ML20215H557

Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-35 & NPF-52,changing Tech Specs to Add Surveillances for New Primary Resistance Temp Detectors & Extend Required Surveillance Intervals

ML20215H557
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	06/16/1987
From:	Tucker H DUKE POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
Shared Package
ML20215H562	List: ML20215H557 ML20215H591
References
NUDOCS 8706240144
Download: ML20215H557 (2)

Text

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . .

3

)

DUKE POWER GOMPm P.O. DOX 3318D j citAHLOTTE, N.C. 28242

{

.HALD. TUCKER reternown 1 vsos ramassant (704) 37&4531' {

. .nunum enouvenon

/

l

. June _16, 1987 i

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555 j I

i Re: Catawba. Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 d Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 1 Technical Specification Amendment  !

Surveillance Interval. Extension

Dear Sir:

I My lett'er of June 10, 1987 transmitted a proposed amendment to the Catawba Technical ~ Specifications. Attached are two additional surveillances which have been identified as requiring a unit shutdown in order to be performed but whose required surveillance date will come due prior to the next Unit 2 scheduled outage.

These are the required' response time tests for the Primary RTDs associated with the Overpower AT and Overtemperature AT Reactor Trips. Only the RTDs remain to be tested.- The rest of the circuitry has been tested satisfactorily within the i required surveillance interval.

All four RTD channels were last tested on October 25, 1985 and were well within their specified tolerances. During the last three previous tests (two on Unit 1 j

and one on Unit 2) no RTD has failed to meet its required response time.

A planned modification for the upcoming Unit 2 refueling outage is the deletion of the existing RTD Bypass Manifold System. The currently installed RTDs will be replaced with RTDs made by a different manufacturer. These new RTDs will be response time tested prior to Unit 2 entering Mode 2 following the first refueling outage.

This equipment has proven to be highly reliable and the amount of time beyond the required surveillance date is relatively short, therefore, the safety analysis and no significant hazards justification provided in the June 10, 1987 letter are applicable to this request.

Also attached is a clarification concerning the requested extension for the response time test for Table 3.3-5, items 7 a., 7.b., and 8 and for surveillance

4. 8. I'.1. 2 g.1) .. These clarifications are editorial in nature and do not affect the technical content of the previously requested changes.

Since this is a supplement to my June 10, 1987 letter, the $150.00 fee is not p [

required. k,6 j t\\

&$$b P

f

pr. , . ,

.-, .i ,

'U. S, Nuclocr Regulatory Commi:sien June'16,.1987 i

'Page.Two

' Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91 (b) (1) the appropriate South Carolina State Official is being provided a copy of this amendment request.

Very truly yours, g/  %

Hal B. Tucker RWO/74/sbn Attachment xc: Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Region II.

101-Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Heyward Shealy, Chief i Bureau of Radiological ~ Health

!' South Carolina Department of Health &

Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 American Nuclear Insurers e/o Dottie Sherman, ANI Library The Exchange, Suite 245 270 Farmington Avenue Farmington, CT 06032 M&M Nuclear Consultants 1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020 INFO Records Center i Suite 1500 1100 Circle 75 Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30339 Mr. P. K. Van Doorn NRC Resident Inspector  ;

Catawba Nuclear Station

!