ML20235V669
| ML20235V669 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1987 |
| From: | Taylor J DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235V671 | List: |
| References | |
| LAC-12383, NUDOCS 8710150262 | |
| Download: ML20235V669 (6) | |
Text
_.
., e a'
i' D /DA/RYLAND g h
[a/
COOPERATIVE
- P O BOX 817
- 2615 EAST AVE.SO
- LA CROSSE, WISCONSIN 54602-0817 (608) 788 4000
' JAMES W' TAYLOR
' G!neral Manager September 30, 1987 In reply., please refer to LAC-12383 DOCKET NO. 50-409 Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Washington, DC 20555 Centlemen:
SUBJECT:
'Dairyland Power Cooperative La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR)
Provisional Operating License DPR-45 Applicat ion for Amendment to License l
REFERENCES:
(1)
.10 CFR 50, Section 50.90 (2) 10 CFR 170.12 (3) DPC Letter, Taylor to Docket Control Desk, l
LAC-12234, dated May 22, 1987 (4) NRC Letter, Berkow to Taylor, dated Auguet 4,1987 (5) DPC Letter, Taylor to Document Control Desk, LAC-12333, dated August 21, 1987 (6) DPC Letter, Taylor to Document Control Desk, LAC-12331, dated August 18, 1987 Dairyland Power Cooperative requests revisions to LACW1 Technical Specifications. There fore, in accordance with the provisinns of Reference 1, an application to amend Provisional Operating beense.No. bPR-45 for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor is hereby fi'.ed.
Reference 3 contained a request to amend the plant's license to a possession-only license.
LACBWR was permanently shut down on April 30, 1987.
Reactor defueling was completed June 11, 19fL The NRC issued the possession-only license in Reference 4.
Due to the permanent shutdown, rauny existing Technical Specifications no longer apply.
LACBWR is considereo to be in Operational Condition 4, Cold Shatdown, since the plant is shut down and there is no fuel in tLe rauctor.
Requirements applicable duriug Operational Conditions 1,2, 3 and 5 are now moot.
Also, there are requirements that still apply during operational Condition 4, but should not opply due to the plant's perennent shutdown and G71OJ50262 070930 J
PDR ADOCK 05000409 j
P pps PC4-20a g
Ill J
g..
f 1.7 l E.y a
DocumentL Control Desk i.
LAC-12383, page 3 1
September 30,o1987-
.defueled condition. An example of this situation is tha requirement that the low pressure. core spray mode of the High Pressure. Core Sprar System be Loperable,(Section 4/5.2.24.1).
Implementation of this revision will greatly
- improve the usability of Technien1 Specifications.
. The revisions troposed at this time consist mainly of eliminating some c
requirements that don't or shouldn't apply.- In a couple of cases,.
requirements that no longer apply are changed so they will be required.
Not all.-non-applicable: specifications are being eliminated by this proposali In.
1 some cases,' where requirements that do and don't apply are intertwined, both are being left in at this time. contains the current specifications'that arc affected by this revision request, the proposed changes,.and justifications for each change.
~-The sections that are being eliminated because they do not apply.are:
-4.0,2.1.1. 4.0.2.1.3, 4.0.2.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.5, 4.1.6, 4.2.2.9, 4/5.2.2.5,
'4.2.2.9 4.2.2.10, 4.2.2.11, 4.2.2.12, 4.2.2.13, 4.2.2.19, 4.2.2.20, 4/5.2.2.21, 4.2.3. 1 1, 5.2.11.5, 4.2.4.2, 4.2.4.4, 4.2.4.5, 4.2.4.6, 4.2.4.7,
- 4.2.4.8, 4.2.4.9, 4.2.5, 4.2.6.4, 4.2.6.5, 4.2.G.6, 4.2.6.7r 4.2.6.9,
~4.2.8.4,'4'5.2.21 4/5.2.22, 4/5.2.23,-4/.5'2.24,2, 4/5.2.24;3, 4/5.5.1, 5.1.3, 5~i.6. 5.2.12, 5.2.1'3, 5.2.14,.6.2.2.c, 6,2.2.g, and 6.2.3.
