ML071270307

Report of Facility Changes, Tests and Experiments Conducted Without Prior Commission Approval

ML071270307
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	05/01/2007
From:	Korsnick M Constellation Energy Group, Constellation Generation Group, Ginna
To:	Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR/ADRO
References
1001779
Download: ML071270307 (10)

Text

Maria Korsnlck R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC Site Vice President 1503 Lake Road Ontario, New York 14519-9364 585.771.5200 585.771.3943 Fax maria.korsnick@constellation.com 0 Constellation Energy Generation Group May 1, 2007 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION: Document Control Desk

SUBJECT:

R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244 Report of Facility Changes. Tests, and Experiments Conducted Without Prior Commission Approval The subject report is hereby submitted as required by 10 CFR 50.59(d)(2). The enclosed report contains descriptions and summaries of the 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations conducted in support of proposed changes to the facility and procedures described in the UFSAR and special tests, from July 2005 through December 2006, performed under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59. Also included in this report is a summary of commitment changes performed in accordance with NEI 99-04, Guidelines for Managing NRC Commitment Changes, as endorsed by NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-17.

If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Robert Randall at (585) 771-5219.

Very truly yours, Mary G. Korsnick

Attachment:

(1) Report of Facility Changes, Tests, and Experiments Conducted Without Prior NRC Approval for July 2005 through December 2006 under the Provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 (2) Report of Commitment Changes for July 2005 through December 2006 Performed in Accordance With NEI 99-04 cc: S. J. Collins, NRC D. V. Pickett, NRC Resident Inspector, NRC 1bor/77q

ATTACHMENT (1)

REPORT OF FACILITY CHANGES, TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED WITHOUT PRIOR NRC APPROVAL FOR JULY 2005 THROUGH DECEMBER 2006 UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 10 CFR 50.59

50.59 EVALUATION

SUMMARY

REPORT 50.59 Evaluation No: 2005-0005 Title of Change: Local Throttling of AOV-624/625 in Emergency Procedures Implementation Document: Emergency Operating Procedures UFSAR Affected Sections: 5.4.5, 6.3.2.1, 6.3.2.3, 6.3.3.3, 6.3.3.9, and 15.6.4.2 System: Residual Heat Removal System Descriptionof Change:

The proposed change justifies a revision to applicable Emergency Operating Procedures to change the local operator actions for throttling of Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system valves AOV-624 and AOV-625. Plant procedures call for operator action to throttle these valves to achieve a specified flow rate prior to transfer to the post-accident sump recirculation phase.

Previous analyses have determined that the system resistance offered by limiting flow during the injection phase will provide a long-term benefit for RHR pump net positive suction head (NPSH) margin, following transfer to the sump recirculation phase, under the limiting assumptions for large break loss of coolant accident (LBLOCA). The proposed change will direct operators to throttle these valves locally using the top-mounted hand wheels, by a specified number of turns from their normally maintained full open position, after the RWST has decreased to a level of 70% or less, and before transfer to the sump recirculation phase.

Evaluation Summary:

A design analysis was performed which determined that the RHR discharge valves throttled to a specific disc angle would correspond to a specified flow rate in the sump recirculation phase, considering the limiting NPSH assumptions. The specified flow rate is a conservative value that would ensure additional NPSH margin as compared to the NPSH analytical value associated with flow during sump recirculation, and which conservatively exceeds the valve variability experienced during prior outage tests. Tests indicated that the disc angle did not change and the flow remained relatively steady once the hand wheel was set in position.

Based on the evaluation performed, it has been concluded that this change may be implemented without NRC approval, per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

50.59 EVALUATION

SUMMARY

REPORT 50.59 EvaluationNo: 2006-0001 Title of Change: Circuit 751 Replacement Implementation Document: Plant Change Record 2005-0029 UFSAR Affected Sections: 8.2.1.1.2, 8.2.1.1.3, 8.2.1.2, 8.3.1.1.2, 8.3.1.1.6.1, 8.3.1.2.4.1, 8.3.1.2.4.5, and 15.6.4.2.3.4 System: Offsite Power System Descriptionof Change:

This 50.59 Evaluation addressed the change to replace the present overhead offsite power circuit 751 that originates from station 204 with an underground circuit that originates from station 13A.

The circuit 751 overhead line will be disconnected from the underground portion of the circuit.

The new circuit from Station 13A will be spliced to the existing circuit 751 underground cable.

The new circuit will be the new power source for transformer 12A via the existing 52/75112 circuit breaker. The new circuit will be designated as circuit 7T. Circuit 751 will no longer be a power source for Ginna Station.

Evaluation Summary:

50.59 Screening # 2006-0070, Circuit 751 Replacement, reviewed the modification to replace the present overhead offsite power circuit 751. The conclusion of that screening was the change in the offsite power source and the resulting increase in the probability of a loss of offsite power need to be evaluated under 10 CFR 50.59. This 50.59 Evaluation addresses only the change in the probability of a loss of the UFSAR described function of the offsite power system to provide a reliable source of 34.5 kV power to the station auxiliary transformers. Based on a PSA evaluation and qualitative engineering judgment this change does not result in more than a minimal increase in probability.

Based on the evaluation performed, it has been concluded that this change may be implemented without NRC approval, per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

50.59 EVALUATION

SUMMARY

REPORT 50.59 Evaluation No: 2006-0002 Title of Change: Reload for Cycle 33 ImplementationDocument: None UFSAR Affected Sections: none System: Reactor Coolant System Descriptionof Change:

59.59 Screening No. 2006-0362, "Core Reload for Cycle 33," reviewed the Westinghouse Reload Safety Evaluation for Cycle 33. The conclusions of that review were that the new version of the ORIGEN code (ORIGEN-S), which was used to calculate the source terms for Cycle 33 constituted a potential change to a method of evaluation. This 50.59 Evaluation addresses only having used the new version of the ORIGEN code (ORIGEN-S) to calculate the source terms for Cycle 33. All other changes associated with the Reload Safety Evaluation for Cycle 33 have been addressed in the 50.59 Screening No. 2006-0362.

