ML17326B283

Application for Amend to License DPR-58,extending Time for Performance of Surveillance of Ice Basket Weighings Until Upcoming Refueling Outages.Response Requested by 870507.Fee Paid

ML17326B283
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	02/10/1987
From:	ALEXICH M P INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML17326B284	List: ML17326B283 ML17326B285
References
AEP:NRC:0967H, AEP:NRC:967H, NUDOCS 8702180391
Download: ML17326B283 (10)

Text

ACCESSION NBR:FACIL:50-315AUTH.NAMEALEXICH>J"t.P.RECIP.NAI'lE-REGULATORY "FORMATION DISTRIBUTION

'SY.El't;<RIDS)8702180391 DOC.DATE:87/02/10NOTARIZED:

NODOCKET5DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPiantiUnitiiIndiana005000315AUTHORAFFILIATIONIndiana8rNichiganElectricCo.RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DocumentControlBranch(Document'bntrol Desk)

SUBJECT:

Application foramendtoLicenseDPR-58'xtending timeforperformance ofsurveillance oficebasketveighings untilupcomingrefueling outages.Responserequested,bg.870507.

Feepaid.DIBTRIBUTIDN CODE:AOOIDCDPIEBRECEIVED:

LTRIENCL3SIZE:LO~+TITLE:QRSubmittal:

GeneralDistribution NOTES:RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAJ'JE Pl/R-AEBPWR-AFOBPWR-APD4PD04PWR-APSBINTERNAL:

ADN/LFl'1B NRR/TSCB01COPIESLTTRENCL1115510111RECIPIENT IDCODE/NANE PWR-AEICSBPWR-APD4LAWIGGINQTONz DPWR-ARSBELD/HDS3NRR/GRASCOPIESLTTRENCL22101111010EXTERNAL:

EQMBRUSKE~SNRCPDR02111LPDRNSIC0305'083-OQklTOTALNUBBERQFCOPIESREQUIRED:

LTTR22ENCL18 lg,tttItI, INDIANA8MICHIGANELECTRICCOMPANYP.O.BOX16631COLUMBUS, OHIO43216February10,1987AEP:NRC:0967H DonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnitNo.1DocketNo.50-315LicenseNo.DPR-58ICECONDENSER SURVEILLANCE INTERVALEXTENSION FORUNIT1CYCLE9U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Attn:DocumentControlDeskMashington, D.C.20555

DearSirs:

Thisletteranditsattachments constitute anapplication foramendment totheTechnical Specifications (T/Ss)fortheDonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnitNo.1.Specifically, wearerequesting anextension untiltheupcomingrefueling outageforperformance ofthesurveillances requiredbyT/Ss4.6.5.1.b.2 and4.6.5.1.b.3, concerning icebasketweighings andflowpassageinspections.

Theicecondenser surveillances arerequiredtobeperformed byMay10,1987.However,thebeginning oftheUnit1Cycle9-10refueling outagehasbeendelayeduntilafterthisdateforreasonsthatweredescribed inourletterAEP:NRC:0967D, datedOctober1,'1986.Mecurrently anticipate thatwewillneedtheextension untiltheendofMay.Thesesurveillances canonlybeperformed duringshutdown; therefore, toavoidunnecessary shutdownoftheplant,weaskthatyourreviewofthisrequestbeperformed onanexpedited basisandthatyourespondtousbyMay5,1987.Thereasonsfortheproposedchange,adiscussion ofalternatives tosubmittal ofthisT/Schangerequest,andouranalysisconcerning significant hazardsconsiderations arecontained inAttachment 1tothisletter.TheproposedrevisedTechnical Specification pageiscontained inAttachment 2.Asummaryoftheicecondenser iceweightcalculations doneinsupportofthisextension requestisincludedinAttachment 3.Adrawingillustrating theicecondenser bayandrow-group orientation iscontained inAttachment 4.Attachment 2alsocontainstworevisedT/Spages(3/43-56and3/45-5)foroursubmittal AEP:NRC:0967F, datedJanuary16,1987.TheseT/SpagesdidnotincludetheT/Srevisions issuedinAmendment 100.ThepagesenclosedinAttachment 2tothisletterincludetherevisions ofthisamendment.

Byinclusion ofthesepagesinthisletter,wearerequesting thatyousubstitute theT/Spages3/43-56and3/45-5forthesimilarpageswhichwereincludedinAEP:NRC:0967F.

SincenoT/Schangesareincludedonpages3/43-56and3/45-5otherthanthosecitedinAEP:NRC:0967F, wehaveconcluded thatnonewjustification per10CFR50.92isrequired.

