ML17328A856
| ML17328A856 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1991 |
| From: | ALEXICH M P INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG |
| To: | MURLEY T E NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17328A857 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-01.129, RTR-REGGD-1.129 AEP:NRC:1142, NUDOCS 9101180288 | |
| Download: ML17328A856 (11) | |
Text
ACCELERATEDDISRIBUTIONDEMONSTRATIONSYSTEMREGULATORYINFORMATIONDISTRIBUTIONSYSTEM(RIDS)DOCKETg0500031505000316
SUBJECT:
ApplicationforamendstoLicensesDPR-58&DPR-74,changingTechSpecs3/4.8.2.3&3/4.8.2.5toreflectRegGuide1.129byremovingrequirementfordifferentialacceptancetestfordcbus,trainsduring92-daysureillance.DISTRIBUTIONCODE:A001DCOPIESRECEIVED:LTRENCLSIZE:TITLE:ORSubmittal:GeneralDistributionNOTESACCESSIONNBR:9101180288DOC.DATE:91/01/15NOTARIZED:NOFACIL:50-315DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit1,Indiana&50-316DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit2,Indiana&AUTH.NAMEAUTHORAFFILIATIONALEXICH,M.P.IndianaMichiganPowerCo.(formerlyIndiana&MichiganEleRECIP.NAMERECIPIENTAFFILIATIONMURLEY,T.E.DocumentControlBranch(DocumentControlDesk)RECIPIENTIDCODE/NAMEPD3-1LACOLBURN,T.INTERNAL:NRR/DET/ECMB9HNRR/DOEA/OTSB11NRR/DST/SELB8DNRR/DST/SRXB8EOC/RFILE0EXTERNAL:NRCPDRCOPIESLTTRENCL112211111111101111RECIPIENTIDCODE/NAMEPD3-1PDNRR/DET/ESGBNRR/DST8E2NRR/DST/SICB7ENUDOCS-ABSTRACTOGC/HDS1RES/DSIR/EIBNSICCOPIESLTTRENCL1111111111101111NOTETOALL"RIDS"RECIPIENTS:PLEASEHELPUSTOREDUCEWASTE!CONTACTTHEDOCUMENTCONTROLDESK,ROOiVIPl-37(EXT.20079)TOELIMINATEYOURNAMEFROMDISTRIBUTIONLISTSFORDOCUMENTSYOUDON'TNEED!TOTALNUMBEROFCOPIESREQUIRED:LTTR18ENCL16
IndianaMichiganPowerCompanyP.O.Box16631Cofumbus,OH43216NAEP:NRC'114210CFR50.90DonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnits1and2LicenseNos.DPR-58andDPR-74DocketNos.50-315and50-316TECHNICALSPECIFICATIONSCHANGEREQUESTU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionAttn:Document,ControlDeskWashington,D.C.20555Attn:T.E.MurleyJanuary15,1991
DearDr.Murley:
ThisletteranditsattachmentsconstituteanapplicationforamendmenttotheTechnicalSpecifications(T/Ss)fortheDonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnits1and2,Specifically,weareproposingtomodifyT/S3/4.8.2.3andT/S3/4.8'.5toreflectRegulatoryGuide1.129byremovingtherequirementforadifferentialacceptancetestfortheDCbustrains(TrainAB,TrainCD,TrainN)duringthe92-daysurveillance.Inaddition,weareproposinganeditorialchangetoT/S3/4.8.1.1toclarifytheintentofthespecification.WehavediscussedthisT/SschangerequestwiththeNRCProjectManager,Mr.TimColburn.Whileweunderstandthatthisrequestdoesnotwarrantwaivingthe30-daycommentperiod,werespectfullyrequestthatsubsequenttothecommentperiodthissubmittalbeprocessedasexpeditiouslyaspossibletoprecludefutureunwarrantedplantshutdowns.Webelievethattheproposedchangeswillnotresultin(1)asignificantchangeinthetypesofeffluentsorasignificantincreaseintheamountsofanyeffluentthatmaybereleasedoffsite,or(2)asignificantincreaseinindividualorcumulativeoccupationalradiationexposure.TheseproposedchangeshavebeenreviewedbythePlantNuclearSafetyReviewCommitteeandwillbereviewedbytheNuclearSafetyandDesignReviewCommitteeattheirnextregularlyscheduledmeeting.9i.01180288910115IPDR-,.ADOCK05000315>>P":--'DR
