ML19343D004
| ML19343D004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1981 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343C999 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104090050 | |
| Download: ML19343D004 (2) | |
Text
.
ps ntav S
UMTED STATES eE'A yj NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO*.; MISSION
- Jg
.C WACHINGTON, D. C. 20555
% % e*/p/
s., M
+....
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMEilDMENT NO. 42 TO FACILITY OPERATIrlG LICENSE TiO. OPR-6 CONSUt1ERS POWER COMPANY
-BIG ROCK POIrlT PLANT DOCKET f!0. 50-155
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 11, 1978, Consumers Power Campany (the licensee) requested an amendment to facility Operating License No. DPR-6 for the Big Rock Point Plant. This amendment would modify the Technical Specifications to incorporate surveillance testing for additional d-c power sources used for the plant safety systems, clarify existing emergency power supply Limiting Conditions of Operation, and modify existing surveillance requirements for the diesel fire pump batteries.
The licensee's submittal, in part, is in response to our letter dated December 7, 1977 which requested Consumers Power Company to submit Technical Specification changes for the Big Rock Point Plant which would address the additional d-c power sources used for the plant safety systems. The requested changes were to be con-sistent with the existing Technical Specifications pertaining to the emergency power sources.
2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION, Thecattached Technical Evaluation Report (TER) was prepared by our consultant, the Lawrence Livemore Laboratory. Based on our review of the TER, we agree with the findings made by our consultant that the proposed Technical Specification changes to the emergency power sources are acceptable on the basis that: (1) the proposed changes satisfy the criteria and procedures set forth in IEEE Std. 308-1074, IEEE Std. 450-1975, and Regulatory Guide 1.129, and (2) the proposed changes are consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications for BWR's.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
We have detennined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this detennination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignifican$ from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an enviromental impact statement or negative declaration and enviromental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amentient.
810.40'90050
- 4.0 C0tiCLUSI0fl We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin..the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such.
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the cannon defense and security or to the heslth and safety of the pubite.
Atta c.'1 ment : Report by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (UCID-18142), dated December 1979.
Dated: March 31, 1981 I
i I
1 l
i
ATTACHMENT UCID 18142 TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR EMERGENCY POWER SOURCES FOR THE BIG ROCK POINT NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Victor R.
Latorre l
I i
l 1
)
i December 1979 i
i i
~
y 4
G 0,
Tb2 y, M ~i: *p. p,.,,.try D~A k
D Q h
' a.';-.T '
- A y_; -
, y 2^
'3%,.gl44,%Tr&...
~
- t?;z../, Am...,a;g.$,fy.,'I' QyO Qsf d4
.,.. -..s.7 3
,.2.1.g'e s, 3.2 gM,t -y~..g.a FA' f, g" y;%+. bag q.,% -
D, W
\\
..-4
.c, a
s'-
. G. t
~+a.t....c. 3asg.p,r,r s
.2
,q... = he n. r g h<4-g; u
c e
e w
.g
- 2 w
TMs is ce latoririal report letended prbuier0y for teternal er limited ex arroel distrhrias. The
' $ ; 'p $ t,
' ' " ^
~
c,_ '
opanions and apednesons mated are Ibeer of the oather med eney et may est he these of the
,. N.p '.
3;;i,.: '
u kereiery.
v.+ N y'r
. J ::..,.,-
+
.n.
. n. -
T1 mis wort was supported by the thirted States Nedeer Regulatay f** ender a
%.{f'f.p[:,"y 5
.E u-*= or vederna.4m wah the vened states r. -_
- or r ersy.
g
'g-
~~N.
~~&
4Dgy y:,,,-r'M.^5 ' %
agf,'?
'. - 1
,.+. :My
..y$M'T_h $
m f
- )-,
_r
.r-r w
., y 7gc23coio]
nt
.. ~
~..
t ASSTRACT This report documents the technical evaluation of the proposed changes to the Technical Specifications for emergency power sources for the Big Rock Point nuclear power plant.
The criteria used to evaluate the acceptability of the changes include those delineated in IEEE Std-308-1974, and IEEE Std-450-1975 as endorsed by _ U.
S.
This repor*. is supplied as part of the Selected Electrical, Instrumenta-tion, and Control Systems Issues Technical Assistance Program being con-ducted for the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory' Comssion by the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.
9 s-
~
~
s'm.-
-~
w a
,e_.
4 FORWORD This report is supplied -as part of the Selected Electrical, Instrumentation, and Control Systems Issues (SEICI) Program being conducted for the U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Operating Reactors, by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Engineering Research Division of the Electronics Engineering Department.
The V. S. NJclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization entitled " Electrical, Instrumentation and Control System Support," BAR 20 19 04 031, FIN A-0231.
i l
i t
l, '
t l
l I
l l
l
r 2.
