ML20212A623

Application for Amend to License NPF-58,deleting License Condition 2.C.10 Re Controls Over Containment Air Locks During Plant Outages & Clarifying License Condition 2.F Re Reporting Requirements of TS & EPP Violations

ML20212A623
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	09/14/1999
From:	Jeffery Wood CENTERIOR ENERGY
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
PY-CEI-NRR-2427, NUDOCS 9909170082
Download: ML20212A623 (11)

Text

.-

NOC Peny Nudear Power Rant Pe, . Oh 4408 John K. Wood 440 2g0 52g4 Vice President. Nudaar Fax:440 2804029 September 14,1999 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Perry Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-440 License Amendment Request Pursuant to 10CFR50.90:

Amendment to Two Operating License Conditions Ladies and Gentlemen:

, Nuclear Regulatory Commission review and approval of a license amendment for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) is requested. The amendment would delete one Operating License Condition, and revise another. License Condition 2.C.10 re jarding controls over the containment air locks during plant outages would be deleted due to the effective implementation of Shutdown Safety administrative controls at PNPP. License Condition 2.F would be revised to clarify the intent of reporting requirements for violations of the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

Attachment 1 provides a Summary, Description of the Proposed Operating License Changes, Background discussion, Safety Analysis, and Environmental Consideration. l Attachment 2 provides the Significant Hazards Consideration. Attachment 3 provides the annotated Operating License pages reflecting the proposed changes. l There are no regulatory commitments contained in this letter or its attachments. If you have questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Henry L. Hegiat, Manager - Regulatory Affairs, at (440) 280-5606.

Ve ruly yours, 0

Attachments cc: NRC Project Manager NRC Resident inspector NRC Region ill -

s }.

State of Ohio -

.f (

9909170002 990914 PDR ADOCK 05000440 P PDR

4

- I, John K. Wood, hereby affirm that (1) I am Vice President - Perry, of the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, (2) I am duly authorized to execute and file this certification as the duly authorized agent for The Cleveland Electric Illuminating

~ Company, Toledo Edison Company, Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, and Pennsylvania Power Company, and (3) the statements set forth herein are true and correct to the best ofmy knowledge, information and belief.

/ John K. Wood 1

Subscribed to and affirmed before me, the 4u dayok

}MMNI .

di% (' 19[11XIO_

wwawu \b g hCO -

mm m

o

, Attachm nt1 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 1 of 4

SUMMARY

The first proposed change to the Operating License would delete License Condition 2.C.10, regarding controls over the containment air locks during plant outages, due to the effective implementation of Shutdown Safety administrative controls at PNPP. This License Condition

was added to the Operating License in 1996 (by Amendment 80) as an " interim step" in the approval process of a license amendment request which was later fully implemented by License Amendment 102 (March 11,1999). Due to the Shutdown Safety administrative con'rols that have been effectively implemented during the last three refueling outages (RFO's 5, 6, and 7),

and which were specifically made an ongoing " regulatory commitment" in a recent letter supporting issuance of Amendment 102 (PY-CEl/NRR-2354L dated January 7,1999), the interim controls that were placed into License Condition 2.C.10 may be deleted, as they are no longer necessary.

The second proposed change to the Operating License would revise License Condition 2.F to clar:fy the intent of reporting requirements for violations of the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan. This change is intended to restore the intent of License Condition 2.F as it existed prior to implementing the new Standard Technical Specifications at PNPP. -

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED OPERATING LICENSE CHANGE Attachment 3 contains annotated pages reflecting the following two items.

Air Lock License Condition License Condition 2.C.10 would be replaced by the word " Deleted", identical to the other deleted License Conditions on the same page.

Reportability License Condition License Condition 2.F would be revised to read "Except 0: !h =l:0 p=/!d:d!- the Teche!: !

SpMcc!'~n: cr E=!=nmen!:! "m!::!!:n P!:n for Section 2.C(2), FENOC shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Section 2.C of this license in the following manner:

Initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System with written followup within thirty (30) days in accordance with the procedures described in 10CFR50.73(b), (c), and (e)." (Revised text is shown in italics) ,

I l

BACKGROUND  ;

Air Lock License Condition j The controls in Operating License Condition 2.C.10 were put in place in Amendment 80, )

dated February 2,1996. This was a partial approval of the original submittal dated November 2,1995 (PY-CEl/NRR-1995L). Amendment 80 only approved opening of the l' containment personnel air locks, using the administrative controls specified in the License Condition. The partial, limited approval in Amendment 80 was intended as an interim step, while the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff continued to consider the full set of

g .

