ML20105C596
| ML20105C596 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1992 |
| From: | Shelton D CENTERIOR ENERGY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20105C562 | List: |
| References | |
| 2037, NUDOCS 9209220317 | |
| Download: ML20105C596 (6) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Docket Number 50-346 License Numbet NPF-3 3erial Number 2037 Enclosure Page 1 APPLICATION FOR AMELDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING ICENSE NUMBER NPF-3 DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POVER STATION Uh_T NUMBER 1 ? Attc%ed are requested changes to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit Number 1, Facility Operating License Number NPF-3. Also included is the Safety Assessment and Significant Hazards Consideration. The proposed changes submitted under cover letter Serial Number 2037 concern: Appendix A, Technical Specification (TS) Figure 5.1-1, DBNPS Exclusion Area, TS Figure 5.1-2, DBNPS Lov Population Zone, TS Figure 5.1-3, DBNPS Unrestricted Area Boundary for-Liquid Effluents, TS Figure 5.1-4, DBNPS Unrestricted Area Boundary for Gaseous Effluents, TS 5.1.1, Site Exclusion Area, TS 5.1.2, Low Population Zone, and TS 5.1.3, Sita Boundary. By: MW7 D. C. Shelton, Vice President, Nuclear - Davis-Besse Svora and Subscribed before me this lith day of September, 1992. Y U// n Notary PulyTic, State of Ohio EVEYtR PMss 4
- nervam actormo
%CurtskaEx;its.htf 28,lis4 9209220317 900911 PDR ADOCK 05000346 P PDR
+ Docket Number 50-346 i Ulcense Number NPF-3 } Serial Number 2037 Enclosure Page 2 1' The following information is provided to support issuance of the requested changes to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit i Number 1, Operasing License Number NPF-3, Appendix A Tochnical [ Specificationst ii A. Time Required to Implement: This change is to be implemented vithin 90 days after the NRC issuance of the License Imendment. j B. Reason for change (Licanse Amendment Request Number 91-0004): This license amendment request proposes deletion of TS Figure-5.1-1, i DPNPS Exclusion Area, TS Figure 5.1-2, DBNPS Lov Population Zone, TS Figure 5.1-3, DBNPS Unrestricted Area Boundary; for Liquid _ Effluents, and TS Figure 5.1-4, DBNPS Unrestricted Area Boundary. for Gaseous Effluents, on the basis that information provided by l these figures is already located in the DBNPS Updated Safety Analysis Report. Additionally, TS 5.1.1, Site Exclusler. Area,.TS [ 5.1.2, Low Population Z(ne, and TS 5.1.3, Site Boundary, are { proposed for revision to reflect thu_above' deletions. l C. Safety Assessment and Significant flazards Consideration: See
- attached, i
i .i i b t I l 4 r i l ? I f i i l I j t i l l l c I' l i f t a . - _ _. _ - - _ _ _ =, ., = -... -
Docket Number 50-346 E License Number NPF-3 l Serial Number 2037 j.. Attachment l Page 1 l 4 = l Safety Assessment and Significant Harards Consideration f j' for License Amendment Request Number 91-0004 l f-TITLE: i - l Proposed Deletion of Technical Specification (TS) Figure 5.1-1, { j Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS) Exclusion Area, TS Figure i l 5.1-2, DBNPS Lov Population Zone, TS Figure 5.1-3, DBNPS Unrestricted 8 d Area Boundary for Liquid Effluents, and TS Figure 5.1-4. DBNPS l Unrestricted Area Boundary for Gaseous Effluents and Proposed Revision l l of T3 3.1.1, Site Exclusion Area, TS 5.1.2, Lov Population Zone, and TS l 5.1.3, Site Boundary i DESCRIPTIO_N_ : i f This License Amendment Request (LAR) proposes deletion of TS Figure i 5.1-1, TS Figure 5.1-2, TS Figure 5.1-3, and TS Figure 5.1-4, on the basis that these figures are already maintained in the IsBNPS Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) as USAR Figure 2.1-3, DBNPS 3 te L j arrangement, and USAR Figure 2.1-7,-DBNPS Lov Population Zone. The' i criteria for establishing the site boundary, unrestricted area, j cxclusion area and low population zone continue to be defined by the TS l and by regulations-(10 CFR Part 100, Reactor Site. Criteria). j Consequently, the proposed changes do not relax any existing- [ requirements, but facilitate _ administrative changes involving these v figures, including the use in the USAR of figures with greater clarity i and detail. Specifically, the following changes are proposed: i e L i t 1. TS 5.1.1, Site Exclusion Area, currently refers to TS Figure 5.1-1. l TS 5.1.1 vould be revised to delete the reterence to TS Figure j j 5.1-1 and the following sentence would be inverted: l 'l \\ "The Site Exclusien Area is as defined in 10 CFR Part 100." TS Figure 5.1-1 shows the site boundary and the site exclusion l area. USAR Section 2.1.2, Site Description, states, in paru e "The site, site arrangement, and' location of the major statien
