ML18051B362

Application for Amend to License DPR-20,changing Tech Specs to Add Requirement to Verify,At Least Once Per 12 H, Operation of at Least One Shutdown Cooling Pump & One HX During Refueling

ML18051B362
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	04/30/1985
From:	Dewitt R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:
Shared Package
ML18051B361	List: ML18051B360 ML18051B362 ML18051B363
References
NUDOCS 8505070285
Download: ML18051B362 (2)

Text

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Docket 50-255 Request for Change to the Technical Specifications License DPR-20 For the reasons hereinafter set forth, it is requested that the Technical Specifications contained in the Provisional Operating License DPR-20, Docket 50-255, issued to Consumers Power Company on October 16, 1972, for the Palisades Plant be changed as described in Section I below: I. Change(s)

Add a section 4.6.1.d as follows: "4.6.1.d During refueling operations verify at least one shutdown cooling pump and one heat exchanger are in operation at least once per twelve (12) hours." II. Discussion The above proposed Technical Specifications change is requested as a result of an NRC request to compare the Palisades Plant Technical

• Specifications (TS) to the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for Combustion Engineering plants. This comparison focused on surveillance requirements for systems and components which provide decay heat capability during hot standby, hot shutdown, and cold shutdown/refueling conditions.

Section 3.8.1.f of the Palisades Plant TS requires that at least one shutdown cooling pump and heat exchanger be in operation during refueling operations.

This proposed TS change will support TS section 3.8.1.f by requiring that pump and heat exchanger operation be verified at least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. The effect of this proposed change will be minimal since this proposed surveillance is already performed in accordance with Palisades Plant General Operating Procedures.

Analysis of No Significant Hazards Consideration This proposed change is identical to example (ii) published in the Federal Register on April 16, 1984 (48FR14870) of the types of license amendments that are considered not likely to involve significant hazards considerations.

Example (ii) illustrates a change that constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included*

in the technical specifications (eg, a new or more stringent surveillance requirement.)

Consequently, this proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration defined in 10CFR50.92.

0505070205 050430 I " PDR 05000255 1 P PDR L_l OC0485-0003A-NL02 III.* Conclusion The Palisades Plant Review Committee has reviewed this Technical Specification Change Request and has determined that this change does not involve an unreviewed safety question and therefore involves no significant hazards consideration.

This change has also been reviewed under the cognizance of the Nuclear Safety Board. A copy of this Technical Specification Change Request has been sent to the State of Michigan official designated to receive such Amendments to the Operating License. CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY R B DeWitt, Vice President Nuclear Operations Sworn and subscribed to before me this 30th day of April 1985. fey, Notary c County, Michiga My commission expires November 5, 1986. SHERRY LYNN DURFEY Notary Public, Jackson County, Mich. My Commission Expires Nov. 5, 1986 OC0485-0003A-NL02