ML20101S457
| ML20101S457 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1985 |
| From: | Hukill H GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101S451 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8502050407 | |
| Download: ML20101S457 (4) | |
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. 143 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.
GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION BY
~
Director, TMI-1
' Sworn and Subscribed to.before me this tax day of ::me...
.. f, 1985.
m.
,W*
E. 6.
.a h u s
<.2 Nottry Pu)lic '
- DARLA JE AN B[RRE NOTARY PUBLIC M100ttTOWN B0*0. DAUPHIN COUNTY MV COMMis$10N f XPIR[S JUNE 17.1935 tMe r;si Pew bre f-:
'S'""
850'050407 850201
~
2 DR ADOCK 05000289 PDR r
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REG!'JTORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF DOCKET N0. 50-289
~
LICENSE NO. DPR-50 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION This is to certify that a copy of Technical Specification Change Request No. ~143 to Appendix A of the Operating License for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1, has, on the date given below, been filed with executives of
~
t.ondonderry Township, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania; Dauphin County, Pennsylvania; and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources,
- Bureau of Radiation Protection, by deposit in the United States mail, addressed as follows:
~
Mr. Jay H. Kopp, Chairman Mr John E. Minnich, Chairman Board of Supervisors of.
Boiard of County Commissioners Londonderry Township-of Dauphin County R.' D. #1, Geyers Church Road Dauphin County Courthouse Middletown, PA 17057 He.rrisburg, PA 17120 Mr. Thomas Gerusky, Director PA. Dept. of Environmental Resources
- Bureau of Ra'diation Protection P.O.. Box 2063 Harrisburg, PA 17120 GPU-NUCLEAR CORPORATION BY
'[irector TMI-1
. DATE: Februarv 1. 1985 w
A I.
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 143 The Licensee requested that the attached revised pages replace the following pages of the existing Technical Specification.
Replace pages 4-2, 4-3 II.
REASON FOR CHANGE This change is requested to provide clarification that the regulating ES control rod power silicon controlled rectifiers (SCR's) shall be trip g
tested every four weeks, and prior to startup when the reactor has been shutdown for greater than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. This proposed change has resulted from our evaluation of Generic Letter 83-28, " Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem /ATWS Events," items 4.4 (Reference GPUN letter 5211-83-330, November 8,1983 and GPUN Letter 5211-381 dated February 1, 1984.
III. SAFETY EVALUATION JUSTIFYING CHANGE I
The TMI-1 Technical Specifications require that the control rod drive
=
trip breakers be trip tested every four weeks, and prior to startup when the reactor has been shutdown for greater than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The language of the Technical Specifications is broad enough to cover the L
SCR portion of the trip function, however, for clarity, the Technical Specifications are being changed to specifically identify the SCR g
portion of the trip function. TMI-1 Procedure 1303-4.1 Rev. 44 m
currently requires confirmation of SCR trip function by verifying the g
reduction in current from the affected power supply. This is done on j
a monthly schedule.
1 This is an administrative change for clarification only; the actual e
testing requirement remains the same. Thus, this Technical E
Specification change does not reduce the margin of safety, j
IV.-
NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION d
The proposed changes are administrative in nature and:
1
- 1) do nct affect plant design or operation, and therefore would not 5
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences i
of an accident previously evaluated; Q
- 2) do not involve modifications to plant equipment, and therefore q
would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
-a accident from any accident previously evaluated;
}-
- 3) do not involve changes which would affect the safety analysis of the plant, and there would not involve a significant reduction in d
a margin of safety.
ii i
1 1
2 A
i$
i 1
m
.V.
IMPLEMENTATION It is requested that this amendment become effective upon issuance.
AMENDMENT FEE (10 CFR 170.21)
Putsuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 170.21, a check for $150 will be sent under separate cover for this submittal.