RBG-26394, Application for Amend to License NPF-47,revising Tech Specs to Reflect Total Predicted Structural Settlement for G Tunnel Settlement Marker 34 & E Tunnel Settlement Marker 28. Fee Paid

Application for Amend to License NPF-47,revising Tech Specs to Reflect Total Predicted Structural Settlement for G Tunnel Settlement Marker 34 & E Tunnel Settlement Marker 28. Fee Paid

ML20237J331
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	08/05/1987
From:	Deddens J GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
Shared Package
ML20237J333	List: ML20237J343 RBG-26394, Application for Amend to License NPF-47,revising Tech Specs to Reflect Total Predicted Structural Settlement for G Tunnel Settlement Marker 34 & E Tunnel Settlement Marker 28. Fee Paid
References
RBG-26394, NUDOCS 8708180101
Download: ML20237J331 (8)

Text

-. - . - - - _ - _ - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - . _ _ - _ - _ _ - - _ _ -

v2

[$'

1 O

G UKaF STATES UTEX:ITIES COMPANY \

RivtR BIND STAflON ' POST OFFICE BOX 220 St FRANCISVlLLE LOUISLANA 70776 AREA CODE 604 636< 60904 346-B651 August 5, 1987 RBG- 26394 File Nos. G9.5, G9.25.1.4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:

River Bend Station - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-458 Gulf States Utilities-(CSU) hereby files an application for an amendment to the River Bend Station Unit'l Technical Specifications, Appendix A to Facility -Operating . License NPF-47, pursuant to 10CFR50.90. This application is filed to revise the total predicted structural settlement for- the" G Tunnel Settlement Marker' No. 34 and for the'E Tunnel Settlement Marker No. 28. The Attachment contains the justifications and' proposed revisions to the. River Bend Station Technical Specifications.

Pursuant to 10CFR170.12, GSU has enclosed a check in the amount of one-hundred and fifty dollars: ($150.00) for the license amendment application fee. Your prompt attention to' this . application is appreciated.

Sincerely,

< ~

J. C. Deddens Senior Vice President River Bend Nuclear Group JCD/ ERG / /DAS/ch Attachment i

1 D

BIBO B7 g g P

l h,f W C/[CCfC k/II  ;

L --- - - _ --- - - - - - -_ --- - - -

(IEED S1RTES T NERICA NUCIJRR RBGULMORY CCMESSICN STME T IOUISINR

• PARISH T WEST FELICIANA

• In the Matter of

• Docket Nos. 50-458 GUIE STMES ITIILITIES 03EPANY *

(River Bend Station,

' Unit 1)

AFFIDAVIT J. C. Deddens, being duly sworn, states that he is a Senior Vice President of Gulf States Utilities Canpany; that he is authorized on the part of said Company to sign and file with the Nuclear Begulatory Camission the documents attached hereto; and that all such dom.wents am true and correct to the best of his haledge, information and belief.

Nr AYuw J. C4'Deddeds l

Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the State and and Parish above named, this day of

//,/j/Fyk,1

/5fec . .

'A' / C+ Y

• /,Joan W. Middlebrooks Notary Public in and for l

West Feliciana Parish, Inuisiana My Ca mission is for Life.

l l

t

cc: Mr. Robert D. Martin, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, TX 76011 NRC Senior Resident Inspector P.O. Box 1051 St. Francisville, LA 70775 Mr. William H. Spell, Administrator Nuclear Energy Division Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 14690 Baton Rouge, LA 70898 l

_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _J

I ATTACHMENT l

GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY RTVER-BEND STATION DOCKET 50-458/ LICENSE NO. NPF-47 STRUCTU'RAL SETTLEMENT LICENSING DOCUMENT INVOLVED: ,

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ITEMS: Table 3.7.10-1 '

PAGE 3/4 7-36 REASON FOR REQUEST 1

Technical Specification 3.7.10, Structural Settlement, idble 3.7.10-1, Total Predict ( d Settlement of Major Structures, G Tunnel, Settlement Marker No. 34, currently indicatesatotalpfedictedsettlementof This change request would change the totgr predicted settlement fo,0.4 inches.Settlement r G Tunnel, Marker No. 34, to 1.3 inches. The initial ass 9taption for Marker No. 34 regarding predicted observardons has been determined to be overly conservative as discussed in Final Safety An'. lysis Report Se'c tion 2.5.4.13.2.2. ,

River Bend Station is currently in coup 11ance with the associated Technical Specification ACTION statement. This ACTION statement requires that a Special Report be submitted to the Commission providing a record of the settlement measuremerks and the predicted settlement, an analysis to demonstrate the continued' structural integrity of the affected structure, and plans to monitor the settlement of 7the 'affected a'tkucture in the future.