Evaluation Summary:

The intended application of ORIGEN-S, which was used to develop source terms for Cycle 33, has not changed with respect to the application of ORIGEN2.1, which was used to develop source terms for Extended Power Uprate. ORIGEN-S has already been used to support requests for amendments to the licenses of Fort Calhoun and Catawba that have been approved by the NRC for its intended application. These NRC safety evaluations place no limitations on its intended use.

Based on the evaluation performed, it has been concluded that this change may be implemented without NRC approval, per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

50.59 EVALUATION

SUMMARY

REPORT 50.59 EvaluationNo: 2006-0003 Title of Change: Ginna Station Extended Power Uprate (EPU) Project Implementation Document: Plant Change Record 2004-0009 UFSAR Affected Sections: Numerous System: Numerous Descriptionof Change:

This 50.59 Evaluation is performed to support an increase in rated core power from 1520 MWt to 1775 MWt. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess those areas affected by power uprate that have not been either evaluated as being acceptable by the Ginna 50.59 Screening process or being reviewed by the NRC and found to be acceptability via the license amendment process and/or an uprate related Safety Evaluation Report (SER) issued by the NRC. The following activities are addressed:

1. 50.59 Screening 2006-0317 of UFSAR Section 3.9 performed for the 1775 MWt power uprate identified a change in a computer program that needs to be reviewed as a possible change in methodology.

2. 50.59 Screenings 2006-0310 of UFSAR Chapter 10 and 2005-0328 of UFSAR Section 5.1 performed for the 1775 MWt power uprate identified a change in the definition of a 50% load rejection used for assessing operational transients that needs to be reviewed.

3. 50.59 Screening 2006-0311 of UFSAR Chapter 8 performed for the 1775 MWt power uprate identified that for a bounding full power operating condition of the loss of one switchyard circuit breaker could cause the remaining circuit breaker to exceed its design rating. Since an administrative control is being proposed for uprate to address this issue, the use of an administrative control needs to be reviewed.

Evaluation Summary:

1. The computer program (MULTIFLEX 3.0) used for the Ginna uprate has previously been used by Westinghouse for the same types of analyses for Ginna and other Westinghouse plants. Its use has been determined to be acceptable by the NRC.

2. The change in definition of a 50% load rejection for operational transients is acceptable since operational transients assume normal operating characteristics of plant system and components.

Additionally, Westinghouse has used the new definition for 50% load rejection for other Westinghouse plants that have performed power uprates.

3. With the maximum design limit of the plant at uprate, the continuous rating of the 115 kV breakers from the GSU transformer to the switchyard could exceed the breaker rating if only one of the two breakers was in-service. The use of an administrative control would restore the operating condition of the breakers to values within their design limits before any damage to the breakers would occur.

Based on the evaluation performed, it has been concluded that this change may be implemented without NRC approval in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

50.59 EVALUATION

SUMMARY

REPORT 50.59 EvaluationNo: 2006-0004 Title of Change: Block the Turbine Bearing High Vibration Trip Function Implementation Document: Temporary Modification 2005-0015 Plant Change Record 2005-0022 UFSAR Affected Sections: 10.2.1.4 System: Turbine Generator System Descriptionof Change:

This 50.59 Evaluation is a revision to Evaluation 2005-0002 and will address two specific plant changes. The first change is being performed under Temporary Modification 2005-0015 and consists of blocking of the Turbine Bearing High Vibration Trip. The second change is being performed under PCR 2005-0022 and consists of the physical removal of the trip circuitry wiring. This 50.59 Evaluation is written to cover both plant changes and related documents and is described as "Blocking of the Turbine Bearing High Vibration Trip and Subsequent Component Removal." PCR 95-021 installed a High Vibration Trip to protect turbine machinery from a rapid vibration increase. This 50.59 justifies blocking and removal of this trip.

There is, however, a potential for an increased commercial risk to turbine machinery if a rapid increase were to occur.

EvaluationSummary:

The blocking and subsequent removal of the High Vibration Turbine Trip will reduce the potential for a spurious turbine trip and subsequent Loss of External Load accident as described in the UFSAR. This trip is not a credited safety function in the UFSAR. In the event of an actual high vibration, by procedure, the Operators will manually trip the turbine or the reactor, thus accomplishing the function. Any increase in risk due to turbine failure is expected to be mostly if not completely offset by a decrease in unnecessary turbine/reactor trips and the change is therefore approximately risk neutral.

Based on the evaluation performed, it has been concluded that this change may be implemented without NRC approval in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

ATTACHMENT (2)

REPORT OF COMMITMENT CHANGES FOR JULY 2005 THROUGH DECEMBER 2006 PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEI 99-04

COMMITMENT CHANGE EVALUATION

SUMMARY

REPORT Commitment Change EvaluationNo: 2005-001 Source Document: R.E. Ginna Response to NRC Notice of Violation, Inspection Report 50-244/93-06, dated July 14, 1993 OriginalCommitment: A documented visual inspection will be performed monthly of the Containment Recirculation Fan Cooler demisters for evidence of oil fouling.

Revised Commitment: The monthly inspection will be moved to a quarterly inspection.

JustificationSummary: This change is being made to reduce personnel radiation exposure. The monthly inspections performed since 1993 have not shown any evidence of rapid demister fouling from oil. Compliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix B will still be maintained.

-I-