. . j

, Att: chm:nt 1 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 2 of 4 changes proposed in the original submittal. Due to actions taken subsequent to the issuance of Amendment 80, the License Condition administrative controls are now duplicative to shutdown safety. administrative controls in place at PNPP, and may be deleted.

The full implementation of the original submittal was recently issued (March 11,1999), by License Amendment 102. This revised the Technical Specification requirements for handling irradiated fuel in the Primary Containment and the Fuel Handling Building, and selected specifications associated with performing core alterations. This amendment was based on revised radiological dose calculations for the fuel handling accident. The calculations showed that the regulatory guidance in the NRC Standard Review Plan was met, based on the existing controls for maintaining water level over the fuel, combined with new controls over radiological decay of the radioactivity in the fuel.

The analyses showed that the regulatory guidance could be met (after several days of radiological decay of the fuel) without reliance on building integrity or ventilation system Operability, and therefore the Technical Specification controls over these items no longer met

'the criteria for being maintained in the Technical Specifications. However, it was recognized that even if the specific Technical Specification controls on building integrity and ventilation system Operability were removed during fuel handling periods, other controls would still remain in effect to control filtration and monitoring of any releases that might occur from a fuel handii g accident. As described in a recent letter supporting issuance of Amendment 102 (PY-CEl/NRR-2354L dated January 7,1999), these remaining controls are implemented at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) through the use of shutdown safety administrative controls.

Shutdown safety administrative controls will continue to be implemented in the future, through the pending revision to NUMARC 93-01, Section 11.2.6, " Safety Assessment for Remov-l of Equipment from Service During Shutdown Conditions", This was specifically made an ongoing

" regulatory commitment" in the January 7,1999 letter.

As noted in the January 7,1999 letter, and in the NRC Safety Evaluation for Amendment 102, l ventilation system and radiation monitor availability is controlled at PNPP during fuel handling  !

periods, and methods are in place to promptly close the building envelope around where fuelis .

being handled. The purpose of the closure is to enable ventilation systems to draw the release i from a postulated fuel handling accident in the proper direction such that it can be treated and monitored. These controls are maintained over various penetrations that exit the combined Containment / Fuel Handling Building envelope, including the containment air locks that are the subject of License Condition 2.C.10.

Due to the Shutdown Safety administrative controls that have been effectively implemented during the last three refueling outages (RFO's 5,6, and 7), and which have been committed to for the future, the interim controls that were placed into License Condition 2.C.10 may be deleted, as they are no longer necessary.

Reoortability License Condition

- The full text of License Condition 2.F is provided above. The important part of the wording for this amendment request is the phrase "Except as otherwise providedin the Technical Specifications or EnvironmentalProtection Plan, FENOC shallreport any violations of the reauirements contained in Section 2.C of this license in the following manner;" (it then goes on to require a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> phone call be made in additinn to the 30 day letter required by the reporting requirements in 10CFR50.73),

r I

1

, Attachm:nt 1 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 3 of 4 l l

One of the " requirements contained in Section 2.C" is License Condition 2.C.(2), which includes l the words "FENOC shall opmate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and  !

the Environmental Protection Plan " Therefore, looking at License Condition 2.F and License  :

Condition 2.C.(2) together, it is concluded that unless the Technical Specifications and the  !

Environmental Protection Plan contain guidance on what types of violations need to be reported .

and how they are to be reported, that the requirements of License Condition 2.F would require  !

the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> call in addition to the 50.73 letter, i i

in fact, the intent of the wording of License Condition 2.F (the "except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan ..." words) was to exclude 2.C.(2) from this reporting requirement. This is because 2.C.(2) only addresses the Technical  ;

Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan, and individual reporting guidance was contained in both of these documents.

In the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP), reporting guidance for violations of the EPP continues to exist in Section 5.4.2 "Nonroutine Reports".' Since this guidance continues to reside in the EPP, the proposed License Amendment will not result in any change in reporting

- requirements for the EPP (the current wording and the proposed wording will be equivalent).