F~~h reports have been submitted quhrterly begstAing September 27, 1985.

Upon NRC approval of this proposed amendment, dulf Stat <,s, Utilities Company will be able to discontiene the submittal of these quartatly Special Reports.

,/ \ s A review of the decign calcui'ation for. structural settlement has revealed a discrepancy between this ' calculation and the River Bend Station Technical Specifications and Final Safety Analysis Report. Therefore, this change request would also change the total prcdicted settlement for E Tunnel, SettlementMarkerNo.28,from3.8inchesto3.3{cches.

DESCRIPTION , l

, J The bases for this Techrtcal Specification is primarily to monitor differential structural settlement to dqtermine adverse effects on piping running between structures and to preserve the assumptions made on the static design of major safety related structures. As~ discussed in Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Section 2.5.4.12)2.2, the original prediction of total settlement at Marker No. 34 was based on the assumption that the location of the marker had settled before readings were initiated due to loads imposed in adjacent areas. On this assumptfon,3 the prediction at Marker No. 34 was adjusted based on observations at Marktr' No. 32, -(Standby Se rvice Water Tower) which is the closest marker to Marker No. 34. Marker No. 32 is i approximately 150 feet away from and much more heavily loaded than Marker No. l

34. The initial asbumption regarding prefleted obse rva tions has been determined to be overly conseiNhtive as 91reussed in FSAR Section 2.5.4.13.2.2. '

1 l

\

l J

en . .

'I ATTACIDENT (con't)

'As discussed above, a review of Geotechnical Calculation No. G(C)-232, y, Revision 2,-has revealed a discrepancy between this calculation and River T>3 0 Bend Station Technical: Specification Table 3.7.10.1, and FSAR Table 2.5-19 for -

'E Tunnel, Settlement Marker No. 28. The Technical Specification tab?.e and FSAR table currently. indicate a total predicted settlement for Marker No. 28 of 3.8 inches. However, the calculation indicates a total predicted settlement of 3.33 inches. This discrepancy has apparently occurred due to a transcription error in the original. development of the FSAR.

A review of the latest Surveillance Test Procedure results' from 4/23/87 indicates that Marker No. 28 has settled 2.02 inches, vt:11 below the settlemeEt of 3.3. inches predicted by the design calculation.

NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION 'l N

As discussed in 1 NCER50.92, the fo11 ewing determinations are provided to the NRC Staff in support of a "no significant hazards consideration".

1. No significant increase in the probability or the consequences of an accident previously evaluated results from this change because:

This change in predicted settlement to 1.3 inches for Marker No. 34 is based on actual observation and comparison and remains well within the previously evaluated design envelope of 1.32 inches. Additionally, no adverse differential settlement has occurred betveen the G Tunnel and the Unit 1 Fuel Building.

Settlement readings at most markers, excluding Marker No. 34, have 3

indicated approximately 60% of their total predicted values. If this were also the case at Marker No. 34, a total settlement of 1.3 inches would be expected. The total settlement as calculated for Marker No. 34 in the original analysis (before adjustment for construction schedule) is.

1.32 inches. Since receiving an operating license on August 29, 1985, quarterly settlement measurements for Marker No. 34 have indicated 0.85, 0.84, 0.91, 0.94, 0.99, 1.03, 0.99 and 1.01 inches, respectively. No abnormal . indications have occurred. Additionally, Marker No. 32 (which the adjustment to Marker No. 34 was based on) had settled 79% of its total predicted value (more than the 60% average) primarily due to the structure size and a bearing pressure of approximately 2.25 times that of a Marker No. 34. This factor also influenced the overly conservative

• adjustment made to Marker No. 34 Marker No. 35 is located at the unconstricted Unit 2 end (west) of the G  ;

Tunnel (see FSAR Figure 2.5-106a). Therefore, it is of no concern with  !