~~0Dr.Murley-2-AEP:NRC:1142Incompliancewiththerequirementsof10CFR50.91(b)(1),copiesofthisletteranditsattachmentshavebeentransmittedtotheMichiganPublicServiceCommissionandtheMichiganDepartmentofPublicHealth.ThisdocumenthasbeenpreparedfollowingCorporateprocedureswhichincorporateareasonablesetofcontrolstoinsureitsaccuracyandcompletenesspriortosignaturebytheundersigned,Verytrulyyours,M.P.AlechVicePresidentAttachmentscc:D.H.Williams,Jr.A.A.Blind-BridgmanJ.R.PadgettG.CharnoffNFEMSectionChiefNRCResidentInspector-BridgmanA,B.Davis-NRCRegionIII ATTACHMENT1TOAEP:NRC:1142REASONSAND10CFR50.92ANALYSESFORCHANGESTOTHEDONALDC.COOKNUCLEARPLANTUNITNOS.1AND2TECHNICALSPECIFICATIONS Attachment1toAEP:NRC:1142Page2HISTORYOFPREVIOUSSUBMITTALSWehavepreviouslyrequestednumerouschangestoSection3/48oftheT/Ss.Inanattempttoputthissubmittalinperspectivewithrespecttoourprevioussubmittals,weareproviding,asrequestedbyourProjectManager,anoverviewofpreviouslyrequestedSection3/48T/Sschangesubmittals.Thefollowingisareferencelistingofourprevioussubmittalswiththeirdatesandsubjects.Followingthislistisabriefsummaryofevents.Itshouldbenotedthatthechangesweareproposinginthissubmittalhavenotbeenrequestedinanyprevioussubmittal.AEP:NRC:0896September28,1984AEP:NRC:0896AApril24,1985DieselgeneratorreliabilityandGenericLetter84-15AEP:NRC:0896BJanuary16,1987ProposedT/SstoreflectStandardT/SscontainedinGenericLetter84-15AEP:NRC:0896FJune25,1987AEP:NRC:0896GSeptember28,1987AEP:NRC:0896HNovember25,1987AEP:NRC:0896IJanuary24,1989AEP:NRC:0896JApril29,1988AdditionalinformationandrevisedT/SsRevisesAEP:NRC:0896and0896Awithrespecttodieselgeneratorfueloilsurveillancetestingandten-yeardieselgeneratorfueloilstoragetankcleaningClarifiedAEP:NRC:0896HRequestedsimulatedloadtestingofthestationbatteriesandtheN-trainbatteriesAEP:NRC:0896KNovember28,1989ProposedachangeintherequiredminimumvolumeofthedieselgeneratorfuelstoragetanksAEP:NRC:0896LOctober31,1988RequesttoeliminatetheoverloadtestAEP:NRC:0896MMarch23,1989RevisedAEP:NRC:0896Hwithrespecttoten-yeardieselgeneratorfueloilstoragetankcleaningandinspectionAEP:NRC:0896NApril6,19891RevisedAEP:NRC:0896BandHwithrespecttodieselgeneratorfueloilsurveillancetesting Attachment1toAEP:NRC:1142Page3WeinitiallysubmittedtwoletterstotheNRCaddressingconcernswehadregardingdieselgeneratorreliabilityandGenericLetter84-15.TheselettersareAEP:NRC:0896datedSeptember28,1984andAEP:NRC:0896AdatedApril24,1985.Subsequently,wesubmittedAEP:NRC:0896BdatedJanuary16,1987torequestchangestotheT/SsinanattempttomakethemmorecloselyreflecttheStandardT/SsenclosedinGenericLetter84-15.AdditionalinformationandrevisedT/SswerelaterprovidedinlettersAEP:NRC:0896FdatedJune25,1987andAEP:NRC:0896GdatedSeptember28,1987.OnNovember25,1987wesubmittedAEP:NRC:0896Htorequestchangestotwospecificportionsoftheoriginalsubmittalsconcerningdieselgeneratorfueloilsurveillancetestingandtheten-yeardieselgeneratorfueloilstoragetankcleaning.Additionalinformationontheten-yeardieselgeneratorfueloilstoragetankcleaningrequestwaslaterprovidedinAEP:NRC:0896I,datedJanuary24,1989.InAEP:NRC:0896LdatedOctober31,1988,werequestedtoeliminatethedieselgeneratoroverloadtest.InAEP:NRC:0896MwesubmittedclarificationandnewproposedT/Spagesfortheten-yeartankcleaningandinspection.RevisediT/SpagesaddressingdieselgeneratorsurveillancetestingweresenttotheNRCinAEP:NRC:0896N,datedApril6,1989.TheNRCissuedAmendmentNos.125and112onMay31,1989totheUnit1and2T/Ss,respectively,whichaddresseddieselgeneratorfueloilsurveillancerequirements,dieselgeneratorfueloilstoragetanksurveillancerequirements,anddieselgeneratorsurveillancetesting.WeproposedtochangethesurveillancerequirementsforthestationbatteriestoallowtheuseofsimulatedloadsfortestingbatterycapacityinletterAEP:NRC:0896JdatedApril29,1988.TheNRCissuedtheseproposedchangesasAmendmentNos.123and110totheUnit1and2T/Ss,respectively,onApril11,1989.WesubmittedAEP:NRC:0896KonNovember28,1989tochangetherequiredminimumvolumeofthedieselgeneratorfuelstoragetanks.AmendmentNos.145and132totheUnit1and2T/SsaddressingdieselgeneratorfuelstoragetankcapacitywereissuedonAugust13,1990.DESCRIPTIONOFCHANGESPROPOSEDINTHISSUBMITTALInthissubmittalweareproposingchangestothreesectionsoftheCookNuclearPlantTechnicalSpecifications(T/Ss):3/4.8.13/4.8.2.33/4.8.2.5A.C.SourcesD.C.Distribution-OperatingD.C.Distribution-Operating-TrainNBatterySystemThefollowingisadescriptionofthechangesproposedtoeachsection.'
Attachment1toAEP:NRC:1142Page4a.34.8.1A.C.SourcesCurrentlyT/S4.8.1.1.2(e)2states:Verifyingthegeneratorcapabilitytorejectaloadgreaterthanorequalto600kwwhilemaintainingvoltageat4160+420voltsandfrequencyat60+1.2Hz,Weareproposingtoaddthewords"steadystate"asfollows:Verifyingthegeneratorcapabilitytorejectaloadgreaterthanorequalto600kwwhilemaintainingsteadystatevoltageat4160+420voltsandfrequencyat60+1.2Hz,b.3/4.8.2.3D,C.DistributionOperating34.8.2.5DAC.Distribution-0eratin-TrainNBatterSstemCurrentlytheT/S4.8.2.3.2(b)(l)surveillancerequirementsfortheABandCDD.C.bustrainsstate,inpart,thefollowing:4.8.2.3.2Each250-voltbatterybankandchargershallbedemonstratedOPERABLEb.Atleastonceper92daysbyverifyingthat:1.Thevoltageofeachconnectedcellisgreaterthanorequalto2.10voltsunderfloatchargeandhasnotdecreasedmorethan0.05voltsfromthevalueobservedduringtheoriginalacceptancetest,andXntheeventthata250-voltD.C.batteryand/oritschargerfailsthissurveillance,thebatterywouldbeconsideredinoperableandtheactionstatementwouldbeentered.TheT/S3/48.2.3actionrequiresthatthebatteryberestoredtooperablestatuswithin2hoursorbeinatleasthotstandbywithinthenext6hoursandincoldshutdownwithinthefollowing30hours.TheidenticalsurveillancerequirementsarestatedinT/S4.8.2.5.2(b)(1)fortheND.CDbustrain.However,theT/S3/48.2.5actionstatementrequiresthat,whentheTrainNbatterysystemisinoperable,theturbinedrivenauxiliaryfeedwaterpumpbedeclaredinoperableandthattheT/S3.7.1.2actionstatementbefollowed.Thisactionstatementrequiresthatwithoneauxiliaryfeedwaterpumpinoperable,therequiredauxiliaryfeedwaterpumpsberestoredtooperablestatuswithin72hoursorbeinatleasthotstandbywithinthenext6hoursandinhotshutdownwithinthefollowing6hours.