. Therefore, no further discussion of the EPP is necessary for this change request.

Prior to the conversion to the new Standard Technical Specifications, the phrase " Reportable Event" was defined in the PNPP Technical Specifications. The definition stated that a Reportable Event shall be any of those conditions specified in 10CFR50.73. Upon conversion from Standard to Improved Standard Technical Specifications, this reporting guidance, which deferred to the requirements of 10CFR50.73, was not incorporated (in the Improved Technical Specifications). This occurred because the term " Reportable Event" was no longer used in the body of the Specifications (the applicable requirements that used the term were relocated to the l Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR)). Therefore, the phrase "except as provided in the Technical Specifications..." no longer works the same as it did prior to the conversion.

There is not considered to be a need to introduce a requirement for a 24 hnur report on l Technical Specification violations in addition to the reporting required by 10CFR50.73.

Immediate notification requirements for nuclear power reactors are provided in 10CFR50.72, and the thirty day reports are covered in the licensee event reporting system,10CFR50.73.

10CFR50.72 and 50.73 provide the information required for the NRC to carry out its safety

- mission and minimize reporting of items with little or no safety significance. The reporting l

- requirements for a violation of Technical Specifications are addressed in 10CFR50.72 and I 50.73.- Specifically,10CFR50.73 (a)(2)(i)(B) requires the reporting of any operation or condition  !

prohibited by Technical Specifications (30 day letter), but 10CFR50.72 is silent on the need for a phone notification of such events.

An additional phone notification for a violation of this item provides no additional safety benefit beyond the report already required by 10CFR50.73 (a)(2)(i)(B). Therefore, License

' Condition 2.C.(2) should be exempted from the 24-hour notification requirement of License Condition 2.F, as previously provided in the PNPP licensing basis.

r.

Attichmrnt 1 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 4 of 4 SAFETY ANALYSIS Air Lock License Condition As discussed in the NRC Safety Evaluation for Amendment 102, administrative controls for Primary Containment / Fuel Handling Building closure are in place at PNPP during shutdown periods when the Technical Specifications do not apply. Areas addressed in the existing administrative controls include appropriate restrictions when the air lock doors are opened, in addition to the controls over other penetrations from the Containment / Fuel Handling Building envelope. The NRC staff concluded that "the licensee's shutdown safety controls for building integrity and ventilation / filtration systems is an acceptable means of supporting the

[ Amendment 102] TS changes." Since the controls as a whole will provide an acceptable level of safety, there is no longer a " sed to maintain the separate controls for the air locks in the body of the Operating License, if License Condition 2.C.10 is deleted, the regulatory commitment (to maintain appropriate controls over ventilation system availability and function for drawing a postulated release in the proper direction such that it can be treated and monitored) made in the January 7,1999 letter, will continue to maintain plant safety.

One additional reason for deleting the existing controls in the License Condition is that it specifically lists a fixed va'ue for "recently irradiated fuel". As noted in the NRC Safety Evaluation for Amendment 102, the term 'recently irradiated' is "a cycle specific number and represents the decay period for the reduction in radionuclide inventory available for release in the event of an FHA. For the upcoming refueling outage

[ Note: this quote is referring to the recent seventh refueling outage), the licensee has ,

determined that the appropriate decay period will be 7 days. ... The TS Bases will be revised to provide a cycle-specific definition of 'recently irradiated' fuel."

The Technical Specification Bases were indeed updated during the seventh refueling outage to inc!ude the cycle-specific definition nf 'recently irradiated' fuel. There is no need to maintain this definition in the body of the Operating License, and plant safety will continue to be maintained if it is removed.

