ML20236S182

Application to Amend License NPF-43,revising Tech Spec Table 3.8.4.5-1, Standby Liquid Control Sys Associated Isolation Devices 480 V Motor Control Ctrs, to Remove Two Circuit Breaker Positions from Table.Fee Paid

ML20236S182
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	11/19/1987
From:	Sylvia B DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
Shared Package
ML20236S183	List: ML20236S182 NRC-87-0201, Proposed Tech Specs Changing Table 3.8.4.5-1, Standby Liquid Control Sys Associated Isolation Devices 480 V Motor Control Ctrs
References
NEC-87-0201, NEC-87-201, TAC-66660, NUDOCS 8711240274
Download: ML20236S182 (5)

Text

3

'ss

3. Ralph SyMa Group Vice President

' Detroit. 6

=-

Edison =400M3tthDixieHighway i

1

, Novenber 19, 1987 .j NIC-87-0201 -1 U. S. Wclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk I Washington, D.' C. .20555 j

Reference:

Fermi 2 ;j NIC Docket No. 50-341 ]

NIC License No. NPF-43 1

Subject:

Proposed Technical Specification (License Amendment);

Change - Standby Liquid Control System Associated {

Isolation Devices (3/4.8.4.5) l 1

Pursuant to 10CFR50.90, Detroit Eison Conpany hereby proposes to ,

j amend Operating License WF-43 for the Fermi 2 plant by incorporating j the enclosed changes into Technical Specification 3/4.8.4.5 Standby -

Liquid Control System Associated Isolation Devices.- The proposed change is a removal of two (2) circuit breaker positions from a list of circuit breakers positions identified in Table 3.8.4.5-1 as these positions house incoming lines only and do not contain circuit 1 breakers or interrupters of any kind.

Datroit Eison has evaluated the proposed Technical Specifications j against the criteria of 10CFR50.92 and determined that no significant j hazards consideration is involved. The Fermi 2 Onsite Review '

Organization has approved and the melear Safety Review Group has reviewed these proposed Technical Specification changes arrl concurs with the enclosed determinations. ,!

Pursuant to 10CFR170.12(c), enclosed with this amendment is a check for one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00) . In accordance with 10CFR50.91, Detroit R11 son has provided a copy of this letter to the State of Michigan. '

If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Lewis P. Bregni at (313) 586-4072.

8711240274 871119 Sincerely, ,. q l

PDR ADOCK 05000341 I i

1 Enclosure 1 hI or o d cc: Mr. A. B. Davis Mr. E. G. Greenman I

h/'

Mr. W. G. Rogers -

Mr. J. J. Stefano Supervisor, Advanced Planning and Review Section,

, Michigan Public Service Commission-l

y g - , .

-

y = ;,

n

' . i , ,

e.o ; 1 .

, , , > s i_ . _

' ~? ';

Novenber 19,1987 ..

' ^

- NIC-87-0201-Page 2~

, . I qd L;

' .- i I,. B. MLPH SYLVIA, .do hereby affirm that. the foregoing'. statementsare - <

~,

based on. fs:ts and circumstances which are true 'and accurate to. the. 4 best of my knowledge and-belief..

t

~

M y#

B. RPLPIVS LVJ(

Group Vice-P'esidentr On this day of. ,-1987,.before me personally appeared B. Ralph Sylvia, being first duly sworn and says :

that he executed the foregoing as his free; act and deed. .

, i Notary Public.

MARCIA BUCK - . ..

Notary Public, Washtenaw County, Mt .

My Commission Expires Dec.2%198U WM kV A%A r-i.

n r h. ,

=

Enclosure to NBC-87-0201 Page 1 MCEGR00tO/ DISCUS!MG4 Technical Specification 3/4.8.4.5 - Standby Liquid Control System - 3 Associated Isolation Devices, Table 3.8.4.5-1, currently requires 480V.

Motor Control Center- (MCC) circuit breakers in positions MJC 72B-4C, ,

Position lA (Incoming Feed) and MCC 72E-5B, Position IC . (Incoming -

Line) to be periodically tested. The proposed change would delete.the; two circuit breaker positions from Table 3.8.4.5-1 as these positions: -

l house ircoming lines only and do not contain circuit breakers or -

interrupters of any kind..

