ML20056D680
| ML20056D680 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 07/26/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20056D668 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9308170315 | |
| Download: ML20056D680 (2) | |
Text
.
A UNITED STATES i
TfIE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
/ f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20E0001
\\.I
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.153 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-40 OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-285
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated May 21, 1993, Omaha Public Power District (the licensee),
requested changes to the Technical Specification (TS) for Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1.
The proposed changes would increase the maximum bypass pressure for the steam generator low-pressure signal (SCLS) trip setting as contained in Tables 1.1, 2-1, 2-2, 2-4, and 3-2 from 550 psia to 600 psia.
The changes would also correct a typographical error and would clarify statements contained in the footnotes to Table 2-1 and Table 2-4.
2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 Steam Generator low-Pressure Sional Bvoass The proposed TS change will increase the permissible bypass to 600 psia to ensure that the automatic bypass enable feature would be below the TS limit when instrument drift, process uncertainties, and setpoint calibration tolerances are accounted for in the setpoint implementation.
The Combustion Engineering Standard Technical Specifications (NUREG-0212, Rev. 2) allow the trip to be inhibited below 600 psia, since the SGLS trip setpoint is 500 psia and the revised bypass setpoint is 100 psia higher, which is consistent with other Combustion Engineering plants. This change will not change any of the safety analyses for Fort Calhoun since the limiting transients occur at hot full power and hot zero power for the main steam line break. The proposed change would still require that the SGLS be enabled prior to the reactor being made critical (except during physics tests).
Based on its review of the licensee's suwittal, the staff concluded that the proposed TS change will not impact the safe operation of the plant and is acceptable.
9308170315 930726 PDR ADOCK 05000295 p
PDR J
4 t.
2.2 Administrative Chances Of the two administrative changes, one corrects a typographical error in the heading of Table 1-1 from Table "1.1" to Table "I-1".
The other change clarifies the statement in Footnotes (1) and (2) to Table 2-1 and Footnotes b and c to Table 2-4 that the automatic reset function occurs before the allowable bypass value is exceeded.
These changes are administrative in nature, and, therefore, the staff finds them acceptable.
1
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Nebraska State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 [NVIRONMENTAL 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 (58 FR 34084). 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.
5.0 CONCLUSION
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: Steven Bloom Date: July 26, 1993
{