|
---|
Category:SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT--LICENSING & RELATED ISSUES
MONTHYEARML20217K9931999-10-14014 October 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 234 to License DPR-56 ML20217B4331999-10-0505 October 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 233 to License DPR-56 ML20216H7091999-09-24024 September 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 229 & 232 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML15112A7681999-09-20020 September 1999 SER Accepting Revision 25 of Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program,Third 10-year Interval for Plant,Units 1,2 & 3 ML20212D1281999-09-17017 September 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Proposed Alternatives CRR-03, 05,08,09,10 & 11 ML20211D5501999-08-23023 August 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 228 & 231 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20206A2921999-04-20020 April 1999 Safety Evaluation Concluding That Proposed Changes to EALs for PBAPS Are Consistent with Guidance in NUMARC/NESP-007 & Identified Deviations Meet Requirements of 10CFR50.47(b)(4) & App E to 10CFR50 ML20205K7411999-04-0707 April 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 227 & 230 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20196G7021998-12-0202 December 1998 SER Authorizing Proposed Alternative to Delay Exam of Reactor Pressure Vessel Shell Circumferential Welds by Two Operating Cycles ML20155C6071998-10-26026 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 226 to License DPR-44 ML20155C1681998-10-22022 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting Proposed Alternative Plan for Exam of Reactor Pressure Vessel Shell Longitudinal Welds ML20154H4771998-10-0505 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 225 & 229 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20154J2401998-10-0505 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 224 & 228 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20154G6821998-10-0101 October 1998 SER Related to Request for Relief 01A-VRR-1 Re Inservice Testing of Automatic Depressurization Sys Safety Relief Valves at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,Units 2 & 3 ML20154G6631998-10-0101 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 223 & 227 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20153B9651998-09-14014 September 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 9 to License DPR-12 ML20238F2661998-08-24024 August 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 222 to License DPR-44 ML20237A7761998-08-10010 August 1998 SER Accepting Licensee Response to NRC Bulleting 95-002, Unexpected Clogging of RHR Pump Strainer While Operating in Suppression Pool Cooling Mode ML20236R8281998-07-15015 July 1998 Safety Evaluation Approving Proposed Alternative (one-time Temporary non-Code Repair) Pursuant to 10CFR50.55a(a)(3) (II) ML20248F4781998-06-0101 June 1998 Corrected Page 1 to SE Supporting Amends 221 & 226 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively.Original Page 1 of SE Had Three Typos ML20247N5351998-05-11011 May 1998 SER Accepting Third 10-year Interval Inservice Program for Pump & Valves for Plant,Units 2 & 3 ML20198L3331997-12-18018 December 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Approval of Proposed Merger of Atlantic Energy,Inc,& Delmarva Power & Light Co ML20212G8301997-10-24024 October 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 221 & 226 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20198S2161997-10-24024 October 1997 Safety Evaluation Accepting Proposed Change to Provisions Identified in Rev 14 of PBAPS QAP Description Re Nuclear Review Board Meeting Frequency ML20217J5631997-10-0909 October 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 225 to License DPR-56 ML20217J6161997-10-0707 October 1997 Safety Evaluation Re Alternative to Reactor Pressure Vessel Circumferential Weld Insps for Plant,Unit 3 ML20211L6241997-10-0303 October 1997 Safety Evaluation Authorizing Licensee Proposed Use of Code Case N-516-1 to Weld Modified Suction Strainer in Suppression Chamber at Plant ML20217D8161997-09-30030 September 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 224 to License DPR-56 ML20211D6201997-09-17017 September 1997 SER Accepting VT-2 Examiner Qualification Request for PECO Energy Company,Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,Units 2 & 3 ML20216G5601997-09-0404 September 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 220 & 223 