ML17326B283
| ML17326B283 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 02/10/1987 |
| From: | ALEXICH M P INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17326B284 | List: |
| References | |
| AEP:NRC:0967H, AEP:NRC:967H, NUDOCS 8702180391 | |
| Download: ML17326B283 (10) | |
Text
ACCESSIONNBR:FACIL:50-315AUTH.NAMEALEXICH>J"t.P.RECIP.NAI'lE-REGULATORY"FORMATIONDISTRIBUTION'SY.El't;<RIDS)8702180391DOC.DATE:87/02/10NOTARIZED:NODOCKET5DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPiantiUnitiiIndiana005000315AUTHORAFFILIATIONIndiana8rNichiganElectricCo.RECIPIENTAFFILIATIONDocumentControlBranch(Document'bntrolDesk)
SUBJECT:
ApplicationforamendtoLicenseDPR-58'xtendingtimeforperformanceofsurveillanceoficebasketveighingsuntilupcomingrefuelingoutages.Responserequested,bg.870507.Feepaid.DIBTRIBUTIDNCODE:AOOIDCDPIEBRECEIVED:LTRIENCL3SIZE:LO~+TITLE:QRSubmittal:GeneralDistributionNOTES:RECIPIENTIDCODE/NAJ'JEPl/R-AEBPWR-AFOBPWR-APD4PD04PWR-APSBINTERNAL:ADN/LFl'1BNRR/TSCB01COPIESLTTRENCL1115510111RECIPIENTIDCODE/NANEPWR-AEICSBPWR-APD4LAWIGGINQTONzDPWR-ARSBELD/HDS3NRR/GRASCOPIESLTTRENCL22101111010EXTERNAL:EQMBRUSKE~SNRCPDR02111LPDRNSIC0305'083-OQklTOTALNUBBERQFCOPIESREQUIRED:LTTR22ENCL18 lg,tttItI, INDIANA8MICHIGANELECTRICCOMPANYP.O.BOX16631COLUMBUS,OHIO43216February10,1987AEP:NRC:0967HDonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnitNo.1DocketNo.50-315LicenseNo.DPR-58ICECONDENSERSURVEILLANCEINTERVALEXTENSIONFORUNIT1CYCLE9U.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionAttn:DocumentControlDeskMashington,D.C.20555
DearSirs:
ThisletteranditsattachmentsconstituteanapplicationforamendmenttotheTechnicalSpecifications(T/Ss)fortheDonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnitNo.1.Specifically,wearerequestinganextensionuntiltheupcomingrefuelingoutageforperformanceofthesurveillancesrequiredbyT/Ss4.6.5.1.b.2and4.6.5.1.b.3,concerningicebasketweighingsandflowpassageinspections.TheicecondensersurveillancesarerequiredtobeperformedbyMay10,1987.However,thebeginningoftheUnit1Cycle9-10refuelingoutagehasbeendelayeduntilafterthisdateforreasonsthatweredescribedinourletterAEP:NRC:0967D,datedOctober1,'1986.MecurrentlyanticipatethatwewillneedtheextensionuntiltheendofMay.Thesesurveillancescanonlybeperformedduringshutdown;therefore,toavoidunnecessaryshutdownoftheplant,weaskthatyourreviewofthisrequestbeperformedonanexpeditedbasisandthatyourespondtousbyMay5,1987.Thereasonsfortheproposedchange,adiscussionofalternativestosubmittalofthisT/Schangerequest,andouranalysisconcerningsignificanthazardsconsiderationsarecontainedinAttachment1tothisletter.TheproposedrevisedTechnicalSpecificationpageiscontainedinAttachment2.AsummaryoftheicecondensericeweightcalculationsdoneinsupportofthisextensionrequestisincludedinAttachment3.Adrawingillustratingtheicecondenserbayandrow-grouporientationiscontainedinAttachment4.Attachment2alsocontainstworevisedT/Spages(3/43-56and3/45-5)foroursubmittalAEP:NRC:0967F,datedJanuary16,1987.TheseT/SpagesdidnotincludetheT/SrevisionsissuedinAmendment100.ThepagesenclosedinAttachment2tothisletterincludetherevisionsofthisamendment.Byinclusionofthesepagesinthisletter,wearerequestingthatyousubstitutetheT/Spages3/43-56and3/45-5forthesimilarpageswhichwereincludedinAEP:NRC:0967F.SincenoT/Schangesareincludedonpages3/43-56and3/45-5otherthanthosecitedinAEP:NRC:0967F,wehaveconcludedthatnonewjustificationper10CFR50.92isrequired.187OZaO(87oz>8go5ooo~RAQOCpDgaly(,r0.0>