EVALUATION OF BIG ROCK POINT
2.1 INTRODUCTION
In this section, the changes in the Technical Specifications contained in Facility Operating License DPR-6, Docket 50-155 issued to Consumers Power Company on May 1,1964 for the Big Rock Point Plant are described and then evaluated on technical bases.
The guidelines for this evaluation are the criteria and procedures enumerated in IEEE Std-308-1974, "IEEE Standard Criteria for Class 1E Power Systems for Nuclear Power Gen-erating Stations," IEEE Std-450-1975, "IEEE Recommended Practice for Main-tenance, Testing, and Replacement of Large-Lead Storage Batteries for Generating Stations and Substations," and NRC Standard Technical Specifi-cations.
2.2 DESCRIPTION
OF PROPOSED CHANGES The changes proposed for the Big Rock Point Pl ant [Ref. 2) are presented below.
It should be noted that they include both revisions and additions to the original Technical Specifications. They are:
A.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3.A.1.(e) to read (during each operating cycle):
(e)
Verify that the cells, cell plates and battery racks show no visual indication of physical damage or abnormal deterioration for the station battery and the RDS batteries.
B.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3.A.1.(f) to read:
(f)
Verify that the cell-to-cell and terminal connections are clean, tight, free of corrosion and coated with anti-corrosion materia.1 for the station battery and the RDS batteries.
1 TECHNICAL EVALVATION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS' FOR EMERGENCY POWER SUURCES FOR THE BIG ROCK POINT NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (Docket No. 50-155) 1.
INTRODUCTION By letter to the Consumes s Power Company (CPC) [Ref. 1] dated December 7, 1977, the U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requested that CPC submit Technical Specification changes for - the Big Rock Point ~
nuclear power plant that incorporated additional d-c power sources used for plant safety systems.
These changes were to be consistent with the exist-ing Big Rock Point specifications pertaining to emergency power sources.
CPC responded to this request by letter dated May 11,1978 [Ref. 2], in which they described the necessary changes, as well-as other changes, which they proposed to enhance the overall clarity of the Technical Specifica-tions.
The purpose of this report is to review these Technical Specifi-cation changes in light of the criteria and procedures set forth in IEEE Std-308-1974 [Ref. 3] and IEEE Std-450-1975 [Ref. 4]' endorsed by U. S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.129, and the NRC Standard Technical Specifications.
a
C.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3. A.1.(g) to read:
(g)
Verify that the battery chargers for the station battery and the RDS batteries will supply at least 30 amperes at a minimum of 135 volts for at least 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />.
D.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3.A.1.(h) to read:
(h)
- Verify that the capacity of the station battery and the RDS batteries is adequate to supply and maintain in OPERABLE status all of the actual emergency loads for the design time interval when the battery is subjected to a battery service test.
The design time interval -for the RDS batteries is one hour and for the station battery is eight hours.
E.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3.A.2.(b) to read:
(b)
Verify that the cell voltage is >2.0 volts and specific gravity is >.2 of each cell of the station battery; and, verify :he Eell voltage is >6.0 volts and specific gruity is >1.2 on each cell of the RDS batteries.
F.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3.A.3 to read:
3.
Weekly:
(a) The electrolyte level of each RCS battery pilot cell and the station battery pilot ' cell is be-tween the minimum and maximum level indication marks.
(b) The pilot cell specific gravity for RDS and station batteries corrected to (77) F is >1.2.
(c) The station battery pilot cell voltage is >2.0 volts.
The RDS battery pilot cell voltage is
>6.0 volts.
(d) The overall battery voltage is >125 volts for the station battery and the RDS bat *.eries.
(e) Test-start the diesel generator and run for warm-up period.
(f) Verify that the diesel generator battery elec-trolyte level is above plates and that the over-all battery voltage is >24 volts.
G.
Add Section 11.4.5.3.4 as follows:
4.
Quarterly - Verify the following:
(a) That the. specific gravity of the diesel generator battery is appropriate for continued service;
(b) That the diesel generator battery and battery rack show no visual indication of physical damage or abnormal deterioration; and (c) That the diesel generator battery terminal con-nections are clean, tight, free of corrosion and coated with anticorrosion material.
H.
Revise Section 11.4.5.3.5 to read:
5.
Sixty months _ - At least once per 60 months during shut-down, verify that the RDS batteries and the station battery capacity is at least 80% of the manufacturer's rating when subjected to a performance discharge test.
This performance disenarge test shall be performed sub-sequent to the satisfactory completion of the required battery service test of Part 11.4.5.3. A.1.(h).
1.
Add Sections 11.3.5.3.A.8 and 9 as follows:
8.
During the reactor power operation, the 138 kV line may be out-of service for recair for periods up to three (3) cays.
9.
