ML20137H530

Rev 2 to Application for Amend to License DPR-16,consisting of Tech Spec Change Request 100 Re Inservice Insp Surveillance Requirements for Snubbers

ML20137H530
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	11/13/1985
From:	Fiedler P GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20137H518	List: ML20137H513 ML20137H530 ML20137H557
References
NUDOCS 8512020415
Download: ML20137H530 (8)

Text

._ _

GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-16 Revision No. 2 Tecnnical Specification Change Request No.100 Docket No. 50-219

, Applicant submits, by this Revision No. 2 to Technical Specification Change Request No.100 to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications, a change to Specification .$.S. A.8 and bases, Specification 4.5.Q and bases, Specification 6.10.2, and Table 3.5.1.

Aa A $ *jf I" By: M XI " __

Peter u. -r1edler Vice President & Director Oyster Creek Sworn and subscribed to before me this /,8 # ay d of ef>x.dut),1985

. N A Notary Public of New Jersey DIANA A.MALDET A Notary Public of New Jersey Mr Commission Expires June 5,1986 8512O20415 851113 FDR ADOCK 05000219 p PDR 4

(0087A)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF )

) DOCKET NO.60-219 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION )

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE This is to certify that a copy of Revision No. 2 to Technical Specification Change Request No.100 for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications, filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on November 13 ,1985, has this 13th day of November ,1985 been served on the Mayor of Lacey Township, Ocean County, New Jersey by deposit in the United States mail addressed as follows:

Mayor of Lacey Township 818 W. Lacey Road Forked River, New Jersey 08731 A A. {

By: 5(F h Peter N. tiedler Vice President & Director Oyster Creek

GPU Nuclear Corporation Nuclear  :::gs:;388 Forked River New Jersey 08731-0388 609 971-4000 Writer's Direct Dial Number:

November 13, 1985 Mayor of Lacey Township 818 W. Lacey Road Forked River, New Jersey 08731

Dear Mayor:

Enclosed herewith is a copy of Revision No. 2 to Technical Specification Change Request No.100 for tne Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications.

These documents were filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission on November 13 , 1985.

Very truly yours, Pe

^ L!

ts. tiedler k

Vice President & Director Oyster Creek PBF: dam (0087A)

Encs.

GPU Nuclear Ccrporation is a subsidiary of the General Pubhc Utihties Corporation i

m 1)

, 0YSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION i PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE OPR-16 00CKET N0. 50-219 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO.100 REVISION NG. 2 Applicant hereby requests the Commission to amend Appendix A of tne above captioned license to incorporate the changes proposed by this Revision 2 to Technical Specification Change Request No.100 of December 10, 1982. Pursuant to 10CFR50.91, an analysis concerning significant hazards considered is provided below:

1. Sections to be changed:

a. Section 3.5. A.8 and bases

b. Section 4.5.Q and bases

c. Section 6.10.2

d. Table 3.5.1

e. Table 3.5.2 (page number change)

f. Figure 3.5-1 (page number change)

2. Extent of changes:

a. Section 3.5.A.8, Shock Suppressors (Snuobers), and Bases Revise wording to conform to NRC Standard Technical Specification and delete reference to Table 3.5.1.

b. Section 4.5.Q, Shock Suppressors (Snubbers), and Bases Revise to define the Visual Inspection Acceptance criteria; establisn guidelines to be used in choosing sample snubbers for functional testing; define Functional Test acceptance criteria for Hydraulic and Mechanical Snubbers; add the requirement for Snubbers Service Life Monitoring; and delete reference to Table 3.5.1.

c. Section 6.10.2, Record Retention Add the requirement to keep records of the snubbers' service lives. Delete reference to Table 3.5.1.

d. Table 3.5.1 Delete table.

e. Table 3.5.2 Page number change due to deletion of Table 3.5.1.

3. Changes reqJested:

The requested changes are shown on the attached revised Technical Specification pages 3.5-3, 4.5-6a, 4.5-6a-1, 4.5-6a-2, 4.5-6a-3 and 6-23. Revised Bases pages 3.5-5, 3.5-6 and 4.5-9b are also attached.

Taole 3.5.1, page 3.5-8, is shown as deleted, and page 3.5-13a which contains Table 3.5.2, has been renumbered as 3.5-9.

n

'e

4. Discussion i l'echnical Specification 3.5. A.8 cites the requirements for Shock Suppressors (snubbers). Technical Specification 4.5.5.Q cites the requirements for the surveillance of snubbers. Technical Specification 6.10.2.1 cites the requirements for record retention relating to snubber service life.

The purposes of Technical Specification Cnange Request 100 Revision No. 2 are:

1) To revise tne requirements for snubbers to include the Mechanical Snubbers and to incorporate the Inservice Surveillance requirements which were transmitted via the D. G. Eisenhut letter of March 23, 1981.

2) To delete the snubber listings for the Technical Specification in response to Generic Letter 84-13,

3) To more closely align with the wording contained with the Standard Technical Specifications.

