ML17264A786
| ML17264A786 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17264A785 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9701150252 | |
| Download: ML17264A786 (4) | |
Text
~ gyS ttEtt(
~t c"
~4 0
Op nO IVl0 0
gO
+**++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 205M-0001 SAFETY EVALU TION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ELATED TO AH NDHENT N0.67 TO F CILITY OPE TING LICENSE 0.
DPR-18 ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION GINNA NUC EAR POWER T
DOCKET NO. 50-244
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated October 29,
- 1996, Rochester Gas and Electric Corpo7 ation (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications (TSs).
The requested changes would revise the NODE applicability for the motor-driven auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pump actuation on opening of the main feedwater (HFW) pump breakers to correct an error introduced during Amendment No. 61.
Specifically, the mode applicability would be for MODE 1 only and not for MODES 1 and 2 as is currently specified.
2.0 BACKGROUND
On February 13, 1996, the NRC issued Amendment No.
61 to the Ginna Station TSs.
This amendment replaced the existing Ginna Station TSs in their entirety with Improved Technical Specifications (ITS) that were based on NUREG-1431.
Subsequent to the issuance of the ITS, the licensee discovered an error with respect to Table 3.3.2-1, Function 6.f related to the motor-driven AFW pump actuation on opening of the MFW pump breakers.
This error required Function 6.f to be operable in MODES 1
and 2 versus the previous TSs which only required this above 5X power (MODE 1).
The addition of MODE 2 for this function has required the licensee to install temporary jumpers to the AFW pump start logic since the HFW pumps are not typically in service under these conditions due to the low system heat loads.
Consequently, the purpose of the proposed amendment is to revise the mode applicability for Table 3.3.2-1, Function 6.f to be consistent with TS requirements prior to Amendment No. 61.
This change also impacts the Required Actions for limiting condition for operation (LCO) 3.3.2 since in order to exit the MODE applicability for Function 6.f, the plant must only enter MODE 2 and not MODE 3.
3.0 EWAUATIDN The MODE applicability for Table 3.3.2-1, Function 6.f is proposed to be revised to remove the requirement for MODE 2.
This proposed change is consistent with the Ginna Station TSs prior to Amendment No. 61.
The prior TS shows that this function was originally only required above 5X power which is equivalent to the definition of MODE 1 in the ITS.
970ii50252 970i09 PDR ADQCK 05000244 P
While standard technical specifications require this function in MODES 1
and 2, the NRC specifically evaluated this difference in the safety evaluation (SE) for issuance of Amendment No. 42, dated Hay 11, 1981.
This SE concluded that only requiring the function above 5X power is appropriate for Ginna Station.
This is due to the fact that below 5X power, AFW may be used to maintain steam generator level such that automatic actuation of AFW is not required (nor desired).
The addition of MODE 2 in Amendment No.
61 was caused by use of the electronic version of NUREG-1431 in developing the ITS for Ginna Station.
Since NUREG-1431 requires this function in Modes 1 and 2, and the licensee failed to identify this difference and make the necessary corrections, Amendment No.
61 was issued with this additional requirement.
There have been no subsequent plant modifications or changes to the accident analysis which would invalidate the previous NRC acceptance of only requiring this function above 5X power.
Therefore, this change to correct the MODE applicability to reflect requirements particular to the Ginna Station is acceptable.
LCO 3.3.2 Required Action C. 1 is proposed to be revised to only require entry into MODE 2 if an inoperable channel of Table 3.3.2-1, Function 6.f is not restored to operable status within 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> per Required Action B.l.
This change is necessary since the ITS are organized to only require exiting the mode of applicability if a given function is not operable.
Since Table 3.3.2-1, Function 6.f is proposed to be revised to only apply in MODE 1, then the necessary required actions should only require exiting HODE 1 (i.e., entering MODE 2) if the function is not operable.
There are no other functions in Table 3.3.2-1 which utilize Required Action C. l.
The staff has determined this to be acceptable.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New York State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENV RONHENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (61 FR 64395).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
6'0
~CONCIUI G
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed
- above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed
- manner, (2) such activities will, be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
- G. Vissing Date:
January 9, 1997
e e-f'
~t I
"k i ~