respect to differential settlement. However, data from other comparible markers (i.e. 1 Marker No. 33 at the east end of the G ' Tunnel) indicates j that no adverse differential settlement has occurred and settlement has i remalned within the Technical Specification allowable ranges. Therefore,  !

modification of the predicted settlement for Marker No. 34 will not adversely impact these design assumptions.  ;

2

__ _~_-

ATTACIDENT (con't)

The change from 3.8 inches to 3.3 inches for Marker No. 28 is in accordance with the design calculations. This change will provide for a more conservative limit on the settlement allowed at this marker. The change- to 3.3 inches for Marker No. 28 will make the Technical

,. Specifications agree with the design calculations as originally l performed. The surveillance test procedure is being revised to incorporate the more conservative administrative total eettlement limit of 3.3 inches until revised in the Technical-Specification.

This change does not involve a design change or physical change to the plant,. and does not alter the initial assumptions made in the static design of major safety related structures as defined in tae ' Technical Specification bases. Thus, there is no significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.

2. This change would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated because:

This change in predicted settlement for Marker No. 34 remains within the previously evaluated design' envelope of 1.32 inches and does not involve a design change or physical change to the plant.

The G Tunnel contains safety-related piping for the Standby Cooling Tower. The G Tunnel was to be used to interconnect the Standby Service Water loops of River Bend Station Units 1 and 2. However, since Unit 2 has been' cancelled, the piping running to Unit 2 has been terminated near the Unit 1 Standby Cooling Tower. Thus, there is no safety-related equipment within at least 150 feet of settlement Marker No. 34 in the west end of the G Tunnel which could be affected.

The change to 3.3 inches for Marker No. 28 is in accordance with the original design calculations. These changes do not involve a design change or physical change to the plant, and do not alter the initisi assumptions made in the static design of major safety related structures as defined in the Technical Specification bases.

Thus, no new accident scenario is introduced by this change of total predicted settlement to 1.3 inches for Marker No. 34 or to 3.3 inches for Marker No. 28,

3. This change would not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety because:

The predicted settlement is based on actual observation and compartoon with other markers. Revising the prediction for Marker No. 34 ensures consistency with the predicted values of other markers and remains within the previously evaluated design envelope of 1,32 inches. No adverse differential settlement has occurred between the G Tunnel and the Unit 1 Fuel Building. Calculations for Marker No. 32 show that the structural bearing load is approximately 2.25 times that of Marker No.

3

f>

• I ATTACHMENT (con't) 34's structure. 'This- conservatism, plus the fact that most major settlement occurs within *he first few years, suggests that the remaining predicted structural settlement will be. consistent with the proposed 1.3 inches.' The change to 3.3 inches for Marker No. 28-is in accordance with the original design' calculations and is conservative with respect to the current . value .- These changes do not involve a. design change or physical change to the plant, and do not alter the initial assumptions made in the static design- ofL major safety related.: structures is defined in the Technical Specification bases. Additionally, the Technical Specification bases ~do not define any margin of safety for structural settlement.

Thus, the margin of safety is not significantly-reduced.

REVISED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION The requested revision is provided in the Enclosure.

SCHEDULE FOR' ATTAINING COMPLIANCE

'Although River Bend Station currently measures actual settlement'in excess of

-the Technical Specification limit for Marker No. 34, River Bend Station is in compliance with the associated. Technical Specification ACTION statement.

This ACTION statement requires that a Special Report be' submitted to the Commission providing a record of the settlement measurements- and the predicted settlement, an analysis to demonstrate the ' continued structural integrity' of the affected structure, and plans to monitor the settlement of the affected structure in the future. Such reports have been submitted ouarterly beginning September 27, 1985. Therefore, River Bend Station is currently in compliance with the applicable Technical Specification.

NOTIFICATION OF STATE PERSONNEL A copy of this submittal has been provided'.to the State of Louisiana, Department of Environmental Quality - Nuclear Energy Division.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL Revision of this Technical Specification does not result in an environmental impact beyond that previously analyzed. Therefore, approval of this amendment- does not result in n significant environmental impact nor does it change any previous environmental impact statements for River Bend Station.

4 l i_____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . . - _ 1

l ENCLOSURE I

l l

l I