ML17264A338

From kanterella
Revision as of 12:49, 29 June 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Application for Amend to License DPR-18,revising TS to Incorporate Ref to Methodology for Determining Ltop Limits Into Administrative Controls Section for RCS PT Limits Rept
ML17264A338
Person / Time
Site: Ginna Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 02/09/1996
From: MECREDY R C
ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML17264A337 List:
References
NUDOCS 9602130368
Download: ML17264A338 (8)
v • d • e


Text

UNITEDSTATESOFAlvKRICANUCLEARREGULATORY COMMSSION IntheMatterofRochester GasandElectricCorporation (R.E.GinnaNuclearPowerPlant))))DocketNo.50-244)APPLICATION FORAMENDMENT TPERATINLIENKPursuanttoSection50.90oftheregulations oftheU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC),Rochester GasandElectricCorporation (RGB),holderofFacilityOperating LicenseNo.DPR-18,herebyr'equests thattheTechnical Specifications setforthinAppendixAtothatlicense,beamended.Thisrequestforchangeistoincorporate reference tothemethodology fordetermining LowTemperature Overpressure Protection (LTOP)limitsintotheAdministrative ControlssectionfortheReactorCoolantSystem(RCS)PressureandTemperature LimitsReport(PTLR).Adescription oftheamendment request,necessary background information, justification oftherequested changes,andnosignificant hazardsandenvironmental considerations areprovidedinAttachment I.Thisevaluation demonstrates thattheproposedchangesdonotinvolveasignificant changeinthetypesorasignificant increaseintheamountsofeffluents oranychangeintheauthorized powerlevelofthefacility.

Theproposedchangesalsodonotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration.

9b02i303b8 960209PDRADQCK05000244PPOR AmarkedupcopyoftheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications whichshowtherequested changesissetforthinAttachment II.Theproposedrevisedtechnical specifications areprovidedinAttachment III.Anevaluation oftheLTOPlimitsusingtheproposedmethodology isprovidedinAttachment IV.WHEREFORE, Applicant respectfully requeststhatFacilityOperating LicenseNo.DPR-18,andAttachment Atothatlicense,beamendedintheformattachedheretoasAttachment III.Rochester GasandElectricCorporation ByRobertC.MecreVicePresident NuclearOperations Subscribed andsworntobeforemeonthis9thdayofFebruary1996.NotaryPuicJOANNES.GORMANNotaryPublicintheStateofNewYorkOrleansCountyCommission ExpiresNov.19 I(I1V~)PnFT':ilVv'i'(kA',ifld Attachment IR.E.GinnaNuclearPowerPlantLicenseAmendment RequestMethodology forLowTemperature Overpressure Protection (LTOP)LimitsThisattachment providesadescription ofthelicenseamendment request(LAR)andthenecessary justifications tosupportincorporation ofthemethodology fordetermining LTOPlimitsintotheAdministrative ControlssectionfortheReactorCoolantSystem(RCS)PressureandTemperature LimitsReport(PTLR).Thisattachment isdividedintosixsectionsasfollows.SectionAsummarizes allchangestotheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications whileSectionBprovidesthebackground andhistoryassociated withthechangesbeingrequested.

SectionCprovidesthejustifications associated withtheseproposedchanges.Anosignificant hazardsconsideration evaluation andenvironmental consideration oftherequested changestotheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications areprovidedinSectionsDandE,respectively.

SectionFlistsallreferences usedinthisattachment.

A.DESCRIPTION OFTECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGESThisLARproposestorevisetheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications toincorporate reference tothemethodology fordetermining LTOPsetpoints.

Thechangeissummarized belowandshowninAttachment II.Administrative Controls5.6.6Itemcwillberevisedtoreference themethodology fordetermining LTOPlimitsandtodeletereference toAmendment No.48withrespecttoLTOPlimits.

B.BACKGROUND Duringtheconversion toimprovedstandardtechnical specifications forGinnaStation,RGBhadproposedtorelocatetheLTOPandRCStemperature andpressurelimitstothePTLR(Ref.1).Associated withthischangewastheadditionofareference totheAdministrative Controlssectionoftechnical specifications relatedtothePTLRdocumenting themethodology usedforallchangestotheselimits.However,theproposedmethodology wouldbe"new"withrespecttodetermination ofboththeLTOPandRCStemperature andpressurelimitsatGinnaStation.Duetotimeconstraints, RGBinformedtheNRCthatuseofthisnewmethodology wouldbeburdensome andinstead,RG&Ewishedtoretaintheexistingvalues.TheNRCagreedwiththisconcernandallowedtheexistinglimitstoberelocated tothePTLRbutrequiredchangestotheselimitstobereviewedandapprovedbytheNRCasdocumented inReference 2.However,thedetermination thatGinnaStationneededtoretaintheexistingvalueswaswithrespecttotheRCSpressureandtemperature limitsthatareincludedinthePTLRandnottheLTOPlimits.Assuch,thisLARrequeststhattheLTOPmethodology bereviewedandapprovedbytheNRCstafFsuchthatitcanbereferenced withintheAdministrative Controlssectionofthetechnical specifications.