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20217M8001997-08-19019 August 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 219 & 222 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20149L2841997-07-23023 July 1997 Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee Relief Request RR-22 for Plant,Units 2 & 3 ISI Program ML20140B0371997-05-30030 May 1997 Safety Evaluation Accepting QAP Description Change ML20135B4111997-02-19019 February 1997 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 218 & 221 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20149L8681996-11-15015 November 1996 SER Accepting Core Spray Piping Insp & Flaw Evaluation for Plant,Unit 2 ML20128G6941996-09-27027 September 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 217 to License DPR-44 ML20117B4521996-08-16016 August 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 216 to License DPR-44 ML20115H2361996-07-15015 July 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 277 & 278 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20117N9691996-06-18018 June 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 214 & 219 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20149L2441996-01-29029 January 1996 Safety Evaluation Accepting Insp & Evaluation Methodology for Operation of Unit 3 Core Shroud for Duration of Current Operating Cycle,Performed in Response to GL 94-03 ML20096E0461996-01-16016 January 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 213 & 218 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20096D0041996-01-11011 January 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 212 & 217 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20096C9541996-01-11011 January 1996 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 211 & 216 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20094B1041995-10-17017 October 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 215 to License DPR-56 ML20092D7501995-08-30030 August 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 210 & 214 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20087A7931995-07-18018 July 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 211 to License DPR-56 ML20086Q0701995-07-10010 July 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 210 to License DPR-56 ML20085M9541995-06-19019 June 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 207 & 209 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20087G0101995-06-13013 June 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 206 to License DPR-44 ML20086E0481995-06-13013 June 1995 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 205 & 208 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively 1999-09-24
[Table view] Category:TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
MONTHYEAR05000278/LER-1999-005-03, :on 990920,uplanned Esfas During Planned Mod Activitives in Main CR Were Noted.Caused by Inattention to Detail by Individuals Performing Work.All CR Mods Were Ceased to Allow Review of Mod Work Packages.With1999-10-20020 October 1999
- on 990920,uplanned Esfas During Planned Mod Activitives in Main CR Were Noted.Caused by Inattention to Detail by Individuals Performing Work.All CR Mods Were Ceased to Allow Review of Mod Work Packages.With
ML20217K9931999-10-14014 October 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 234 to License DPR-56 ML20217B4331999-10-0505 October 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 233 to License DPR-56 05000278/LER-1999-004-03, :on 990901,3A RPS Bus Was Inadvertently Deenergized,During Planned Mod Activities on Main CR Panel. Caused by Electrician Failing to Self Check Work.All CR Work Was Ceased Immediately & Shutdown Meeting Held1999-10-0101 October 1999
- on 990901,3A RPS Bus Was Inadvertently Deenergized,During Planned Mod Activities on Main CR Panel. Caused by Electrician Failing to Self Check Work.All CR Work Was Ceased Immediately & Shutdown Meeting Held
ML20217G3541999-09-30030 September 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with ML20216H7091999-09-24024 September 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 229 & 232 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML15112A7681999-09-20020 September 1999 SER Accepting Revision 25 of Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program,Third 10-year Interval for Plant,Units 1,2 & 3 ML20212D1281999-09-17017 September 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Proposed Alternatives CRR-03, 05,08,09,10 & 11 05000278/LER-1999-003-03, :on 990814,HPCIS Was Declared Inoperable Due to Erratic Behavior Resulting in Loss of Single High Train Safety Sys.Caused by Weakness in Procedural Guidance. Readjusted Hydraulic Governor Needle Valve.With1999-09-13013 September 1999
