ML20205N128
| ML20205N128 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1988 |
| From: | Mcduffie M CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205N134 | List: |
| References | |
| NLS-88-213, NUDOCS 8811030463 | |
| Download: ML20205N128 (9) | |
Text
_ _,
lk#'
CacoHfte Powee & Ught Compefty P O Box 1551
- Rs.vegh. N C. 27602 OCT 28 1988 u A ucouma Sen+or Vice Prmdent Nu c 5 *' G*** '*"
SERIAL:
NLS 88-213 10CFR50.90 86TSB15 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTENTION: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 BRUNSWICK S'.'EAM ELECTRIC PIANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 6 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. DPR 71 & DPR 62 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITION TABLE FOOTNOTE Gentlemen:
In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations. Title 10, Parts 50.90 and 2.101, Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L) hereby requests a revision to the Technical Specifications for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1 and 2.
The proposed change revises Footnote *** on Page 1 10 to allow the reactor mode switch to be placed in the Refuel position while a single control rod is being moved, as opposed to only when being recoupled, provided the one-rod out interlock is operable. provides a detailed description of the proposed changes and the basis for the changes. details the basis for the Company's determination that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration. provides instructions for incorporation of the proposed changes into the Technical Specifications for each unit. provides a summary of the proposed Technical Specification changes for each unit on a page by page basis.
Enclosurar 5 and 6 provide the proposed Technical Specification pages for each unit.
In accordance with the requirements of 10CFR170.12, a check for $150 is also enclosed.
In order to allow time for procedure revision and orderly incorporation into copies of the Technical Specifications, CP&L requests that the 1
[m m i e /I g /f f, 8811030463 891028 PDR ADOCK 0*K90324 8 i P
FDC
Document Control Dosk SLS 88'.213 / Page 2 proposed amendments, once approved by the NRC, be issued with an effective date to be no later than 60 days from the issuance of the amendment.
Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. Stephen D.
Floyd at (919) 836 6901.
Yours very truly.
i$
Of M. A. McDuffie i
BAB/bab(\\cor\\86tsbl5)
Enclosures:
1 1.
Basis for Change Request 2,
10CFR50.92 Evaluation l
3.
Instructions for Incorporation 1
4.
Summary List of Revisions l
5.
Unit 1 Technical Specification Pages 6.
Unit 2 Technical Specification Pages cc:
Mr. Dayne H. Brown Dr. J. Nelson Grace Mr. W. H. Ruland Mr. B. C. Buckley M. A. McDuffie, having been first duly sworn, did depose and say that the information contained herein is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and belief; and the sources of his information are officers, employees, contractors, and agents of Carolina Power &
Light Company.
/
Weh v' g........,',,
7-ifotary (Seal) "
MO/p s'
.....***...G,,
N/27/87
[
- 4 'k My commission expires:
i f
i k N. PUBLIC./ C/,5 3*,...........(y'
,,'CO U t0,...
e........it
ENCLOSURE 1 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PIANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKETS 50 325 6 50 324 OPERATING LICENSES DPR 71 & DPK 62 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITION TABLE FOOTNOTE EASIS FOR CHANGE REQUEST Proposti Change Revise Footnote *** associated with Table 1.2 on Page 1 10 from
...while a single control rod is beir.g recoupled..." to "... while a single control rod is being moved..."
Basis The Brunswick Technical Specifications currently allow, while in Operational Conditions 3 (Hot Shutdown) or 4 (Cold Shutdown), the reactor mode switch to be placed in the Refuel position from the Shutdown position while a single control rod is being recoupled provided that the one rod out interlock is operable (Footnote *** to Table 1.2).
Centrol rod recoupling involves a single notch insertion followed by a full withdrawal to verify rec.opling.
The Brunswick Technical Specifications currently allow control rod testing to be performed in Operational Conditions 2 (Startup) and 5 (Refueling). The proposed change to the Technical Specifications will replace the word "recoupled" with the word "moved," thereby more clearly indicating that Footnote *** permits control rod movement for recoupling and for control rod testing.
This proposed change would th 111 0 control rod testing to occur in Operational Conditions 2, )
and 5.
Control rod testing and control rod recoupling both involv. esset,tiaily the same rod movements; from full in to full out, or full out to full-in.
Control rod recoupling involves a single notch insertion if the rod Collowed by a full withdrawal to verify recoupling. Control rod testing involves recording the time taken for the control rod to be withdrawn from full.in to full-out and from full out to full-in.
These control rad tests must be performed on each of the 137 control rods in the core prior to startup following each refueling outage.
When the mode switch is in the Refuel position, no more than one control rod may be withdrawn at any given time.