The sections which are being deleted becaure they should not apply are:
- 4. 0. 2~ 1. 3. 4. 0. 2.1. 4,. 4/5 L 2. 4, 4. 2. 2. 6, 4 2. 2. 7, 4. 2. 2. 8, 4. 2. 2.17, 4.2.2.22, 5.2.16, 4/5.2.24.1, 4/5.2.24.4, 4/5.3.2.5, 5.2.4, 5.2.5, 5.2.6, 5.2.9 and 5.2.16.
Section 5.l c7 is being deleted because it is redundant end on the same page as unother change.
The sections which are being uodified to remove portions that do not apply are:
-4.0.1, 4.2.1.1, 4/5.2.1.10, 4.2 2.2, 4.2.6.1, 4.2.6.2, 4.2.6.3, 4.2.6.8, Table 4.3,.2.1 (an exieting reference error was also~ corrected),
Table 5.3.2.1, 6,1,1, 5.2.1.2.(e), Minimum Frequencies for Testing, Calibrating, and/or Checking of Instrumentation Table, Table 1, 6.2.2.h, and Table 6.2.2-1.
The sections which are being modified to make them morn str;ingent or applicable under existing conditions are 5.1.2 and 5.2.2.1 contains the proposed modified Technical Specification pnges.. Reference 5 was a Technical Specification revision request which also affected pages 5-2 and 5-4.
Reference 6 affected page 6-1 of the Technical Specifications.
r r
- FindiIng of No Significant Hazards l
We have reviewed the hazards considerations referenced in 10 CPR 50 Sections 01 and 92'and have determined that, with these criteria, no s Caificant hazards considerr.tions' result from this proposed amendment.
h PC4-20a
m,.
c y; g
s t
- s i
<[ Document' Control Desk'
' LAC-12383L page'3 Sertember 30, 1987
' 1'.
Operation-of.LACBWR in accordance with the proposed amendment will'not involve'a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an'
'i n.
. accident previously evaluated.
0 The majorit'y of changes and deletions are of items that are no longer I l applicable.
These changes and deletions cannot affect the probability' or consequences of any type of accident.
The changes which make previous requirements applicable under the existing conditions also
'j cannot affect the probability or consequence of any type of accident'.
One of these dealt with controls over plant activities, the other j
changed a test requirement to be every 18 months rather than prior to cold startups. 'Also, the deletion of Section 5.1.7, which contained redundant'information to the Definition Section (4.0.1) cannot affect any accident probability or consequence.
'{'l
- The sections which are being deleted because they are no longer necessary under the current plant conditions include 4.0.2.1.3 and
- 4.0.2.1.4.
These.are the high reactor pressure and low reactor' water.
< 1 eve 1~ safety limits..Since the reactor is permanently shut.down and defueled, elimination of-these limits cannot increase the probability or
]
consequences of an accident.
Section 4/5.2.2.4 covers reactor vessel j
temperature and pressure limits.
Again, since the plant is permanently shut downiand defueled, deletion of1these limits cannot increase the probability or consequcaces of an accident.
Sections 4.2.2.6, 4.2.2.7, and 4.2.2.8 deal with ~operaison of the forced circulation valves arid pumps. Since the reactor is permanently shut down and defueled, the valves and pumpe can no longer affect reactivity or power and so elimi-nation of these sections cannot. increase the probability or consequence of a' previously arialyzed accident.
Section 4.2.2.17 tequires operabil-ity of the boron injection system.
The only condition that could possibly be' interpreted to apply during current conditions is that
. operability is required whenever all control rods aren t fully inserted.
Since the reactor la defueled, there is no need for boron even if control rods are withdrawn.
Therefore, elimination of this requirement cannot increase the probability or consequences of an accident pre--
= viously analyzed.
- Section 4.2.2.22 established radioactivity limits for reactor coolant
- arid ofigns, while 3.2.16 established surveillance requirements.
Their purpose'was to detect fuel degradation.
Since the reactor is defueled, sampling the primary ecolant would not provide any information on fuel y
condition.
Therefore, elimination of this specification cannot affect l
the probability or consequences of my accident.
Section 4/5.2.24.1 covers the High Pressure Core Spray System (UpCS) and
- 4/5.2.24.4 established the requirement for the Overhead Storage Tank l
(OilST) as the source of water for HPCS.