- on 990814,HPCIS Was Declared Inoperable Due to Erratic Behavior Resulting in Loss of Single High Train Safety Sys.Caused by Weakness in Procedural Guidance. Readjusted Hydraulic Governor Needle Valve.With
ML20212A5871999-08-31031 August 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Aug 1999 for Peach Bottom,Units 2 & 3.With ML20211D5501999-08-23023 August 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 228 & 231 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20212H6311999-08-19019 August 1999 Rev 2 to PECO-COLR-P2C13, COLR for Pbaps,Unit 2,Reload 12 Cycle 13 ML20210N7641999-07-31031 July 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Jul 1999 for PBAPS Units 2 & 3. with 05000277/LER-1999-005-01, :on 990616,failure to Maintain Provisions of FP Program Occurred.Caused by Less than Adequate Engineering Rigor in Both Development & Review Analysis.Fire Watch Immediately Established.With1999-07-16016 July 1999
- on 990616,failure to Maintain Provisions of FP Program Occurred.Caused by Less than Adequate Engineering Rigor in Both Development & Review Analysis.Fire Watch Immediately Established.With
ML20209H1121999-06-30030 June 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for June 1999 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with ML20195H8841999-05-31031 May 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for May 1999 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with 05000278/LER-1999-002-02, :on 990406,safeguard Sys to Unrelated Door Was Inadvertently Disabled by Security Alarm Station Operator. Caused by Noncompliance with Procedures & Less than Adequate Shift Turnover.Briefed Personnel on Event.With1999-05-0606 May 1999
- on 990406,safeguard Sys to Unrelated Door Was Inadvertently Disabled by Security Alarm Station Operator. Caused by Noncompliance with Procedures & Less than Adequate Shift Turnover.Briefed Personnel on Event.With
ML20206N1661999-04-30030 April 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Apr 1999 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with ML20206A2921999-04-20020 April 1999 Safety Evaluation Concluding That Proposed Changes to EALs for PBAPS Are Consistent with Guidance in NUMARC/NESP-007 & Identified Deviations Meet Requirements of 10CFR50.47(b)(4) & App E to 10CFR50 05000278/LER-1999-001-03, :on 990312,ESF Actuation of Rcics Occurred Due to High Steam Flow Signal During Sys Restoration.Temporary Change to Restoration Procedure Was Initiated to Open RCIC Outboard Steam Isolation Valve in Smaller Increments1999-04-0808 April 1999
- on 990312,ESF Actuation of Rcics Occurred Due to High Steam Flow Signal During Sys Restoration.Temporary Change to Restoration Procedure Was Initiated to Open RCIC Outboard Steam Isolation Valve in Smaller Increments
ML20205K7411999-04-0707 April 1999 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 227 & 230 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20205P5851999-03-31031 March 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Mar 1999 for Peach Bottom Units 2 & 3.With ML20207G9971999-02-28028 February 1999 Monthly Operating Repts for Feb 1999 for Peach Bottom Units 2 & 3.With 05000278/LER-1998-009-01, :on 981227,unplanned Esfa Were Noted.Caused by Transformer Insulator Failure.Replaced Failed Insulator. with1999-01-20020 January 1999
- on 981227,unplanned Esfa Were Noted.Caused by Transformer Insulator Failure.Replaced Failed Insulator. with
ML20199E3471998-12-31031 December 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Dec 1998 for Peach Bottom,Units 1 & 2.With ML20206P1651998-12-31031 December 1998 Fire Protection for Operating Nuclear Power Plants, Section Iii.F, Automatic Fire Detection ML20205K0381998-12-31031 December 1998 PECO Energy 1998 Annual Rept. with ML20206D3651998-12-31031 December 1998 1998 PBAPS Annual 10CFR50.59 & Commitment Rev Rept. with ML20206D3591998-12-31031 December 1998 1998 PBAPS Annual 10CFR72.48 Rept. with 05000277/LER-1998-008-01, :on 981130,circuit Breaker SU-25 Tripped.Caused by Less than Adequate Procedural Guidance.Operators Verified Sys Integrity & Successfully Returned Sys to Svc.With1998-12-30030 December 1998
- on 981130,circuit Breaker SU-25 Tripped.Caused by Less than Adequate Procedural Guidance.Operators Verified Sys Integrity & Successfully Returned Sys to Svc.With
