ML17332A720

Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-58 & DPR-74.Amends Would Modify TS 3/4.6.1.7 to Allow Limited Purge Operation in Modes 1,2,3 & 4 for Pressure Control,Alara & Respirable Air Quality Considerations

ML17332A720
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	03/31/1995
From:	FITZPATRICK E INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML17332A721	List: ML17332A720 ML17332A722
References
AEP:NRC:1185, NUDOCS 9504060198
Download: ML17332A720 (14)

Text

PR.ICDR.IMY'

'CELERATED RIDSPROCESSING)

REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM(RIDS)ACCESSION NBR:9504060198 DOC.DATE:

95/03/31NOTARIZED:

YESDOCKETFACIL:50-315 DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit1,IndianaM0500031550-316DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit2,IndianaM05000316AUTH.NAMEAUTHORAFFILIATION FITZPATRICK,E.

IndianaMichiganPowerCo.(formerly Indiana&MichiganEleRECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DocumentControlBranch(Document ControlDesk)SUBZECT:Application foramendstolicensesDPR-58&DPR-74.Amends

.wouldmodifyTS3/4.6.1.7 toallowlimitedpurgeoperation inmodes1,2,3&4forpressurecontrol,ALARA

&respirable airqualityconsiderations.

DISTRIBUTION CODE:A001DCOPIESRECEIVED:LTR ENCLSIZE:TITLE:ORSubmittal:

GeneralDistribution NOTES:RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-1LAHICKMAN,Z INTERNAL~FILE CENTER~01'RR/DRCH/HICB NRR/DSSA/SRXB OGC/HDS2EXTERNAL:

NOACCOPIESLTTRENCL111111111110RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-1PDNMSS/DWM/LLDP NRR/DSSA/SPLB NUDOCS-ABSTRACT NRCPDRCOPIESLTTRENCL1122111111NOTETOALL"RIDS'ECIPIENTS:

PLEASEHELPUSTOREDUCEWASTE!CONTACTTHEDOCUMENTCONTROLDESK,ROOMPI-37(EXT.504-2083)TOELIMINATE YOURNAMEFROMDISTRIBUTION LISTSFORDOCUMENTS YOUDON'TNEEDlTOTALNUMBEROFCOPIESREQUIRED:

LTTR13ENCL12 fll indianaMichiganPowerCompanyP.O.Box16631Columbus, OH43216i4arch31,1995AEP:NRC:1185 DocketNos.:50-31550-316U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission ATTN:DocumentControlDeskWashington, D.C.20555Gentlemen:

DonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnits1and2PROPOSEDAMENDMENT TOTECHNICAL SPECIFICATION SECTION3/4.6.1.7 FORCONTAINMENT PURGEREQUIREMENTS andThisletteranditsattachments constitute anapplication foramendment totheTechnical Specifications (T/Ss)forDonaldC.CookNuclearPlantUnits1and2.Specifically, weareproposing tomodifyT/Ss3/4.6.1.7, Containment Ventilation System,anditsassociated Bases,toallowlimited(240hoursannually) purgeoperation inMODES1,2,3,and4forpressurecontrol,ALARAandrespirable airqualityconsiderations.

Theproposedchangeswillenhanceourabilitytousethecontainment purgesystemtoreduceunnecessaiy hardships onplantpersonnel performing activities incontainment.

Additionally, anincreaseinallowable purgetimeisbeingrequested toaddressimprovements inplantoperations andcapacityfactors.Attachment 1providesadetaileddescription oftheproposedchanges,thejustification forthechanges,andou'rdetermination ofnosignificant hazardsconsideration performed pursuantto10CFR50.92.Attachment 2containstheexistingT/Spagesmarkedtoreflecttheproposedchanges.Attachment 3containstherevisedT/Spages.Webelievetheproposedchangeswillnotresultin(1)asignificant increasein.theamounts,andnosignificant changeinthetypesofanyeffluentthatmaybereleasedoffsite,or(2)asignificant increaseinindividual orcumulative occupational radiation exposure.

TheseproposedchangeshavebeenreviewedbythePlantNuclearSafetyReviewCommittee andtheNuclearSafetyandDesignReviewCommittee.