Reportability License Condition An additional notification for a violation of the Technical Specifications or the EPP provides no additional safety benefit beyond the reports already required. Therefore, License Condition 2.C.(2) should be exempted from the 24-hour notification requirement of License Condition 2.F, as was previously provided in the PNPP licensing basis.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The proposed Operating License change request was evaluated against the criteria of 10CFR51.22 for environmental considerations. The proposed change does not significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposures, does not significantly change the types or significantly increase the amounts of effluents that may be released off-site and, as discussed in Attachment 2, does not involve a significant hazards consideration. Based on the foregeing, it has been concluded that the proposed Operating License change meets the criteria given in 10CFR51.22(c)(9) for categorical exclusion from the requirement for an Environmentalimpact Statement.

r Attachment 2 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 1 of 2 .

l Sinnificant Hazards Consideration The standards used to arrive at a determination that a request for amendment does not involve a significant hazard are included in Commission regulation 10CFR50.92, which states that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed changes would not:

1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or I

2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or j

3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

{

l The proposed amendment has been reviewed with respect to these three factors and it has been determined that the proposed change does not involve a significant hazard because:

1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or I consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The proposed changes delete or revise two Operating License conditions, one that addresses administrative controls on air locks during refueling outages, and one regarding reporting of violations of the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

These proposed changes to the Operating License are administrative only, and have no effect on any previously evaluated accident scenario. The proposed changes have no effect on plant hardware, plant design, safety limit setting, or ,

plant system operation and therefore do not modify or add any initiating  !

parameters that would significantly increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated.

The changes will not alter the operation of equipment assumed to be available for the mitigation of accidents or transierits, nor will they alter the operation of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the accident analyses.

The proposed activity does not affect accident mitigation capabilities or the radiation release amounts for postulated accidents. Since there are no changes to previous accident analysis, the radiological consequences associated with these analyses remain unchanged.

Therefore, the proposed change does not significantly increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

2. The proposed change would not croate the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

The proposed changes are administrative in nature, and do not involve any physical alteration of the plant (no new or different type of equipment will be

r-4

, Attachm9nt 2 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 2 of 2 Slanificant Hazards Consideration installed). They do not alter the design assumptions, conditions, configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is operated. The proposed changes have no impact on component and system interactions.

The safety functions of plant structures, systems, and components are also not changed in any manner, nor is the reliability of any structure, system, or component reduced.

The proposed changes are not providing for operation in a mode that is not already evaluated. These changes do not affect the operation of any systems or components, nor do they involve any potential initiating events that woulo create any new or different kind of event.

Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3. The proposed change will not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

The proposed changes are administrative in nature (they delete or revise two license conditions). Administrative controls will continue to be applied to the opening of the air locks during plant shutdown periods, and to the reporting of violations of the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

There is no impact on safety limits or limiting safety system settings. The changes do not affect any plant safety parameters or setpoints. No physical or operational changes to he facility will result from the proposed changes. l The proposed changes have no impact on any safety analysis assumptions.

Consequently, no margin of safety as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report or defined in the basis of any Technical Specification is reduced as a result of these changes. These proposed changes do not detrimentally affect the ability of structures, systems and components important to safety to fulfill their intended safety functions.

Therefore, the proposed changes do not cause a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

Based on the above considerations, it is concluded that a significant hazard would not be introduced as a result of this proposed change. Also, since NRC approval of this change must be obtained prior to implementation, no unreviewed safety question can ,

exist.

i

Attichmtnt 3 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L hjo chang b OIS php ,4, Page 1 of 3

+.r- infom Hon.

Pr .v1 AeA renewal. Such sale and leaseback transactions are subject to a the representations and conditions set forth in the above mentioned application of January 23,1987, as supplemented on March 3,1987, as well as the letter of the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation dated March 16,1987, consenting to such transactions. Specifically, a lessor and anyone else who may acquire an interest under these transactions are prohibited from exercising 5

directly or indirectly any control over the licenses of PNPP Unit 1. For purposes of this condition the limitations of 10 CFR 50.81, as now in effect and as may be subsequently amended, are fully applicable to the lessor and any successor in interest to that lessor as long as the license for PNPP Unit i remains in effect; these financial transactions shall have no effect on the license for the Perry Nuclear facility throughout the term of the license. ,

{

l (b) Further, the licensees are also required to notify the NRC in writing prior to any {

change in: (i) the terms or conditions of any lease agreements executed as part of these transactions; (ii) the PNPP Operating Agreement; (iii) the existing ,

property insurance coverage for PNPP Unit 1; and (iv) any action by a lessor or I others that may have an adverse effect on the safe operation of the facility.

C. This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below-

}

(1) Maximum Power Level FENOC is authorized to operate the facility at reactorcore power levels not in excess of 3579 megawatts thermal (100% power) in accordance with the l conditions specified herein.