The low pressure core spray 1
PC4-20a J
y l'
2 Document ~ Control Desk z
LAC-12383 page.4 September 30, 1987 mode 'ofLIIpCS and the OHST ure required tc) be operable during Condition.4.
Since the reactor is defueled, there is no need or use for an emergency core' cooling system.
Therefore, elimination of these-specifications will not affect the probability or consequences of an accident..
Section 4.3.2.5 establishes the operability requirements of the Gaseous Radwaste System.
This specification applies whenever the main condenser air ejector system is in operation.
The air ejectors will never be used Lfor their design function again, but it is possible that pathway may be used as a vent. Since no reactor offgas is being generated'with the reactor shut 'down and defueled, there is no need for the Gaseous
~Radwaste System and there would be no effect on the probability or consequences of 'an accident if its operability requirement is deleted.
Section;5.2.4 states that the reactor vessel shall be hydrostatically tested'at 1400 psig after any of its gasketed joints have been opened and resealed.
Since the plant is permanently shut d9wn, elimination of l:
this test will not increase the probability or consequences of an 1:>
accident.
i i.
Sections 5.2.5, 5.2.6, and 5.2.9 establish surveillance requirements on
.)
systems.that are not or should not be required to be operable, i.e.
forced circulation, shutdown condenser and boron injection.
Since these systems are not needed to prevent or mitigate an accident during the i
permanent shutdown and defueled status, deleting their surveillance I
requirements will not affect accident probability or consequences, i
Section-5.2.16 covers corrosion test coupons in the forced circulation system.
Since the plant is permanently shut down and defueled, 3
elimination of this specification will not increase the probability or i
consequence of any accident.
I For these reasons, it can be concluded that none of the proposed changes involves any increate in the probability or consequences of an accident previously ana'lyzed.
I 2.
Operation of LACBWR in accordance with thn preposed amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Since this proposed amendamnt consists mainly of deletion of requirements that don't or shouldn't apply, it doesn't affect the probability of any kind of accident.
No new mode of operation is created by any of the changes in this package, and so the proposed amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
~
accident from any previously evaluated.
i pC4-20a 1
I Document Control Desk LAC-12383' page G Geptember 30, 1987 il 1
3.-
Operation of LACBWR in accordance with the proposed amendment will not
' involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
l Since the revisions proposed by this amendment mainly consist of deleting requirements that don't apply or are not necessary for a plant that has been permanently shutdown and defueled, the margin of safety is j
not b ing reduced.
The 2 changes that make previous requirements applicable under existing conditions can only enhance the margin of i
safety, not reduce it.
The editorial changes (the correction of the incorrect reference and elimination of redundant definitions) do not affect the margin of safety at all.
For these reasons, this proposed l
amendment will not involve a significant reduction in the margin of
)
safety.
t As determined by the analysis above, this amer.dment has no significant i
hazards consideration.
l The license amendment has been reviewed by the appropriate review committees, i
The application fee required by Reference 2 for processing a license anendment or exemption request is enclosed.
If there are any questions, please contact us.
Sincerely, DAIRYLAND POWER C00pERATI E,
/
l James W. Taylor, Ge seral Manager j
f JWT:LSG:dh Enclosures i
cc:
Mr. A. Bert Davis l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
Region III Mr. Peter B. Erickson, LACBWR Project Manager Divisi.on of Nuclear Reactor Regulations U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC Resident Inspector l
Pc4-20a l
J 1
A-
)
i I
Document'C'ntrol Desk o
LAC-12383
'page G
]
September 30, 198_7 l
cc:
(cont'd)
.j i
Mr
.L.
L. Smith, Director Electric'and Water Bureau Wisconsin Public Service Commission i
P. O. Box 7054 Madison, WI. 53707 j
I l
l I
STATE OF W MCONSIN )
l
)
-COUNTY OF LA CROSSE )
1 Personally came'before mo this d day of 6
, 1967, the above named, James Taylor, to me known to be the person who executed the j
foregoing instrument and acknowledged th^ same.
/
Nctary Publicl/La Crosse County Wisconsin My conunission expires 2 ((__/ '
l I4 l
t-l-
I i
j PC4-20a