',9504060198 950331PDRADDCK05000315PPDR'l)

~,s)f9f U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Page2AEP:NRC:1185 Incompliance withtherequirements of10CFR50.91(b)(l),

copiesofthisletteranditsattachments havebeentransmitted totheMichiganPublicServiceCommission andtotheMichiganDepartment ofPublicHealth.Sincerely, E.E.FitptrickVicePresident SWORNTOANDSUBSCRIBED BEFOREMETHIS~4~~DAYOFQQ~~I~1995

/0NotaPublicMyCommission Expires:~P-$

'$'hAttachments CC:A.A.BlindG.CharnoffJ.B.MartinNFEMSectionChiefNRCResidentInspector

-BridgmanJ.R.Padgett ATTACHMENT 1TOAEP:NRC:1185 DESCRIPTION ANDJUSTIFICATION OFCHANGES10CFR50.92ANALYSISFORCHANGESTOTHEDONALDC.COOKNUCLEARPLANTUNITS1AND2TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS C~wI~w~g~

Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1185 Page1I.ESCRIPTION OFCHANGESTheproposedamendment toTechnical Specifications (T/Ss)3/4.6.1.7 makesthefollowing specificchangestotheCookNuclearPlantUnits1and2T/Ss:T/S3/4.6.1.7 A.RevisestheLimitingCondition forOperation forspecification 3/4.6.1.7 (onpage3/46-9a)toredefinetheconditions inwhichitispermissible tooperatethecontainment purgesystemwheninMODES1,2,3,and4.TheproposedLimitingCondition forOperation wouldbemodifiedtoread:"Thecontainment purgesupplyandexhaustisolation valvesshallbeclosedexceptwhenoperation ofthecontainment purgesystemisrequiredfor;pressurecontrol,ALARA,andrespirable airqualityconsiderations forpersonnel entryandforsurveillance testingandmaintenance activities."

B.RevisetheBasesforspecification 3/4.6.1.7 (pageB3/46-2a)toreflecttheactivities whichallowpurginginMODES1,2,3,and4,asdefinedabove.Additional changestothebaseswillinclude,1)increasing theallowable purgetimefrom200to240hours,2)addingareference totheabilityofthepurgeisolation valvestocloseagainstLOCAforces,therebyassuring10CFR100guidelines aremaintained, and3)deleting"**"notescorrected duringpreviousamendments.

IX.JUSTIFICATION FORCHANGEST/S3/4.6.1.7 WeproposetochangethewordinginboththeLimitingCondition ForOperation andtheBasesofT/S3/4.6.1.7 toallowlimitedcontainment purgingwhileinMODES1,2,3,and4forreasonsotherthan"safetyrelatedreasons."

Ascurrently written,.

useofthecontainment purgesystemduringMODES1,2,3,and4islimitedto"safetyrelatedreasons."

Thesearedefinedas"theneedtoimprovecontainment workingconditions, e.g.,reduceairborneactivity, toperformsurveillance and/ormaintenance onasafety-related systemorpieceofequipment."

Additionally, purgeoperation islimitedto200hours,perthetechnical specification bases.Therestrictiveness ofthiswordingresultsinunnecessary hardshiptooperators, maintenance technicians, instrument technicians, andotherplantworkersperforming routinetasksincontainment.

Forexample,maintenance activities relatedtotheuppercontainment

-aIne Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1185 Page2ventilation systemsandtheglycolfloorcoolingsystemrepresent requiredactivities onequipment whichisnotcharacterized as"safetyrelated."

Achangetothespecification wouldallowthelimiteduseofcontainment purgetoaddressadverseenvironmental conditions (i.e.,temperature,

humidity, and/orpressure),

ALARAconcerns, andtoassurethatrespirable airqualityismaintained.

Itshouldbenotedthattheuseofthepurgesystemtosupporttheaboveactivities wouldberestricted tooccasions whentheexistingairfiltration andtemperature controlsystemswerenotsufficient toprovideacontainment atmosphere supportive ofworkingconditions.