The requested change to the Technical Specifications differs from the Standard Technical Specifications in the following areas:

1) Applicability - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications do not use tne phraseology include in " operational conditions 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5". The requirements of the TSCR are applicable whenever the protected system is required to be operable as delineated in the existing Technical Specifications.

2) As described in Generic Letter 84-13, the table listing all safety related snubbers has been deleted.

5. Determination We have detennined that the proposed changes in Technical Specification Change Request No.100, Revision No. 2 involve a change that constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the tecnnical specifications, or involve purely administrative changes to the technical specifications.

Based on the above, operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in accordance witn Technical Specification Change Request No.100, Revision No. 2 thereto would not:

1. Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequence of an accident previously evaluated; or

2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated; or

3. Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

e 3.5-3

. b. Two of the fourteen suppression chamber - drywell vacuum breakers may be inoperable provided that they are secured in the closed position.

c. One position alann circuit for each operable vacuum breaker may be inoperable for up to 15 days provided that each operable sup-pression chamber - drywell vacuum breaker with one defective alarm circuit is physically verified to be closed innediately and daily during this period.

6. After completion of the startup test program and deinonstration of plant electrical output, tne primary containinent atmosphere shall be reduced to less than 4.01, 02 witn nitrogen gas within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after the reactor mode selector switch is placed in the run mode. Primary containment deinerting may consnence 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to a scheduled shutdown.

7. If specifications 3.5.A.l.a, b, c(1) and 3.5.A.2 througn 3.5.A.5 cannot be met, reactor shutdown shall be initiated and the reactor shall be in tne cold shutdown condition witnin 24 nours.

8. Shock Suppressors (Snubbers)

a. All safety related snubbers are required to be operable whenever the systems they protect are required to be operable except as noted in 3.5.A.8.b and c below.

b. With one or more snubbers inoperable, witnin 72 nours replace or restore the inoperable snobber(s) to operable status,

c. If the requirements of 3.5. A.8.a and 3.5. A.d.D cannot be met, declare the protected system inoperaole and follow tne appropriate action statement for that systein,

d. An engineering evaluation shall be performed to determine if the components protected by the snubber (s) were adversely affected by the inoperability of the snubber prior to returning tne system to operable status.

, Amendment No. 21, 25, 32, 86, 87 L

~

3.5-5 importantly, the accessibility of tne valve lever arm and position reference external to the valve. The fail-safe feature of the alarm circuits assures operator attention if a line fault occurs.

Conservative estimates of the hydrogen produced, consistent witn tne core cooling system provided, snow that the hydrogen air mixture resulting from a loss-of-coolant accident is considerably below the flammaDility limit and hence it cannot burn, and inerting would not be needed. However, inerting of the primary containment was included in the proposed design and operation. The 6% oxygen limit is the oxygen concentration limit stated by the American Gas Association for hydrogen-oxygen mixtures below which combustion will not occur.(4)

The 4% oxygen limit was estaolished by analysis of the Generation and Mitigation of Q9: ustiole Gas Mixtures in Inerted BWR Mark I Containments. L' To preclude the possibility of starting up the reactor and operating a long period of time with a significant leak in the primary system, leak enecks must be made wnen the system is-at or near rated temperature and pressure. It has been shown (9)(10) that an acceptable margin witn respect to flammability exists witnout containment inerting. Inerting the primary containment provides additional margin to that already considered acceptable. Therefore, permitting access to the drywell for the purpose of leak checking would not reduce the margin of safety oelow that considered adequate and is judged prudent in terms of tne added plant safety offered by tne opportunity for leak inspection. Tne 24-nour time to provice inerting is judged to be a reasonable time to perform tne operation and establish the required 02 limit.

Snubbers are designed to prevent unrestrained pipe motion under dynamic loads as mignt occur during an earthquake or severe transient, while allowing normal thermal motion during startup and shutdown. Tne consequence of an inoperable snubber is an increase in tne prooaDility of structural damage to piping as a result of a seismic or other event, initiating dynamic loads. It is, therefore, required that all snubbers required to protect the primary coolant system or any other sdfety system or Component be operdDie wnenever tne systems they protect are required to De operable.

i Amendaent No. 75, 86 j

3.5-@

The purpose of an engineering evaluation is to determine if the components protected by tne snubber were adversely affected by the inoperability of the snubber. This ensures that the protected component remains capable of meeting tne designed service. A documented visual field inspection will usually be sufficient to determine system operability.

Because snubber protection is required only during low probability events, a period of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> is allowed for repairs or replacements.

Secondary containuentN is designed to minimize any ground level I release of radioactive materials which might result from a serious accident. The reactor building provides secondary containment during reactor operation when the drywell is sealed and in service and provides primary cont 41ninent when tne reactor is shutdown and the drywell is open, as during refueling. Because the secondary containment is an integral part of the overall containment system, it is required at all times that primary containment is required.

Moreover, secondary containment is required during fuel handling operations and whenever work is being performed on the reactor or its connected systems in the reactor building since tneir operation could result in inadvertent release of radioactive material.

Amendment No. 14, 18, 75 Corrected December 24, 1984