ML20058Q140

TS Change Request 211 to License DPR-16,changing TS Pages 1.0-1,3.2-3,3.4-1,3.4-4,3.5-6,3.5-7,3.8-1 & 3.17-1 to Provide Option for Verifying Operability During LCO by Exam of Surveillance Records

ML20058Q140
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	10/18/1993
From:	J. J. Barton GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20058Q136	List: ML20058Q131 ML20058Q140 ML20058Q149
References
NUDOCS 9310260089
Download: ML20058Q140 (2)

Text

- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

GPU NUCLEAR CDRPORATION OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GDIERATING STATION I

Facility Operating License No. DPR-16

'Ibchnical Specification Change Request Request No. 211 Docket No. 50-219 i

Applicant suhnits, by this Technical Specification Change Request No. 211 to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Operating License, a change to pages 1.0-1, 3.2-3, 3.4-1, 3.4-4, 3.5-6, 3.5-7, 3.8-1, and 3.17-1.

p _

.A

/ L

'v BY (/ 2 l J.fJ. B  : nl '

l Vii es ent and Director Oy Cro .

SwornandSubscribedtobeforemethis/[ day of 993.

dl

• Jotary Public of id l

l JUDITH M. CROWE NetaryPubileof NemtJersey My Commission Expiree _.li4 r/ 4 T~

9310260089 931018 5 PDR ADOCK 05000219 h p PDR ia

'3 HILTED SI'ATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR RHRILATORY CONISSIGi In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-219 GPU Nuclear Corporation )

CERTIFICATE OF SD NICE

.This is to certify that a copy of Technical Specification Charge Request No. 211 for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatirg Station Operating License, filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory hinnion on October 18 1993 has this day of October 18,1993, been served on the Mayor of Iacey hhip, O an County, New Jersey by deposit in the United States mail, addressed as follows:

'Ibe Honorable Louis A. Amato Mayor of Iacey Twnship 818 West Iacey Road Forked River, IU 08731 r

ey i/.p; h Cf. J. B tlan Vice O ident and Director re- i  ;

3

i I

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GDIEPATING STATIGi OPERATING LICENSE 10. DPR-16 DOCKET 10. 50-219 TE0INICAL wtI;mCATIOT OIANGE REQUEST 10. 211 1

.)

i Applicant hereby requests the Winnion to- change Facility Operatirq  ;

License No. DPR-16 as dinmened below, and pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91, an I analysis concerning the determination of no significant hazards consideration is also presented:

l 1.0 SECTIONS 'IO BE CHANGED 1.1 Definitions 3.2C Standby Liquid Control System 3.4A Core Spray System 3.4B Autcraatic Depressurization System s 3.4C Containment Spray System and Emergency Service Water System '

3.5B Secondary Containment 3.8 Isolation Condenser i 3.17 Control Room Heating, Ventilating, and Air-conditioning System 2.0 EbTERT OF OIANGE For the systems identified in Section 1.0, this Technical Specification Change Request would give the option of verifying operability during a Limitirg condition of Operation by the examination of surveillance records. 'Ihis change does not preclude  ;

testing as the means of determiniry operability.

3.0 OiANGES REDUESTED i

As delineated on the attached revised Technical Specification pages ,

1.0-1, 3.2-3, 3.4-1, 3.4-4, 3.5-6, 3.5-7, 3.8-1, and 3.17-1.

l 4.0 DISCUSSIGIS

'Ihe requirement to demonstrate operability, by daily testing, of a redundant system (omponent) when a system (component) is declared inoperable was a typical TS requirement when Oyster Creek was ,

granted its Provisional Operating License. 'Ibese redundant system '

(uaq&ent) testify requirements were designed to be conservative at  ;

a titre when there was a lack of plant operating history and an ,

insufficient equipnent failure data base to justify other testiry '

frequencies.

'Ihis change proposes the option of verifyirg system (component) operability in lieu of daily testing as now required by the systems' Limitirg Condition for Operation (IDO) . 'Ihis option would decrease the probability of equipnent failure because the daily testirg i contril:utes to unnmary component wear and challenges to the .;

,u .. x ,- - a - - .;-- . ~ . . ,

i i

safety related systems. l Daily. testing of redundant systems (components) is not required in .!

the NRC's. Standard Technical Specifications nor in recently issued BWR Technical Specifications. The NRC staff deleted these testing  !

requirements since the added assurance provided by such testing-is i not sufficient to justify the loss of safety function during the test, provided the periodic surveillance testing is current and that there are no known reasons to suggest that the redundant system  !

(component) is inoperable.

.l The proposed deletion of multiple system (component) testing will  !

conform Oyster Creek to current BWR plant operating practices. '

Since verification will not change the probability of accident precursors, this proposed amendment will not affect the probability  !

of an accident previously evaluated. This change will not involve  ;

a significant increase in the consequences of an accident previously ~ -!

evaluated because normal surveillance testing ensures the i operability for the systems identified in Section 1.0 is maintained-This proposed change would not introduce any new modes of operation .,

which could create a new or different kind of accident. Verifying f operability would only delete excessive system or component testing. l Therefore, the proposed change would not create any new types of' ,

equipment failure that could cause a new or different kind - of accident. ]

s The proposed change will not reduce the functional capability of the j equipment required for safe operation of Oyster Creek-. -The surveillances will provide adequate assurance of system performance. l The reduction in testing during an LCO will decrease the probability - ')

of equipment failure and human error. Therefore, verification of )

operability does not represent a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

5.0 DETERMINATION GPU Nuclear has determined that operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in accordance with the proposed Technical' Specifications does not involve a significant hazard. The changes do not:

1. Involve a sianificant increase in the orobability or the conseauence of an accident Dreviousiv evaluated.

The change provides an alternate means of determining system. -i (component) operability without' testing. Since a recent~ l surveillance will provide the evidence for determining:

operability,' the verification will be equivalent to the demonstration or testing of the' redundant-system (component).

Since the redundant system (component) can perform its design function, this change will not increase the probability or consequence of an accident previously evaluated. .;

l q

k I

2. Create the nossibility of a new or different kird of accident from any previous 1v evaluated.

Operation of the facility in accordance with this propused change will rot create the possibility for an accident or malfunctico of a different type from any acx:ident previously evaluated. '1he proposed amndment does not modify any system (ccznpanent) operation or maintenance activity. 'Ibe facility '

will continue to be operated within the limits of existing ,

accident analysis and margins of safety. ,

3. Involve a sianificant reduction in a maruin of safety. ,

This change permits an administrative check (verify) in place of daily testirg (demanstrating) to determine operability during a IID. Since the proposed charge does not alter any system hardeare or design basis, the margin of safety is not reduced.

6.0 IMPIDDirATICN We rcquest that the amndment authorizing this change became effective 60 days after issuance.

t k