AnychangestotheRCSpressureandtemperature limitsincludedinthePTLRwillstillrequireNRCreviewandapproval.

ItshouldbenotedthattheLTOPmethodology beingproposedbyRGEcEhadreceivedinitialNRCreviewsincethemethodology providedinReference 1incorporates allcommentswhichRG@Ehadreceivedtodate.Attachment IVcontainstheevaluation oftheLTOPlimitsatGinnaStationusingthisproposedmethodology.

C.JUSTIFICATION OFCHANGESThissectionprovidesthejustification forallchangesdescribed inSectionAaboveandshowninAttachment II.Thejustifications areorganized basedonwhetherthechangeis:morerestrictive (M),lessrestrictive (L),administrative (A),ortherequirement isrelocated (R).Thejustifications listedbelowarealsoreferenced inthetechnical specification(s) whichareaffected(seeAttachment II).

C.~dA.lAdministrative ControlsSection5.6.6.cisrevisedtostatethat"theanalytical methodsusedtodetermine theLTOPlimitsshallbethosepreviously reviewedbytheNRC"versusthe"LTOPlimitsshallbethosepreviously reviewedandapprovedbytheNRCinAmendment No.48."Thischangeisadministrative innaturesincetheLTOPlimitswerepreviously relocated fromtechnical specifications tothePTLR.Theonlychangebeingrequested isthatallfuturechangestotheseLTOPlimitsmustbeperformed inaccordance withNRCapprovedmethodology insteadofrequiring alicenseamendment.

Thechangeisalsoconsistent withNUREG-1431.

Therearenotanymorerestrictive (M),lessrestrictive (L),orrelocated (R)changesassociated withthisLAR.D.SIGNIFICANT

~ARDSCONSIDERATION EVALUATION, TheproposedchangestotheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications asidentified inSectionAandjustified inSectionChavebeenevaluated withrespectto10CFR50.92(c)andshowntonotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdescribed below.Thissectionisorganized basedonSectionCabove.D.lEvalitinfAmini.rivehanesTheadministrative changesdiscussed inSection8.3donotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdiscussed below:Operation ofGinnaStationinaccordance withtheproposedchangesdoesnotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated.

TheproposedchangesonlyrequirethatfutureLTOPlimitsbedeveloped usingNRCapprovedmethodology asspecified withintheAdministrative Controlssectionanddonotinvolveanytechnical changes.Assuch,thesechangesareadministrative innatureanddonotimpactinitiators oranalyzedeventsorassumedmitigation ofaccidentortransient events.Therefore, thesechangesdonotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously analyzed.

~$~Il~IOperation ofGinnaStationinaccordance withtheproposedchangesdoesnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Theproposedchangesdonotinvolveaphysicalalteration oftheplant(i.e.,nonewordifferent typeofequipment willbeinstalled) orchangesinthemethodsgoverning normalplantoperation.

Theproposedchangeswillnotimposeanynewordifferent requirements.

Thus,thischangedoesnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccident.

previously evaluated.

Operation ofGinnaStationinaccordance withtheproposedchangesdoesnotinvolveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Theproposedchangeswillnotreduceamarginofplantsafetybecausethechangesdonotimpactanysafetyanalysisassumptions otherthanrequiring futureevaluations ofLTOPlimitstobeperformed inaccordance withNRCapprovedmethodology.

Thesechangesareadministrative innature.Assuch,noquestionofsafetyisinvolved, andthechangedoesnotinvolveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Basedupontheaboveinformation, ithasbeendetermined thattheproposedadministrative changestotheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications donotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated, doesnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentpreviously evaluated, anddoesnotinvolveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Therefore, itisconcluded thattheproposedchangesmeettherequirements of10CFR50.92(c)anddonotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration.

E.ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION RGBhasevaluated theproposedchangesanddetermined that:Thechangesdonotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdocumented inSectionDabove;Thechangesdonotinvolveasignificant changeinthetypesorsignificant increaseintheamountsofanyeffluents thatmaybereleasedoffsitesincenospecifications relatedtooffsitereleasesareaffected; andThechangesdonotinvolveasignificant increaseinindividual orcumulative occupational radiation exposuresincenonewordifferent typeofequipment arerequiredtobeinstalled asaresultofthisLARAccordingly, theproposedchangesmeettheeligibility criteriaforcategorical exclusion setforthin10CFR51.22(c)(9).

Therefore, pursuantto10CFR51.22(b),

anenvironmental assessment oftheproposedchangesisnotrequired.

4 F.REFERENCES LetterfromR.RMecredy,RG&;E,toA.A.Johnson,NRC,

Subject:

Technical Specijications Improvement Program,ReactorCoolantSystem(RCS)PressureandTemperature LimitsReport(PTLR),datedDecember8,1995.LetterfromL.B.Marsh,NRC,toR.R.Mecredy,RG&;E,RL.Ginna-Acceptance forReferencing ofPressureTemperalm eLimitsReport(TAC¹M92320),datedDecember26,1995.-5-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17264A338&oldid=742690"