Attachment1toAEP:NRC:1142Page5Weareproposingtodeletethephrase,"andhasnotdecreasedmorethan0.05voltsfromthevalueobservedduringtheoriginalacceptancetest,"fromthesetwoT/Sssothattheyreadasfollows:IEach250-voltbatterybankandchargershallbedemonstratedOPERABLE:b.Atleastonceper92daysbyverifyingthat:1.Thevoltageofeachconnectedcellisgreaterthanorequalto2.13voltsunderfloatcharge,andInaddition,weareproposingtoincreasethevoltagerequirementgiveninT/Ss4.8.2.3.2(a)3and4.8.2.5.2(a)3.ThecurrentT/Sstates:3.Thepilotcellvoltageisgreaterthanorequalto2.10volts,andWeareproposingtorevisetheT/Stostatethefollowing:3.Thepilotcellvoltageisgreaterthanorequalto2.13volts,andThus,weareproposingtoraisetherequiredvoltageofeachconnectedcellfromgreaterthanorequalto2.10voltto2.13volts,andtodeletetherequirementthatthevoltagehasnotdecreasedmorethan0.05voltsfromthevalueobservedduringtheoriginalacceptancetest.JUSTIFICATIONSFORCHANGESa.34.8.1A.C.SourcesTheintentofthischangeistomakethespecificationclearer.Byaddingthewords"steadystate"wearenotchangingthemeaningofthespecification.b.3/4.8.2.3D.C.Distribution-Operating34.8.2.5D.C.Distribution-0eratin-TrainNBatter~SstemTherequirementthatthevoltagemustnotdecreasemorethan0.05voltsfromthevalueobservedduringtheoriginalacceptancetesthasresultedinplantshutdownsovertheyears.Deletionofthisrequirementisjustifiedfromseveralperspectives.First,RegulatoryGuide1.129,"Maintenance,Testing,andReplacementofLargeLeadStorageBatteriesforNuclearPowerI Attachment1toAEP:NRC:1142Page6Plants,"describesamethodacceptabletotheNRCstaffformaintaining,testing,andreplacinglargeleadstoragebatteriesforalltypesofnuclearpowerplants.ThisRegulatoryGuidestatesthatconformancewiththerequirementsandrecommendationsthatarespecifiedinIEEEStd.450-1975,"IEEERecommendedPracticeforMaintenance,TestingandReplacementofLargeLeadStorageBatteriesforGeneratingStationsandSubstations,"providesanadequatebasisforcompliancewiththeCommission'sregulationsinthisarea.ThisIEEEstandardmakesnomentionofa0.05-voltacceptancetestasspecifiedinourT/Ss~However,the1980and1987revisionsdospecifyafloatvoltageof2.13voltsasweareproposing.Second,theWestinghouseStandardizedTechnicalSpecificationsdonotrequirethe0.05voltacceptancecriteria,butdorequireavoltageof2.13voltsasweareproposing.TheBasesofRevision4oftheWestinghouseStandardizedT/Ssstatethatthesurveillancerequirementfordemonstratingtheoperabilityofthestationbatteri,esisbasedontherecommendationsofRegulatoryGuide1.129,"Maintenance,Testing,andReplacementofLargeLeadStorageBatteriesforNuclearGradePowerPlants,"February1978,andIEEEStd450-1980,"IEEERecommendedPracticeforMaintenance,TestingandReplacementofLargeLeadStorageBatteriesforGeneratingStationsandSubstations."Thesefirsttwojustificationsarefurthersupportedbythemanufacturer'sInstallationandOperatingInstructionsManual(C&DPowerSystems,¹12-800)andIEEEStandards450-1975,1980and1987,whichrevealednoinformationdisputingthisproposedchangetotheT/Ss.Inaddition,thecurrentTechnicalSpecificationsarecontradictory.ThesecondsurveillancerequirementofbothofthesubjectT/Ssstates:Each250-voltbatterybankandchargershallbedemonstratedOPERABLE'.At,leastonceper7daysbyverifyingthat:3.Thepilotcellvoltageisgreaterthanorequalto2.10volts,andConsequently,abatterythatmaypasstheweeklysurveillancemightconceivablyfailthe92-daysurveillanceifitdoesnotmeetthe0.05-voltacceptancecriteria.Finally,aspreviouslystated,thecurrentT/Sshaveresultedinunwarrantedplantshutdownsandthermalcycling.Assuch,theydonotenhanceplantsafety.
Attachment1toAEP:NRC:1142Page7SinificantHazardsAnalsisPer10CFR50.92,aproposedamendmentwillnotinvolveasignificanthazardsconsiderationiftheproposedamendmentdoesnot:(1)involveasignificantincreaseintheprobabilityorconsequencesofanaccidentpreviouslyevaluated,(2)createthepossibilityofanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviouslyanalyzedorevaluated,or(3)involveasignificantreductioninamarginofsafety.Criterion1Theproposedchangesdonotincreasetheprobabilityorconsequencesofapreviouslyevaluatedaccident.TheirintentistoprovideclarificationandtomakeourT/SsreElectNRCandindustryguidance.Theydonotaffecttheaccidentanalysis.Consequently,webelievethatthesechangesdonotincreasetheprobabilityorconsequencesofapreviouslyanalyzedaccident.Criterion2TheproposedchangesdonotcreatethepossibilityoEanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanypreviouslyevaluated.Theydonotrequirephysicalalterationoftheplantorchangesinparametersgoverningnormalplantoperation.Wethereforebelievethatthesechangesdonotcreatethepossibilityofanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviouslyanalyzedorevaluated.Criterion3TheproposedchangesmaketheT/Ssclearerandeliminatetheneedforthermalcyclingoftheunitsduetofailureofanoverlyconservativesurveillance.Unwarrantedplantshutdownsnotonlyinducethermalstressesonthereactorvessel,butchallengesafetysystems.Consequently,theproposedchangesactuallyenhanceplantsafety.Assuch,webelievetheproposedchangesdonotsignificantlyreduceamarginofsafety.Lastly,wenotethattheCommissionhasprovidedguidanceconcerningthedeterminationofsignificanthazardsbyprovidingcertainexamples(48FR14780)oEamendmentsconsiderednotlikelytoinvolvesignificanthazardsconsiderations.Thefirstoftheseexamplesreferstochangeswhicharepurelyadministrative.SincetheproposedchangesareconsistentwithNRCandindustryguidancewebelievethesechangesfallwithinthescopeofthisexample.Therefore,webelievethatthesechangesdonotinvolveasignificanthazardsconsiderationasdefinedin10CFR50.92.