- -t l
structures are shown on Figure 2.1-3. The site boundary shown on I this figure is also the limit of the~ exclusion area." l -~.-
- i This establishes that USAR Figure 2.1-3 reflects the same information relative to the
- houndary and exclusion area as TS. j j Figure 5.1-1. } 2. TS 5.1.2, Low Population Zone, curret.tly refers to TS Figure.5.1-2. l} t } TS 5.1.2 vould be revised to delete the reference to TS Figure ~j ~ j 5.1-2 and the following sentence vould be-insertedt 1 l "The Lov Population _ Zone-is as defined-in 10 CFR-Part 100." e i f -TS Figure 3.1-2 shows the DBNPS Lov Population Zone. USAR Section- [ 2.1.3.3, Lov Population-Zone, states, in part: f f i I !~ k w w n o w.- -,,-~w-w+ w -ve r m i- ,rr--- -e--y v --w - -e ve-++ , w w+ ~ vr aywwwa
- -w
=p-
. - - - - ~ _. -. 1 i Docket Number 50-346 l License Number NPF-3 i-Serial Number 2037 I Attachment i j' Page 2 -{ g 4 i "The low population zone has been established as that area outside i of the site boundary within a radius of two miles from the center j of the containment structure." ) i. 1 USAR F'qure 2.1-7 shovs_ the site boundary and a two mile radius [ { circ 1s from a point equivalent to the center of the containment j. structure. TS Figure 5.1-2 shows the site laundary and a circle of two mile radius from a point equivalent to.nc center of the l co.ainment structure. Therefore, USAR Figure 2.1-7 reflects thel i j sata information relative to the site boundary and lov population zone as TS Figure 5.1-2. .i I l 3. TS 5.1.3, Site Boundary, currently refers to TS Figure 5.1-3 and TS -} Figure 5.1-4. TS 5.1.3 vould be revised to delete the reference to TS Figure 5.1-3 and TS Figure 5.1-4 and the tollowing sentence vould be inserted: + i l 1 ? "The UNRESTRICTED AREA and SITE BOUNDARY are defined in Technical i i Specification Section 1.0, Definitions." TS Figure 5.1-3 shows the site boundary as the unrestricted area j boundary for liquid effluents. USAR Section 11.2.1, Liquid Vaste-i Systems - Design'0bjectives, states, in part: l
- i "The systems handling liquid vastes are designed such that the i
estimated releases in liquid effluents comply with the following j requirements of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR-50: j a. The individual radionuclide concentrations in the liquid [ l effluents at the site boundary shall not exceed the limits i for releases to unrestricted areas given in Appendix-B of 10 CFR 20." I i i This establishes that USAR Figure 2.1-3 reflects the-same i information rela:ive to the site boundary and the unrestricted area j boundary for liquid effluents as TS Figure 5.1-3. _i i [ IS Figure 5.1-4 shows the site boundary as the unrestricted area I boundary for gaseous ef fluents. USAR Section 2.1.2.2, Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits, states, in part: ) i { j- "The site boundary es shown on USAR Figure 2.1-3 is - the boundary l 1 line which determines the-limits of gaseous' releases foripurposes (. of TS limits to fulfill the_ requirements of 10 CFR 20 pertaining to { radioactive releases to unrestricted areas." } As with TS Figure 5.1-3,-this establishes that USAR Figure 2.1-3 reflects-the same-information relative to the site boundary and the= v [ unrestricted area boundary for gaseous effluents as1TS Figure -,i ~ l 5.1-4. l 4 In l I L k ? i i -( 1
Docket Number 50-346 License Number NPF-3 Serial Number 2037 Attachment Page 3 As described above, this LAR is an administrative change requesting deletion of TS information that is defined by TS or Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulation and is also maintained in the USAR. Presently, any changes to the facility affecting the USAR figures vould require a corresponding license amendment request per 10 CFR 50.90. Under this proposed LAR, changes to these facility as reflected in these figures vould be controlled by 10 CFR 50.59, which would require submittal of a license amendment request only if the proposed facility change involves an unreviewed safety