ML18092A706

Application for Amend to Licenses DPR-70 & DPR-75,changing Tech Specs to Revise Surveillance Requirement 4.8.2.3.2e to Delete Performance of Two Separate Tests of Batteries During Certain Plant Shutdowns.Fee Paid

ML18092A706
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	08/06/1985
From:	Corbin McNeil Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML18092A707	List: ML18092A706 ML18092A708
References
LCR-85-14, NUDOCS 8508160241
Download: ML18092A706 (4)

Text

Public Service Electric and Gas Company Corbin A. McNeill, Jr. Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Han cocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609 339-4800 Vice President -

Nuclear August 6, 1985 Ref: LCR 85-14 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Off ice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Division of Licensing Washington, D. c. 20555 Attention: Mr. Steven A. Varga; Chief Operating Reactors Branch 1 Division of Licensing Gentlemen:

REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES DPR-70 AND DPR-75 UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 SALEM GENERATING STATION DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 In accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended and the regulations thereunder, we hereby transmit copies of our request for amendment and our analyses of the changes to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-70 and DPR-75 for Salem Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2.

This amendment request consists of changes to surveillance testing of the batteries.

In accordance with the fee requirements of 10CFR170.21, a check in the amount of $150.00 is enclosed.

(, -.

• P~BR'fl. 16Anoe~

0241 osooo2:72 aso~6----:--~ .: . ,

. PDR I

. .

Mr. Steven A. Varga 8-6-85 Pursuant to the requirements of lOCRFS0.91, a copy of this request for amendment has been sent to the State of New Jersey as indicated below.

This submittal includes three (3) signed originals and forty (40) copies.

Sincerely, Enclosure C Mr. Donald c. Fischer Licensing Project Manager Mr. Thomas J. Kenny Senior Resident Inspector Mr. Samuel J. Collins, Chief Projects Branch No. 2, DPRP Region 1 Mr. Frank Cosolito, Acting Chief Bureau of Radiation Protection Department of Environmental Protection 380 Scotch Road Trenton, N.J. 08628 Honorable Charles M. Oberly, III Attorney General of the State of Delaware Department of Justice 820 North French Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801

Ref: LCR 85-14 STATE OF NEW JERSEY )

) SS.

COUNTY OF SALEM )

Corbin A. McNeill, Jr., being duly sworn according to law deposes and says:

I am a Vice President of Public Service Electric and Gas Company, and as such, I find the matters set forth in our letter dated August 6, 1985, concerning our Request for Amendment to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-70 and DPR-75, are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.

Subscribed and Sworn to before me this (cz TI4 day of l).uG.LJ..'51 , 1985

~pklk#.!/f My Commission expires on

• e PROFOSED CHANGE 1D TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS SALEM UNIT NOS. 1 & 2 Ref: LCR 85 - 14 Description of Change Revise Surveillance Requirement 4.8.2.3.2.e to read as per the attached revised pages for toth Salem units. This change will remove the requirement for performinJ two separate tests of the batteries durin.J certain plant shutdowns and allON the satisfactory i;erformance of the rrore stringent of the two tests to satisfy the surveillance requirements for both the 18 rronth and the 60 month tests on those occasions where the 60 month tes*t is performed.

Reason for Change Performance of the Battery Service Test durin.J those outages where the 60 rronth Battery Capacity Discharge Test is also performed adds up to an extra week to the outage schedule. On an 18 month cycle, the battery service tests are OJmpleted on each of the batteries; but, on approximately every third outage, the Service Test is accanplished, the battery is recharged, and the battery is then subjected to the full Capacity Discharge Test, which is far more demandinJ on the battery than the Service Test.

Significant Hazards Consideration Evaluation The purpose of the service Test is to demonstrate the ability of the battery to satisfy the design requirements (battery duty cycle) of the r:x:

system, that is, the ability to support the equip:nent important to safety for a specific time period; the battery is sized during the plant design stages to have the capacity to perform this function.

The purpose of the Capacity Discharge Test is to shav that the battery is still within an acceptable i;ercentage of the original design capacity, which was initially demonstrated in the Battery Acceptance Test.

Since the Battery Capacity Discharge Test demonstrates that the battery is still within acceptable limits relative to its original design, this test also demonstrates, unless a significant change to the DC systen has been made during subsequent plant operation (and that change would have been evaluated in tenns of 10CFRS0.59), that the battery can also satisfy the original design duty cycle.

The proposed change in testing will have no appreciable impact on the operability of the batteries. *In that there is no significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously analyzed, there is no new accident created for which no analysis was performed, and no margin of safety is significantly reduced, we have determined that this change involves no significant hazards consideration.