~~AEP:NRC:0967H-2-Webelievethattheproposedchangewillnotresultin(1)asignificantchangeinthetypesofeffluentsorasignificantincreaseintheamountsofanyeffluentthatmaybereleasedoffsite,or(2)asignificantincreaseinindividualorcumulativeoccupationalradiationexposure.TheseproposedchangeshavebeenreviewedbythePlantNuclearSafetyReviewCommittee(PNSRC)andwillbereviewedbytheNuclearSafetyandDesignReviewCommittee(NSDRC)attheirnextregularlyscheduledmeeting.Incompliancewiththerequirementsof10CFR50.91(b)(1),copiesofthisletteranditsattachmentshavebeentransmittedtoMr.R.C.CallenoftheMichiganPublicServiceCommissionandMr.G.BruchmannoftheMichiganDepartmentofPublicHealth.Pursuantto10CFR170.12(c),wehaveenclosedanapplicationfeeof$150.00fortheproposedamendments.ThisdocumenthasbeenpreparedfollowingCorporateprocedureswhichincorporateareasonablesetofcontrolstoinsureitsaccuracyandcompletenesspriortosignaturebytheundersigned.Verytrulyyours,cmM.P.AlexchVicePresidentP"tnggg(llAttachmentscc:JohnE.DolanW.G.Smith,Jr.-BridgmanR.C.CallenG.BruchmannG.CharnoffNRCResidentInspector-BridgmanJ.G.Keppler-RegionIII ATTACHHENT1TOAEP:NRC:0967HREASONS,DESCRIPTIONOFALTERNATIVESCONSIDERED,AND10CFR50.92ANALYSISFORCHANGETOTHEDONALDC.COOKNUCLEARPLANTUNIT1TECHNICALSPECIFICATIONS I,KAttachment1toAEP:C:0967HReasonsforT/SChangeRequestandDiscussionofAlternativesWearerequestinganextensionofthesurveillanceintervalfortheicecondensericebasketweighingsandflowpassageinspectionsrequiredbyT/Ss4.6.5.1.b.2and4.6.5.1.b.3.WerequestthatafootnotebeaddedtotheseT/SswhichstatesthatSpecification4.0.6applies.TheseicecondensersurveillancesarerequiredtobeperformedbyMay10,1987.CurrentlytherefuelingoutageisscheduledtobeginattheendofMay1987.Thereforethelengthofthisextensionisshortcomparedtotheoveralllengthofthesurveillanceinterval..Inthepastfivesurveillances(performedinApril1985,June1985,September1985,December1985,andJune198'6)'allicebasketweightsforbaysandrow-groupshavemettheacceptancecriteriaofT/S4.6.5.1.b.2.Thissurveillancehistoryshowsthatmaintainingtherequirediceweighthasnotbeenaproblem,andthereforewebelievethattheicecondenserwillhavesufficienticeweighttoperformitssafetyfunctionduringtheextensionperiod.Inadditiontothesurveillancehistory,wehaveperformedcalculationsoftheicelossduetosublimationthatalsosupportourbeliefthatthisextensionwillnotimpacttheabilityoftheicecondensertoperformitssafetyfunction.Thesecalculations,whicharesummarizedinAttachment3,showthatinmid-July1987allbutthreebaysandthreerow-groupsareexpectedtocontainatleast1220poundsoficeatthelower95percentconfidencelevelasrequiredbyT/S4.6.5.l.b.2.Theicecondensertotaliceweightisexpectedtobewellovertheminimumof2,371,450poundsrequiredbyT/S4.6.5.1.b.2.ThecalculationsusedknowniceweightsEromthebeginningofthissurveillanceintervalandextrapolatedexpectedicebasketweightsbasedontheaverageicelossutilizingdataEromthepastfiveiceweighingsforeachbayandrowgroup.Allcalculationswereperformedbasedonaverageexpectedicelossandtheminimumexpectedatthelower95percentconfidencelevelthroughatleastJuly1,1987'moredetaileddescriptionofthesecalculationsiscontainedinAttachment3.Theexpectedvaluesforthethreebaysandthethreerow-groupsthatmayfallbelowtheT/Slimitof1220poundsperbasketarebay1(1202pounds),bay7(1155pounds),bay24(1134pounds),row1group2(1212pounds),row4group3(1206pounds),androw9group3(1162pounds).Whilethesebaysandrow-groupsmightfallbelowtheT/Slimit,theyareallabovethe1098poundsstatedinthebasesastheminimumacceptableweight(BasespageB3/46-4).Thesebasesstatethat"Theminimumweightfigureof1220poundsoficeperbasketcontainsa10percentconservativeallowanceforicelossthroughsublimation."Thisstatementindicatesthatthepurposeofthe1220poundsurveillancelimitistoensureaminimumiceweightof1098poundsattheendoEthesurveillanceinterval.Thereforewebelievethatsinceallbaysandrow-groupsareexpectedtohaveicebasketweightswellover1098pounds(withmostbaysandrow-groupshavingicebasketweightsover1220pounds),theicecondenserhassufficientcapabilitytoperEormitssafetyfunctionduringtherequestedextensionperiod.