]

The Standby Liquid Control System -(SICS) is a special backup system- l that provides an inde~ndent and diverse means for shutting down the reactor from full pow 3x in the event that multiple. failures prevent' the insertion of the control rods. 'Ibe SICS design is conposed of' ij both Class lE and non-Class lE equipment. Subsequent.to the NBC l review of this system (as documented in Safety Evaluation-Report Supplement #5 - NUREG-0798) Detroit Mison proposed Technical Specification 3/4.8.4.5 to ensure the reliability and availability of .

the system by periodic testing of the SICS non-Class lE isolation R devices. The non-Class lE circuit breakers, actuated by fault i currents, are used as isolation devices to protect equipment l associated with the SICS,- The operability requirements of these circuit breakers ensures that the SICS equipment is protected in the -

event of faults in the loads powered by these circuit breakers.. l During a recent Technical Specification surveillance review two circuit breaker positions from Table 3.8.4.5-1 were identified as '

positions not containing circuit breakers or interrupters of any kind. The MDC 72B-4C Position lA and MCC 72E-5B Position IC were verified, by design documents and an as-built walkdown, as positions containing only incoming distribution lines which are serviced upstream by Class 1E circuit breakers. These circuit breaker positions are assumed to have been. incorrectly identified and listed in Table 3.8.4.5-1 when the Technical Specifications were developed and issued. Therefore, as these two circuit breaker positions do not contain circuit breakers or interrupters of any kind Detroit Mison would propose to delete the associated references in Table 3.8.4.5-1. i SIGRIFICANr HMNOS COBEIDERPLTION In accordance with 10CFR50.92, Detroit Edison has made a determination that the proposed amendment involves no significant hazards i considerations. To make this determination, Detroit Edison must establish that operation in accordance with the proposed amendnent :

would not: 1) involve a significant increase in the probability or

~

consequences or .2) any create the' possibility of of an accident a new previously or different evaluated,t kira of acciden from accident l

l Enclosure to NBC-87-0201 i Page 2- j i

previously evaluated, or, 3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. -

1) The proposed change to delete the circuit breaker positions 50C  ;

72B-C, Position IA and 10C 72E-5B, Position 1C from Technical l Specification Table 3.8.4.5-1 does not -involve a significant- l incre.ue in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. %is change irriolves the correction of'an-  !

error in Table 3.8.4.5-1 which identified circuit breaker  ;

positions ICC 72B-4C, Position lA and PKr 72E-5B, Position IC as '

positions that contain 480V PCC circuit breakers for the SECS.

These positions, however, do not contain circuit breakers or interrupters of any kind and. house incoming lines only. The.

change corrects an error in Table 3.8.4.5-1 consistent with design l docunents and the as-built plant and is considered not to. involve  ;

L a significant hazard consideration. As such,'the change meets Exanple (i) of amendnents that are considered not likely to involve Significant Hazards Considerations' (51 FR 7751) . 'In addition, the change does not _ result in any modification to the plant or system operation and no safety-related equilxnent or.

function will be altered.

2) The proposed change to delete the circuit breaker positions MCC 72B-4C, Position lA and MCC 72E-5B, Position 1C from Technical Specification Table 3.8.4.5-1 does not create the possibility.of a  ;

new or different kind of accident from any accident previously. I evaluated. As stated in 1) above, this change corrects an error in Table 3.8.4.5-1 consistent with design documents and the as-built plant. The change does not result in any modifications to the plant or system operation and no safety-related equipnent or function will be altered. The requested change does not create i any new accident mode.  ;

3) The proposed change to delete the circuit breaker positions FCC-  !

72B-4C, Position lA and')CC 72E-5B, Position 1C from Technical Specification Table 3.8.4.5-1 does not involve a significant .;

reduction in a margin of safety as stated in 1), above. I Based on the above reasoning, Detroit B31 son has determined.that the proposed amendnent does not involve a significant hazards consideration.  !

ENVIRutMENmL DESCT Detroit niison has reviewed the proposed Technical Specification changes against the criteria of 10CFR51.22 for environmental considerations. As shown above, the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration, nor significantly change the types or significantly increase' the amounts of effluents that may be released offsite, nor significant occupational radiation exposures. yBased increase individual on the or cunulative foregoing, Detroit Edison concludes that the proposed Technical Specifications do neet l

_ ____-_-___.----.O

Enclosure to tGC-87-0201 Page 3 the criteria given in 10CFR51.22(c) (9) for a categorical exclusion .

from the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement.

CatCES_T0N Based on the evaluations above: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in conpliance with the Canmission's regulations and proposed amendments will not be inimical to' the common defense and security or to the health and safety _of the public.

The change requested herein corrects an error in Table 3.8.4.5-1 consistent with design documents and the as-built plant and as such is like that of Example (i) of amendments that are considered not likely to involve Significant Hazards Considerations (51 FR 7751) .

_ _ - _ _ _