05000277/LER-1998-007-02, :on 981107,failure to Meet TS & Associated LCO Requirments of Absolute Difference in APRM & Calculated Power of Less than 2% Was Noted.Caused by Substitute Valves Being Used.Removed Substitute Valves.With1998-12-0404 December 1998
- on 981107,failure to Meet TS & Associated LCO Requirments of Absolute Difference in APRM & Calculated Power of Less than 2% Was Noted.Caused by Substitute Valves Being Used.Removed Substitute Valves.With
ML20196G7021998-12-0202 December 1998 SER Authorizing Proposed Alternative to Delay Exam of Reactor Pressure Vessel Shell Circumferential Welds by Two Operating Cycles ML20196E8261998-11-30030 November 1998 Response to NRC RAI Re Reactor Pressure Vessel Structural Integrity at Peach Bottom Units 2 & 3 ML20198B8591998-11-30030 November 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Nov 1998 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with 05000278/LER-1998-005-03, :on 981025,inadvertent Unit 3 Electrical Bus E33 Trip (Esfa) During Performance of Unit 2 Electrical Bus E32 Surveillance Test Was Noted.Caused by Personnel Error. Sp S12M-54-E32-XXF4 Was Completed.With1998-11-20020 November 1998
- on 981025,inadvertent Unit 3 Electrical Bus E33 Trip (Esfa) During Performance of Unit 2 Electrical Bus E32 Surveillance Test Was Noted.Caused by Personnel Error. Sp S12M-54-E32-XXF4 Was Completed.With
ML20206R2571998-11-17017 November 1998 PBAPS Graded Exercise Scenario Manual (Sections 1.0 - 5.0) Emergency Preparedness 981117 Scenario P84 ML20198C6751998-11-0505 November 1998 Rev 3 to COLR for PBAPS Unit 3,Reload 11,Cycle 12 ML20195E5341998-10-31031 October 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Oct 1998 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with ML20155C6071998-10-26026 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 226 to License DPR-44 ML20155C1681998-10-22022 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Accepting Proposed Alternative Plan for Exam of Reactor Pressure Vessel Shell Longitudinal Welds ML20155H7721998-10-12012 October 1998 Rev 1 to COLR for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 2, Reload 12,Cycle 13 05000277/LER-1998-006-02, :on 980915,automatic RWCU Isolation Occurred While Placing RWCU Sys in Svc.Caused by Unexpected Surge of Water.Procedure Change Was Initiated to Open MO-2-12-74 & RWCU Sys Was Successfully Returned to Svc.With1998-10-0909 October 1998
- on 980915,automatic RWCU Isolation Occurred While Placing RWCU Sys in Svc.Caused by Unexpected Surge of Water.Procedure Change Was Initiated to Open MO-2-12-74 & RWCU Sys Was Successfully Returned to Svc.With
ML20154J2401998-10-0505 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 224 & 228 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20154H4771998-10-0505 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 225 & 229 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20154G6821998-10-0101 October 1998 SER Related to Request for Relief 01A-VRR-1 Re Inservice Testing of Automatic Depressurization Sys Safety Relief Valves at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,Units 2 & 3 ML20154G6631998-10-0101 October 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 223 & 227 to Licenses DPR-44 & DPR-56,respectively ML20154H5541998-09-30030 September 1998 Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1998 for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3. with 05000278/LER-1998-004-03, :on 980820,automatic RWCU Isolation Occurred While Placing B RWCU Sys Demineralizer in Svc.Caused by less-than-adequate Control of Equipment.Isolated B Demineralizer & Returned RWCU Sys to Svc1998-09-18018 September 1998
- on 980820,automatic RWCU Isolation Occurred While Placing B RWCU Sys Demineralizer in Svc.Caused by less-than-adequate Control of Equipment.Isolated B Demineralizer & Returned RWCU Sys to Svc
05000277/LER-1998-005-02, :on 980824,noted Failure to Meet TS Actions for Suppression chamber-to-drywell Vacuum Breaker Not Being Fully Seated.Caused by Personnel Failing to Take All TS Required Actions.Temporary Procedure Changes Were Made1998-09-18018 September 1998
- on 980824,noted Failure to Meet TS Actions for Suppression chamber-to-drywell Vacuum Breaker Not Being Fully Seated.Caused by Personnel Failing to Take All TS Required Actions.Temporary Procedure Changes Were Made
ML20153B9651998-09-14014 September 1998 Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 9 to License DPR-12 1999-09-30
[Table view] |
Text
i 1
kQ Ctag e
t UNITED STATES g
.j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20665 4001 o
4 4.....