187OZaO(87oz>8go5ooo~RAQOCpDgaly(,r0.0>

~~AEP:NRC:0967H Webelievethattheproposedchangewillnotresultin(1)asignificant changeinthetypesofeffluents orasignificant increaseintheamountsofanyeffluentthatmaybereleasedoffsite,or(2)asignificant increaseinindividual orcumulative occupational radiation exposure.

TheseproposedchangeshavebeenreviewedbythePlantNuclearSafetyReviewCommittee (PNSRC)andwillbereviewedbytheNuclearSafetyandDesignReviewCommittee (NSDRC)attheirnextregularly scheduled meeting.Incompliance withtherequirements of10CFR50.91(b)(1),

copiesofthisletteranditsattachments havebeentransmitted toMr.R.C.CallenoftheMichiganPublicServiceCommission andMr.G.Bruchmann oftheMichiganDepartment ofPublicHealth.Pursuantto10CFR170.12(c),

wehaveenclosedanapplication feeof$150.00fortheproposedamendments.

Thisdocumenthasbeenpreparedfollowing Corporate procedures whichincorporate areasonable setofcontrolstoinsureitsaccuracyandcompleteness priortosignature bytheundersigned.

Verytrulyyours,cmM.P.AlexchVicePresident P"tnggg(llAttachments cc:JohnE.DolanW.G.Smith,Jr.-BridgmanR.C.CallenG.Bruchmann G.CharnoffNRCResidentInspector

-BridgmanJ.G.Keppler-RegionIII ATTACHHENT 1TOAEP:NRC:0967H REASONS,DESCRIPTION OFALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED, AND10CFR50.92ANALYSISFORCHANGETOTHEDONALDC.COOKNUCLEARPLANTUNIT1TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS I,KAttachment 1toAEP:C:0967HReasonsforT/SChangeRequestandDiscussion ofAlternatives Wearerequesting anextension ofthesurveillance intervalfortheicecondenser icebasketweighings andflowpassageinspections requiredbyT/Ss4.6.5.1.b.2 and4.6.5.1.b.3.

WerequestthatafootnotebeaddedtotheseT/SswhichstatesthatSpecification 4.0.6applies.Theseicecondenser surveillances arerequiredtobeperformed byMay10,1987.Currently therefueling outageisscheduled tobeginattheendofMay1987.Therefore thelengthofthisextension isshortcomparedtotheoveralllengthofthesurveillance interval.

.Inthepastfivesurveillances (performed inApril1985,June1985,September 1985,December1985,andJune198'6)'allicebasketweightsforbaysandrow-groups havemettheacceptance criteriaofT/S4.6.5.1.b.2.

Thissurveillance historyshowsthatmaintaining therequirediceweighthasnotbeenaproblem,andtherefore webelievethattheicecondenser willhavesufficient iceweighttoperformitssafetyfunctionduringtheextension period.Inadditiontothesurveillance history,wehaveperformed calculations oftheicelossduetosublimation thatalsosupportourbeliefthatthisextension willnotimpacttheabilityoftheicecondenser toperformitssafetyfunction.

Thesecalculations, whicharesummarized inAttachment 3,showthatinmid-July1987allbutthreebaysandthreerow-groups areexpectedtocontainatleast1220poundsoficeatthelower95percentconfidence levelasrequiredbyT/S4.6.5.l.b.2.

Theicecondenser totaliceweightisexpectedtobewellovertheminimumof2,371,450 poundsrequiredbyT/S4.6.5.1.b.2.

Thecalculations usedknowniceweightsEromthebeginning ofthissurveillance intervalandextrapolated expectedicebasketweightsbasedontheaverageicelossutilizing dataEromthepastfiveiceweighings foreachbayandrowgroup.Allcalculations wereperformed basedonaverageexpectedicelossandtheminimumexpectedatthelower95percentconfidence levelthroughatleastJuly1,1987'moredetaileddescription ofthesecalculations iscontained inAttachment 3.Theexpectedvaluesforthethreebaysandthethreerow-groups thatmayfallbelowtheT/Slimitof1220poundsperbasketarebay1(1202pounds),bay7(1155pounds),bay24(1134pounds),row1group2(1212pounds),row4group3(1206pounds),androw9group3(1162pounds).Whilethesebaysandrow-groups mightfallbelowtheT/Slimit,theyareallabovethe1098poundsstatedinthebasesastheminimumacceptable weight(BasespageB3/46-4).Thesebasesstatethat"Theminimumweightfigureof1220poundsoficeperbasketcontainsa10percentconservative allowance foricelossthroughsublimation."

Thisstatement indicates thatthepurposeofthe1220poundsurveillance limitistoensureaminimumiceweightof1098poundsattheendoEthesurveillance interval.