(2) Technical Soecifications i

/ The Technical Poecifications contained in Appendix A and the Environmental Protection Plan catained in Appendix B, as revised through Amendment No. 81, are hereby incorporated into the license. FENOC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection -

l Plan.

(3) Antitrust Conditions

a. Cleveland Electric illuminating Company, Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, OES Nuclear, Inc., Pennsylvania Power Company, and the Amendment No. 96

Attachment 3 I PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Page 2 of 3 I

• Toledo Edison Company shall comply with the antitrust conditions delineated in f

Appendix C to this license; Appendix C is hereby incorporated into this license.

b. FENOC shall comply with the antitrust conditions delineated in Appendix C to this license as if named therein. FENOC shall not market or broker powetor energy from the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No.1. The Owners are respbnsible and c.

accountable for the actions of FENOC to the extent that said actions affect the  !

marketing or brokering of power or energy from the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, l Unit No.1, and in any way, contravene the antitrust condition contained in the license.

(4) Deleted (5) Deleted i

(6) Fire Protection (Section 9.5. SER. SSER #1. 2. 3. 4. 7. and 8)

{

l FENOC shall comply with the following requirements of the fire protection program:

FENOC shallimplement and maintain in effect all provisions of the approved fire f

j protection program as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report, as amended, for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant and as approved in the Safety Evaluation Report '

(NUREG-0887) dated May 1982 and Supplement Nos.1 through 10 thereto, subject to the following provisions:

a. FENOC may make changes to the approved fire protection program without prior l approval of the Commission only if those changes _would not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire.

(7) Deleted "

(8) Deleted (9) Deleted '

\ -

w -*

(10)Fnmarytontainment ekO air lock penetrations may be open during CORE ALTERATIONS and movement of irradiated fuel within the primary'c inment, except when moving recently irradiated fuel (i.e., fuel that F cupied part of a critical reactor c' ore within the previous seven days vided the following  !

conditions exist:

One doorin each air lock is le of being closed.

/>

• Hoses and c running through the air lock employ a means to allow safe, quick nnect or severance, and are tagged at the air lock with specific ructio moval. # s /

Amendment No. 96

Attichm nt 3 PY-CEl/NRR-2427L Piga 3 cf 3

% =

C The air lock is not blocked in such a way that it cannot be avnadtMy uuseo.

• A dat.;';J mmyloual is# available to expeditiously close the air lock door.

s -A D. FENOC is exempted from: 1) the requirements of Section Ill.D.2(b)(ii), containment airlock testing requirements, Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, due to the special - l

' circumstance described in Section 6.2.6 of SER Supplement No. 7 authorized by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii); and 2) the requirements of Section IV.F., Full Participation Ex of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, due to the special circumstance described in the Exemption dated November 6,1986. These exemptions are authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security. The exemptions are hereby granted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12. With the granting of these exemptions, the facility will operate, to the extent authorized herein, in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission.

E. FENOC shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the Commission-l approved physical security, guard training and qualification, and safeguards contingenc plans, including amendments made pursuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous Amendments and Search Requirements revisions to 10 CFR 73.55 (51 FR 27817 and 27822) and to the authority of 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p). The plans, which contain Safeguards Information protected under 10 CFR 73.21, are entitled: fPerry Nuclear Power Plant Physical Security Plan," with revisions submitted through September 11,1987; " Perry Nuclear Power Plant Guard Training and Qualification P with revisions submitted through August 12,1986; and " Perry Nuclear Power Plant Safeguards Contingency Plan" (Chapter 8 of the Security Plan),'with revisions submitted through May 15,1986.

Changes made in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55 shall be implemented in accordance with the schedule set forth therein..

4,,e o h 2.. c,.(2 h F. Exceptp*=~re gn:re r the T:2.r5' hacMeet!cn: :.- Er9:=:..:;D ,

uCaer. Nec 'FENOC shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Section 2.CNhis license in the following manner:

Initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System with written followup within thirty (30) days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR 50.73(b), (c), and (e). 2 G. The licensees shall have and maintain financial protection of such type and in such amounts as the Commission shall require in accordance with Sectic . F0 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to cover public liability claims.

3 J Amendment No. 96