i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 234 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-56 EECO ENERGY COMPANY PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-278
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 2,1998 (Reference 1), in response to Generic Letter 94-02,"Long term Solutions and Upgrade of interim Operating Recommendations for Thermal Hydraulic Instabilities in Boiling Water Reactors (BWR)," PECO Energy Company (the licensee) proposed design modifications to the Power Range Neutron Monitoring (PRNM) system in the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3. Subsequently, by letters dated March 1,1999 (Reference 2), as supplemented June 14, October 1 (Reference 3), and October 6,1999 (Reference 4), the licensee proposed license amendments to revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) for both Peach Bottom Units. The proposed TS changes will enable the licensee to install the proposed design modification. This modification will upgrade the existing analog PRNM, excluding the associated detectors and cables, with a General Electric (GE)
Company digital PRNM called " Nuclear Measurement Analysis and Control (NUMAC)." This NUMAC FRNM will also include an Oscillating Power Range Monitor (OPRM) to detect and suppress reactor power instabilities and provide an automatic trip function. The OPRM_is called
" Option ill stability trip function" in the staff approved licensing Topical Report NEDO-31960, "BWR Owner's Group Long-Term Stability Solution Licensing Methodology" dated July 1993.
By ' letter dated September 5,1995 (Reference 5), the staff approved GE licensing Topical Report (LTR) NEDC-32410P, " Nuclear Measurement Analysis and Control Power Range Neutron Monitor (NUMAC-PRNM) Retrofit Plus Option ill Stability Trip Function." This Topical l
Report addressed the full scope of the modification to replace the Power Range Monitoring i
portion of an anSy Neutron Monitoring System in GE BWRs with GE NUMAC PRNM including OPRM. In th!s Topical Report, the staff approved proposed TS changes for Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) reactor trip and rod block protective fuiictions. By letter dated I
9910270043 991014
~
PDR ADOCK 05000278 P
PDR
I l
1 1 I
- August 15,1997, the staff approved Supplement 1 to NEDC-32410P which includes TS 1
c requirements for_OPRM and provides clarification of issues related to the APRM.
The licensee's proposed TS changes reflect only the PRNM portion of the modification affecting 1
the Reactor Protection System (RPS) and Rod Block Monitoring (RBM) functions of the APRM j
instrumentation and will be implemented following installation of NUMAC-PRNM. The licensee will submit a separate license. amendment request for the proposed TS changes to reflect the n
l OPRM portion of the modification after the first operating cycle following installation of NUMAC-PRNM in each Peach Bottom unit. During this period, the OPRM trip function will not be connected to plant RPS in order to evaluate the performance of the OPRM algorithms. Until implementation of the TS requirements for the OPRM operability, PECO Energy will continue to implement the Interim _ Corrective Actions specified in the NRC Bulletin 88-7 Supplement 1,
" Power Oscillations in Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs)", to detect and suppress power oscillations.
. The June'14, October 1, and October 6,1999, letters provided clarifying information that did not h
change the staff's initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
l l-2.0 EVALUATION The staff safety evaluation report (SER) in Reference 5 states that those licensees who
- reference Topical Report NEDC-32410P for the installation of NUMAC-PRNM, should provide plant-specific r'evised TSs for the PRNM functions consistent with Appendix H of the Topical l
Report. The staff's SER also asked the licensees to provide clarification and reconciled differences between the specific plant design and the Topical Report design descriptions. In Reference 2, the licensee stated that the proposed TS changes are consistent with the NRC-approved.GE Topical Report NEDC-32410P with some minor deviations. The licensee also provided plant specific response for the Required Utility Actions specified in the Topical Report.
The staff's review of the plant specific response and the licensee's justification for various
' deviations resulted in a request for additional information. The licensee responded to the staff's request in References 3 and 4 which included Control Rod Block Instrumentation (CRBI) revised Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) TS Table 3.3.2.1-1.