Therefore webelievethatsinceallbaysandrow-groups areexpectedtohaveicebasketweightswellover1098pounds(withmostbaysandrow-groups havingicebasketweightsover1220pounds),theicecondenser hassufficient capability toperEormitssafetyfunctionduringtherequested extension period.

0I' Attachment 1toAEP.C:0967HPage2T/Ssrequirevisualinspections ofthelatticeframes,theintermediate andtopdeckfloorgratings, thelowerinletplenumsupportstructures andturningvanes,andatleasttwoflowpassagesperbay.Overhalfoftheseareasmustbeinspected fromlowercontainment, andtherefore thiscannotbedoneatpowerduetoALARAconsiderations.

IEightvisualinspections havebeenperformed sinceJuly1982.Sincethattime,twoinspections failedtheT/Sacceptance

criteria, thefirstinOctober1983andthesecondinJuly1985.Inbothcasestheproblemconsisted ofblockedflowpassagescausedbymaintenance ontheicebeds.Frequently wheniceisbeingreplenished intheicebaskets,chipsoficeandfrostaredispersed throughout theicecondenser.

Inbothcasestheunsuccessful inspections wereperformed priortopost-maintenance clean-up.

4Following post-maintenance

cleaning, thesurveillances resultswereacceptable.

Bothsurveillance failuresresultedfrommaintenance thatwasperformed inModes5or6andwascorrected beforetheplantenteredMode4.Therefore atnotimeweretheflowpassagesblockedwhentheicecondenser wasrequiredtobeoperable(Modes1through4).Itisimportant tonotethatnofailureshavebeenexperienced ininspections oftheicecondenser inthe"as-found" condition following poweroperation.

Thissurveillance historysupportsourbeliefthattheextension ofthevisualinspection willnotsignificantly impacttheabilityoftheicecondenser toperformitssafetyfunction.

Portionsofboththevisualinspections andtheicebasketweighings canbedoneatpower.Thevisualinspection ofthetopportionsoftheflowpassagesandlatticeframes,aswellastheintermediate andtopdeckfloorgratings, canbedoneatpower.AllicebasketsexceptthoseinRows1and9canbeweighedatpower.Row1islocatedclosesttothecontainment wall,andRow9islocatedclosesttothecranewall(seedrawinginAttachment 4).Theseicebasketscannotbeweighedbecausetheybecom'efrozeninplace(eventhoughnoiceorfrostcanbeseenandtheflowpassagesremainclear)andmustbefreedfromthebottom.ThiscannotbedoneatpowerduetoALARAconcerns.

Althoughportionsofthesesurveillances canbedoneatpower,werequestthattheextension applytoallofthesurveillances.

Werequestthisbecauseoftherelativedifficulty inperforming thepartialsurveillances atpower.Inaddition, duetotheexcellent surveillance historyoftheicecondenser, wedonotbelievethatperforming portionsofthesesurveillances wouldprovideasignificant benefittosafety,andwebelievethattheadministrative burdenofperforming thesepartialsurveillances outweighs thesmallpotential gaininsafetymargin.10CFR50.92Evaluation Per10CFR50.92,aproposedamendment willnotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration iftheproposedamendment doesnot:(1)involveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously

analyzed, 4~I Attachment 1toAEP.C:0967H(2)createthepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously analyzedorevaluated, orh(3)involveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Ourevaluation oftheproposedchangewithrespecttothesecriteria, based,ontheaboveinformation, isprovidedbelow.Criterion 1Onthebasisofthesurveillance historyoftheicebasketsandflowpassages, thecalculations ofthesublimation rates,andtherelatively shortperiodofthisextension, webelievethattheextension willnotresultinasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofapreviously evaluated accident.

Criterion 2Thesurveillance extension willnotresultinachangeinplantconfiguration oroperation.

Therefore, thischangewillnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously analyzedorevaluated.

Criterion 3Webelievethatanextension ofthesurveillance intervalwillnotresultinasignificant reduction inthemarginofsafetybasedontheexcellent surveillance performance ofthissystem,thecalculations ofsublimation ratesandtherelatively shortperiodofthisextension.

Lastly,wenotethattheCommission hasprovidedguidanceconcerning thedetermination ofsignificant hazardsbyproviding certainexamples(48FR14870)ofamendments considered notlikelytoinvolvesignificant hazardsconsideration.

Thesixthoftheseexamplesreferstochangeswhi.chmayresultinsomeincreasetotheprobability ofoccurrence orconsequences ofapreviously analyzedaccident, buttheresultsofwhicharewithinlimitsestablished asacceptable.

Webelievethesechangesfallwithinthescopeofthisexample.Therefore webelievethischangedoesnotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdefinedin10CFR50.92.