0I' Attachment1toAEP.C:0967HPage2T/Ssrequirevisualinspectionsofthelatticeframes,theintermediateandtopdeckfloorgratings,thelowerinletplenumsupportstructuresandturningvanes,andatleasttwoflowpassagesperbay.Overhalfoftheseareasmustbeinspectedfromlowercontainment,andthereforethiscannotbedoneatpowerduetoALARAconsiderations.IEightvisualinspectionshavebeenperformedsinceJuly1982.Sincethattime,twoinspectionsfailedtheT/Sacceptancecriteria,thefirstinOctober1983andthesecondinJuly1985.Inbothcasestheproblemconsistedofblockedflowpassagescausedbymaintenanceontheicebeds.Frequentlywheniceisbeingreplenishedintheicebaskets,chipsoficeandfrostaredispersedthroughouttheicecondenser.Inbothcasestheunsuccessfulinspectionswereperformedpriortopost-maintenanceclean-up.4Followingpost-maintenancecleaning,thesurveillancesresultswereacceptable.BothsurveillancefailuresresultedfrommaintenancethatwasperformedinModes5or6andwascorrectedbeforetheplantenteredMode4.Thereforeatnotimeweretheflowpassagesblockedwhentheicecondenserwasrequiredtobeoperable(Modes1through4).Itisimportanttonotethatnofailureshavebeenexperiencedininspectionsoftheicecondenserinthe"as-found"conditionfollowingpoweroperation.Thissurveillancehistorysupportsourbeliefthattheextensionofthevisualinspectionwillnotsignificantlyimpacttheabilityoftheicecondensertoperformitssafetyfunction.Portionsofboththevisualinspectionsandtheicebasketweighingscanbedoneatpower.Thevisualinspectionofthetopportionsoftheflowpassagesandlatticeframes,aswellastheintermediateandtopdeckfloorgratings,canbedoneatpower.AllicebasketsexceptthoseinRows1and9canbeweighedatpower.Row1islocatedclosesttothecontainmentwall,andRow9islocatedclosesttothecranewall(seedrawinginAttachment4).Theseicebasketscannotbeweighedbecausetheybecom'efrozeninplace(eventhoughnoiceorfrostcanbeseenandtheflowpassagesremainclear)andmustbefreedfromthebottom.ThiscannotbedoneatpowerduetoALARAconcerns.Althoughportionsofthesesurveillancescanbedoneatpower,werequestthattheextensionapplytoallofthesurveillances.Werequestthisbecauseoftherelativedifficultyinperformingthepartialsurveillancesatpower.Inaddition,duetotheexcellentsurveillancehistoryoftheicecondenser,wedonotbelievethatperformingportionsofthesesurveillanceswouldprovideasignificantbenefittosafety,andwebelievethattheadministrativeburdenofperformingthesepartialsurveillancesoutweighsthesmallpotentialgaininsafetymargin.10CFR50.92EvaluationPer10CFR50.92,aproposedamendmentwillnotinvolveasignificanthazardsconsiderationiftheproposedamendmentdoesnot:(1)involveasignificantincreaseintheprobabilityorconsequencesofanaccidentpreviouslyanalyzed, 4~I Attachment1toAEP.C:0967H(2)createthepossibilityofanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviouslyanalyzedorevaluated,orh(3)involveasignificantreductioninamarginofsafety.Ourevaluationoftheproposedchangewithrespecttothesecriteria,based,ontheaboveinformation,isprovidedbelow.Criterion1Onthebasisofthesurveillancehistoryoftheicebasketsandflowpassages,thecalculationsofthesublimationrates,andtherelativelyshortperiodofthisextension,webelievethattheextensionwillnotresultinasignificantincreaseintheprobabilityorconsequencesofapreviouslyevaluatedaccident.Criterion2Thesurveillanceextensionwillnotresultinachangeinplantconfigurationoroperation.Therefore,thischangewillnotcreatethepossibilityofanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviouslyanalyzedorevaluated.Criterion3Webelievethatanextensionofthesurveillanceintervalwillnotresultinasignificantreductioninthemarginofsafetybasedontheexcellentsurveillanceperformanceofthissystem,thecalculationsofsublimationratesandtherelativelyshortperiodofthisextension.Lastly,wenotethattheCommissionhasprovidedguidanceconcerningthedeterminationofsignificanthazardsbyprovidingcertainexamples(48FR14870)ofamendmentsconsiderednotlikelytoinvolvesignificanthazardsconsideration.Thesixthoftheseexamplesreferstochangeswhi.chmayresultinsomeincreasetotheprobabilityofoccurrenceorconsequencesofapreviouslyanalyzedaccident,buttheresultsofwhicharewithinlimitsestablishedasacceptable.Webelievethesechangesfallwithinthescopeofthisexample.Thereforewebelievethischangedoesnotinvolveasignificanthazardsconsiderationasdefinedin10CFR50.92.