The proposed TS' changes revise the RPS and RBM function LCOs of the APRM instrumentation. Additionally, the TS Bases associated with the RPS and the RBM LCOs are updated.to reflect these revisions. Also, editorial changes are incorporated in Reactor Coolant System LCO 3.4.1 and Special Operations LCO 3.10.8. The staff finds all changes to be consistent with the Topical Report except for two changes in the RBM LCO and one change in
- the RPS LCO. The staff finds these three changes to be acceptable as described below:
2.1 RBM LCO'
- In the revised CRBI LCO table, the licensee changed thermal power limits on specified conditions for the operability of the RBM trip functions from the current "two-sided" to a "one-sided" configuration to reduce the risk 'of non-compliance with the TS required surveillance of the RBM instrumentation.' The proposed changes to thermal power limits are conservative with
- respect to the current TS requirements and, therefore, are acceptable.
l-l I
, The licensee also deleted the RBM "Downscale" trip function from the CRBI LCO table which is neither addressed nor proposed to be deleted in the Topical Report. The licensee stated that this trip fails to meet any of the four criteria of 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) for an LCO to be included
- in the plant TS for safe operation of the facility. Also, no credit was taken for the downscale function in any ARPM RBM TS (ARTS) analyses by GE. With the current analog neutron monitoring system, inclusion of the RBM downscale function in the plant TS, in addition to RBM Inop function, has some merit because there are some failure modes that could result in a
- reduction of signal (downscale RBM signal), but not a full failure (inop RBM signal). The NUMAC RBM has a built-in self-test capability to detect abnormal operating conditions, and provides an RBM Inop alarm and the associated rod block signal. No failure modes have been
. identified which would result in the RBM flux value being reduced to near zero without other
' alarms.' This feature reduces the value.of the RBM downscale function to that of a " diagnostic aid" in troubleshooting certain Inop conditions which have already been indicated by self test.
As such, the RBM "Downscale" function becomes part of the overall RBM inop function, which is retained in the plant TSs. Therefore, the staff finds the licensee's proposed deletion of RBM downscale function from the plant TSs to be acceptable.
2.2 RPS LCO
-In the proposed changes to the RPS instrumentation LCO TS Table 3.3.1.1-1, the licensee l changed the instrument setpoint allowable values (AVs) for Si'.1ulated Thermal Power-High and Neutron Flux High reactor trip functions of the APRM instrumentation. These changes are non-conservative with respect to the current TS AVo because the Neutron Flux-High instrument setpoint Analytical Limit (not included in the plant TSs and defined as the measured or calculated limit established by the safety analysis to encure that the safety limit is not exceeded) was not changed (increased) as stated in Reference 2. In response to the staff's request for additional information dated September 27,1999, the licensee stated in Reference 4, that the revised AV for Neutron Flux-High instrument setpoint was calculated based on an analyticallimit of 122 percent RTP instead of 120 percent RTP value used for the current TS Setpoint AV. This change of analytical limit is based on the analysis performed by GE. The licensee stated that the proposed changes to the AVs were calculated using the staff approved instrumentation setpoint methodology documented in NEDC-31336," General Electric
' Instrumentation Setpoint Methodology" and the 122 percent RTP analyticallimit. The staff finds the licensee's justification for the proposed setpoint AV changes to be acceptable.
2.3 ' Summary
- Based on the above review and justifications for TS changes, the staff concludes that the licensee's proposed TS changes are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In_ accordance with the Commission's recul*=, N Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL' CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility
- component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes
i 4
-surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no
. public comment on such finding (64 FR 29711). Accordingly, the amendments meet the I
eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
4 The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there
- is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the nealth and safety of the publ Principal Contributor: 1.Ahmed Date: 0:tober 14,1999 j
i i
l i
l i
A 4
l L
.a '
6.0 REFERENCES
1.
Letter from Garret D. Edwards (PECO Energy) to NRC dated March 2,1998, " Selection of Option lit for Long-Term Solution _"
- 2.
Letter from Garret D. Edwards (PECO Energy) to NRC dated March 1,1999, " Proposed Changes To Peach Bottom Units 2&3 Technical Specifications" 3.
Letter from James A. Hutton, Jr. (PECO Energy) to NRC dated October 1,1999,
" Response to Request for Additional Information" 4.
Letter from James A. Hutton, Jr. (PECO Energy) dated October 6,1999," Supplemental Information" 5.
Letter from NRC to David W. Reigel (GE NUMAC Project) dated September 5,1995,
" Acceptance of Licensing Topical Report NEDC-32410P" i
I i
l
[-