If Specification A.8 is not met, a nomal orderly shutdown shall De initiated within one (1) hour and the reactor shall be shut down as described in Section 1.2.5(a) within twelve (12) hours and shut down as described in Section 1.2.5(a) and (b) within the following 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
J.
Add the following sentence after the first paragraph in the Bases:
The operability of the diesel battery and charger is verified by the weekly starting test of the diesel and by the weekly verification of the electrolyte level and overall' battery voltage.
K.
Revise Section 4.7.11.1.2.C.1 to read:
1.
The batteries and battery racks show no visual indication of physical damage or abnormal deterioration, and
2.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
4 This technical review was performed based. on the criteria set forth in IEEE Std-308-1974, IEEE Std-450-1975, and pertinent NRC Standard Technical Specifications.
As far as changes A, B, C, D, E, F [(a) througn-
'(d)), and H are concerned, the licensee states [Ref. 2] that they are pri-marily editorial in nature.
They were provided to improve clarity and to
t correct what is claimed to be a minor error:
each RDS battery cell is a 6-volt unit consisting of three sections per cell, thus minimum cell volt-age for each RDS battery should 'e 6 Y versus the presently specified 2 V.
IEEE Std-308-1974 requires a visual inspection of both batterie>
and the battery charger.
These visual inspections are not mentioned ex-plicitly in the proposed Technical Specifications, revision F,
section 11.4.5.3.A.3.
Proposed change G, which adds section 11.4.5.3.4 to the Technical Specifications, does not conform to IEEE Std-308-1974; however, it does meet the intent of the NRC Standard Technical Specifications.
Changes F[(f)], G and J are provided to meet the intent of the staff's Decemoer 7, 19.77 letter [Ref. 1].
They were developed based upon existing Technical Specifications requirements and supplemented by standards derived from the diesel fire pump battery surveillance.
Other conditions considered include the f act that the diesel gener6 tor battery is only required during the starting of the diesel generator and that the diesel generator is started weekly.
Thus, the operability of the battery is enecked at least weekly through both diesel operation and battery elec-trolyte level and voltage checks.
Further, the proposed quarterly checks crovide an adequate level of assurance that no iong-term degradation pro-blems are developing and, as previously indicated, they are consistent with standards developed by the staff for the diesel fire pump batteries. There are no proposed changes to the " Limiting Conditions for Operation" for the diesel generator battery or :harger since it is concluded that Section 11.3.5.3.A.2 is applicable for these components.
Change I is provided to clarify the operability status of the 138-kV power supply.
Presently, the Big Rock Point Plant Technical Spec-ifications do not specifically allow continued plant operation with the 138-kV line de-energized by virtue of stating that the line shall "normally be available."
However, no required action is clearly identified, and there is no specified time frame in which to perform the action, in order
i e
to rectify this situation, Change I is proposed.
This change would allow continued reactor power operation for up to three days with the 138-kV line inoperable: after which, a plant shutdown would be required.
This is consistent with the existing LCOs for the 46-kV power supply and the diesel generator, and is deemed appropriate since the level of backup electrical protection will not be reduced over that occurring with a loss of the 46-kV power supply or diesel generator, because the incoming 138-kV and 46-kV lines are independent and both can provide power to the same safety systems.
Change K is submitted to delete inspection of the diesel generator battery pl ates.
This requirement is imoossible to meet since the battery case is opaque (made of hard rubber) and, therefore, not conducive to plate inspections.
4 e
h
l t
3.
CONCLUSIONS The changes in the Technical Specifications proposed by Consumers Power Company for the Big Rock Point niant satisfy the requirements set forth in the NRC Standard Technical Specifications, as mentioned previous-ly. However, there are some discrepancies between some of the surveillance functions and the surveillance i nterval s and those given in IEEE Std-308-1974 Since the intervals and surveillance functions given in the IEEE standard are illustrative, it is concluded that the proposed Technical Soecifications changes do conform to the inten* of the NRC staff for'emer-gency power sources for the Big Rock. Point nuclear power plant.
As such, we recommend that the NRC find the proposed changes to the Technical Spec-ifications acceptable.,
- i h
REFERENCES 1.
NRC (D.
K.
Davis) letter to Consumers - Power Company (D. A. Bixel) dated December 7,1977.
2.
Consumers Power Company (D. A. Sixel) letter.to NRC (D.
L.- Ziemann) dated May 11, 1978.
3.
IEEE Std-308-1974, "Stancarc Criteria for Class IE Power Systems.for -
Nuclear Power Generating Stations."
4 IEEE Std 450-1975, "lEEE Recox. ended Practice for Maintenance, Test-
-ing, and Repl acement of Large Lead Storage Batteries for Generating Stations and Substations."
5.
Big Rock Point FSkR.
l LLL:1980/1 4
lt i
~
4