Anadditional changetoT/S3/4.6.1.7 istoincreasethecurrentpurgelimitof200hoursperyearto240hours.Theoriginaltimelimitwascalculated basedonaunitcapacityfactorof77X.Asaresultoflongeroperating cyclesandimprovedplantperformance, theCookNuclearPlantcapacityfactorisnowforecasted tobe93X.Utilizing thesamecalculation whichestablished the200hourlimit,andincreasing thecapacityfactorto93Xyieldsavalueof240hours.Thisincreased timeallotment reflectstheadditional timetheunitwillremaininMODES1,2,3,and4witha93Kcapacityfactor.Asstatedinthetechnical specification bases,thecontainment purgesystematCookNuclearPlanthasbeendesignedinaccordance withNRCBranchTechnical PositionCBS6-4,Rev.1,anddemonstrated tobecapableofclosureagainstthedynamicforcesassociated withalossofcoolantaccident.

Thepurgevalveswillreceiveacontainment ventilation isolation signalonbothasafetyinjection andhighradiation signalsandclosewithin5seconds.Inaccordance withtheaboveBranchTechnical

Position, thepotential siteboundarydoseswerecalculated basedontheoriginalanalysisusedtodetermine theradiological consequences ofalossofcoolantaccident.

Theresultsofthisanalysisindicated atotalthyroiddoseof165remforthe0-2hoursiteboundarydoseandawholebodydoseof9.32rem.Sincephysicalchangeswillnotresultfromtheproposedamendment, thesiteboundarydoesguidelines of10CFR100(300remthyroidand25remwholebody)willnotbeexceededintheeventofanaccidentduringcontainment purgingoperations.

Theadditionof40hoursofallowable annualpurgetimewillnotresultinasignificant increaseintheamountofeffluentreleased.

TheOffsiteDoseCalculation Manual(ODCM)ensuresthatthedoserateatanytimeattheSITEBOUNDARYfromgaseouseffluentfromallunitsonthesitewillbewithintheannualdoselimitsofAppendixB,Table2,Column1of10CFR20forUNRESTRICTED AREAS.Thesespecifications willbestrictlyadheredtoduringanyreleaseviathepurgepathway.

Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1185 Page3Inconclusion, webelievethattheproposedtechnical specifications willnotaffectsystemcapability orintroduce anewordifferent modeofpurgesystemoperation notpreviously addressed intheaboveanalysis.

III.10CFR5092CRITERIAPer10CFR50.92,aproposedchangedoesnotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration ifthechangedoesnot:involveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated, 2.createthepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated, or3.involveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.CriteronThepurposeofthisamendment istoallowflexibility intheuseofthecontainment purgesystemduringMODES1,2,3,and4.Theuseofthissystemduringthesemodesofoperation haspreviously beenapproved(Amendment No.66).Therefore, thisamendment requestdoesnotinvolvea,significant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated becausetheproposedchange'otheT/Ssdoesnotaffecttheassumptions, parameters, orresultsofanyUFSARaccidentanalysis.

Basedontheexistingsystemdesignanddemonstrated closurecapability itisconcluded thattheproposedchangesdonotmodifytheresponseofthecontainment duringadesignbasisaccident.

Theproposedamendment doesnotaddormodifyanyexistingequipment.

Basedontheseconsiderations, itisconcluded thatthechangesdonotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Criterion 2Theproposedchangedoesnotinvolvephysicalchangestotheplantorchangesintheplantoperating configuration.

Thus,itisconcluded thattheproposedchangedoesnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1185 Page4Criterion 3Themarginforsafetypresently providedisnotreducedbytheproposedchange.Asdiscussed previously, thecontainment purgevalveshavebeendesignedanddemonstrated capableofclosureagainstthedynamicforcesresulting fromalossofcoolantaccident.

Theproposedamendment doesnotimpacttheabilityofthepurgevalvestoperformtheirintended.function (i.e.achieveclosure)intheeventofanaccident.

Basedontheseconsiderations, itisconcluded thatthechangesdonotinvolveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.IV.CONCLUSION Inconclusion, webelievethattheproposedchangedoesnotinvolvesignificant hazardsconsiderations because,asdemonstrated inthepreviousdiscussions, operation oftheCookNuclearPlantinaccordance withthechangeswouldnot:involveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated, 2.createthepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated, or3.involveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.

ATTACHMENT 2TOAEP:NRC:1185 EXISTINGTECHNICAL SPECIFICATION PAGESMARKEDTOREFLECTPROPOSEDCHANGES 4\~