question. SYSTEMS, COMPONENTS, AND ACTIVITIES AFFECTFD: This LAR affects the TS sections and figures shoving the maps of the Unrestricted Area, the Exclusion Area, and the Low Population Zone. No systems or components are affected by the proposed revision of these TS sections or deletion of these TS figures. SAFETY FUNCTIONS OF THE AFFECTED SYSTEMS, COMPONENTS AND ACTIVI lES: The function of TS Section 5 is to contain the facility design features including those features of the facility such as materials of constructjon and geometric arrangements which, if altered or modified, vould have a significant effect on safety, and which are not covered in the TS Limiting Conditions for Operation, Surveillance Requirements, or Safety Limits and Limiting Safety System Settings. The purpose of the TS is to maintain the validity of the Opdated Safety Analysis Report. EFFFCTS ON SAFETY: T'is LAR is strictly an administrative change, deleting TS figures, the content of which continue to be defined by TS and 10 CFR Part 100, and that are already maintained in the USAR. Changes-to these USAR= figures vould still be rootrolled by the 10 CFR 50.59 process. Thus, this proposed revision of the TS sections and deletion of the TS figures has no adverse effect on safety. -SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION: The Nuclear Regulatary Commission has provided standards in 10 CFR 50.92(c) for determining whether a significant hazard exists due to a proposed amendment to an 0perating License for a facility. A proposed amendment involves no significant hazards consideration--if operation of the faellity in accordance with the proposed changes would: (1) Not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; (2) Not create the-possibility of a nov -or different-kind of: accident from any accident previously evaluated;- or (3) Not involve a significant reduction-in a margin-of safety. Toledo Edison has reviewe6 the proposed changes and determined that a f \\
.._ __ _ _ ~._._ Docket Number-50-346 License. Number.NPF-3 i' Serial Number 2037 l Attachment j j Page 4 I i f l significant hazards consideration does not exist because operaD,n of l l the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit Number 1, in accord..ce j i. vith the proposed changes vould: f I la. Not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated because this is strictly an 'l administrative change to delete from the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS) Technical Specifications (TS) information that is already maintained in the DBNPS Updated i Safety Analysis Report (USAR). There are no accident i i initiators or assumptions affected by the proposed changes. I lb. Not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an l accident previously evaluated because this is strictly an ]j i administrative change to delete from the DBNPS TS information that is alvtady maintained in the DBNPS USAR. There is no j effect on the source term or containment isolation and no increase in radiological effluents. J i l 2a. Not create the possibility of a new kind of accident from any l l accident previously evaluated because this is strictly an j j administrative change to delete from the DBNPS TS information ) a that is already maintained in the DBPPS USAR. - l k k 2b. Not create the possibility of a different kind of accident l from any accident previously evaluated because this is strictly an administrative change to delete from the DBNPS TS [ information tha;. is already maintained in the DBNPS USAR. l I [ } 3. Not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety l because this is strictly an administrative change to delete i from the DBNPS TS information that is'already maintained in [ ] the DBNPS USAR. I t CONCLUSION: i g i the j On the basis of the above, Toledo Edison has determined that License Amendment Request does not involve a significant hazards - f i-consideration. As this License Amendment Request _ concerns proposed [ l changes to the Technical Specifications that must be reviewed by the i Nuclear Regulatory Commission, this License Amendment Request does not l constitute an unreviewed safety question. } i i I i ATTACHMENT: 4 - Atracheu are the proposed marked-.up changes to the Operating. License. ? 1 I l f 1 d _ - t 2 i c I ,eir y + ,v.-,- --+,e.-r ,w----- ew.s.. + +.--r r, ,,-r,Y.,-w wm .w w ,a -v-',=< %we - r e vat -}}