This is enforced by a redundant logic circuit which uses the "all rods in" signal and a rod selection signal to prevent the selection of a second rod for movement with any other rod not fully inserted. The simultaneous selection of two control rods is prevented by the interconnecting arrangement of the select push buttons. Thus, for both control rod recoupling and control rod testing, El 1
only one control rod may be moved at any given time, and the requirement for shutdown margin will be maintained, i
i l
h I
h t
I i
t i
t l
i f
l I
l i
I
[
1 El 2
ENCLOSURE 2 BRUNSWILK STEAM ELECTRIC PIANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKETS 50 325 & 50-324 OPERATINC LICENSES DPR 71 & DPR-62 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITION TABLE FOOTNOTE 10CFR50.92 EVALUATION i
The Commission has provided stann:xds in 10CFR50.92(c) for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists. A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facili*.y involves no significant hazards consideration if oparation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not: (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (2) create the possibitity of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Carolina Power & Light Company has reviewvd this proposed license amendment request and determined that its adoption would not involve a significant hazards consideration. The bases for this determination are as follows:
Proposed Change Revise Footnote *** associated with Table 1.2 on Page 1 10 from
"...while a single control rod is being recoupled..." to "... while a single control rod is being moved..."
i Basis The change does not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:
1.
Revising Footnote *** to more clearly allow movement as opposed to recoupling of a single control rod does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident I
previously evaluated. The Brunswick Technical Specifications currently allow, while in Operational Conditions 3 (Hot shutdown) or 4 (Cold Shutdown), the reactor mode switch to be placed in the Refuel position from the Shutdown position while a single control rod is being recoupled provided that the one rod out interlock is I
operable (Footnote *** to Table 1.2).
The proposed change will allow the operator to move a control rod for testing or recoupling while the unit is in either Operational Condition 3 or 4.
This will be in addition to control rod testing already permitted by the Brunswick Technical Specifications in Operational Conditions 2 (Startup) and 5 (Refueling).
When the mode switch is in the Refuel position, criticality cannot be achieved, even with one control rod completely removed from the l
E2-1
r i
core. Currently, only a single control rod may be removed from the core at any given time while the mode switch is in the Refuel position. This maintains the shutdown margin of the plant and i
enforces the shutdown margin electronically. The proposed change will not impact these mechanisms, and the same shutdown margin will be maintained. Thus, the probability of an accident will not i
be significantly changed.
Control rod recoupling involves moving the control rod from full-in to full ou-W,1ce versa.
Control rod testing involves recording the time it takes for the control rod to be withdrawn from full in to full out and from full out to full in.
Thus, the I
movement involved in recoupling a rod bounds the movement involved i
in control rod testing. Therefore, the consequences of any 2
accident that eculd occur during control rod testing would be bounded by those that could occur during recoupling. Thus, the i
consequences of an accident will not be changed.
2.
The Brunswick Technical Specifications currently allow, while in 7
operational conditions 3 or 4 the reactor mode switch to be placed in the Refuel position from the Shutdown position while a single control rod is being recoupled provided that the one rod-out interlock is operable (Footnote *** to Table 1.2).
Movement l
of a control rod through the recoupling process encompasses any possible position the control rod can be placed in when being moved.
In addition, when the mode switch is in the Pefuel position, criticality cannot be achieved, even with one control rod completely removed from the core. Currently, only a single control rod may be removed from the core at any given time while the mode switch is in the Refuel position. This maintains the shutdown margin of the plant and enforces the shutdown margin electronically.
The proposed change will not impact the existing plant protective system and the same shutdown margin will be maintained. No modifications are being made that will decrease the shutdovn margir, or jeopardize the safety functions of the protection system.
Thus, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3.
The proposed change will not impact the existing plant protective system and the same shutdown margin will be maintained. When the mode switch is in the Refuel position, criticality cannot be achieved, even with ore contrul rod completely removed from the core.
Currently, only a single concrol rod may be removed from the core at any given time while the mode switch is in the Refuel position.
This maintains the shutdown margin of the plant and enforces the shutdown margin electronically. No modifications re being made that will decrease the shutdown margin or jeopardize the safety functions of the protection system. Thus, the proposed E2-2
amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
O E2 3
O ENCLOSURE 3 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKETS 50 325 6 50 324 OPERATING LICENSES DPR 71 & DPR 62 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITION TABLE FOOTNOTE INSTRUCTIONS FOR INCORPORATION The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A.o Operating Licenses DPR 71 and DPR 62) would be incorporated as follows:
Ut'IT 1 Remove Page.
Insert Pngg 1 10 1 10 UNIT 2 Remove Page Insert Page 1 11 1 11 E3 1
ENCLOSURE 4 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELEGIRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKETS 50 325 6 50 324 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-71 & DPR 62 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENEMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITION TABLE FOOTNOTE
SUMMARY
LIST OF REVISIONS UNIT 1 Pages Description of Changes 1-10 Revise Footnote *** from "...while a single control rod is being recoupled..." to "...while a single control rod is being moved" UNIT 2 Pages Descriotion of Changes 1 11 Revise Footnote *** from "...while a single control rod is being recoupled..." to "...while a single control rod is boing moved" E4 1