief valve. The reliability of systems and components relied upon to prevent or mitigate the consequences of

l '

l' ^ccid:nto prcviously cyclu tcd io not d:grcd:d bayo 91 that obtaintd from the currently defined surveillance interval. l asurance of system and equipment availability is maintained. This char.je does not involve any change to system or equipment configurat on. Therefore, this change does not increase the probability of occurrence or the consequences 7f an accident previously evaluated.

2. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed amendment extends the interval between successive surveillances frou 18 months to 24 months. This chango does not involve any change to the actual surveillance requirements, nor does it involve any ch'.nge to the limits and restrictions on plant operation. This changr does not involve any change to system or equipment configuration. (

Therefore, this change is unrelated to the possibility of e.or. ting a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluatod.

3. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amondment would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of na'.ety. The proposed amendment extends the interval between successivr surveillances from 18 months to 24 months. This change does not involve any change to the actual surveillance requirements, nor does it involve any change to the limits and restrictions on plant operation. The reliability of systems and components is not degraded beyond that obtained from the currently defined eurveillance interval. Assurance of system and equipment availability is maintained. Therefore, it is concluded that operation of the f acility in accordance with the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The proposed extension of the identified surveillances to 24 monthe does not degrade the reliability of systems and components beyond that obtained from the currently defined surveillance interval. Reliable performance of the systems and equipment effected by this change has been demonstrated.

Implementation of the proposed amendment will maintain the required level of assurance of cystem and equipment availability. Thus, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment involves no significant hazarde considerations.

6.0 IMPLEMENTATION h

It is requested that the amendment authorizing this change become effective upon issuance.

{

1

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ -