ML20072C090
| ML20072C090 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 08/10/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072C078 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9408170071 | |
| Download: ML20072C090 (6) | |
Text
___
a na p
5 3
UNITED STATES 5
i!
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055HXxn SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N05, iii AND 104 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-42 AND DPR-60 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-282 AND 50-306
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 21, 1992, as revised December 29, 1992, November 24, 1993, May 17, 1994, and June 21, 1994, the Northern States Power Company (NSP or the licensee) requested amendments to the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60 for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2.
The May 17 and June 21, 1994, letters contained clarifying information and updated TS pages which were within the scope of the initial Federal Reaister notice.
The amendments revise TS and associated Bases for surveillance test intervals and allowed outage times for the engineered safety features and reactor protection system (RPS) instrumentation consistent with the NRC staff position as documented in l
NRC letters to the Westinghouse Owners Group.
The amendments also update operation modes to be consistent with Westinghouse Standard Technical I
Specification (STS) operational modes and also include several editorial changes to the Prairie Island TS that are unrelated to the changes described
- above, I
2.0 EVALVATION The proposed changes to the TS and the staff's evaluation of these changes are divided into the following main categories:
2.1 Qefinitions - TS Section 1.0. 3.10.A and Bases for Section B.3.10 The licensee proposed adding new definitions for the terms ACTION, OPERATIONAL MODE - MODE, STAGGERED TEST BASIS and a new TS Table 1-1 which would replace the existing definition for COLD SHUTDOWN, HOT SHUTDOWN, POWER OPERATION and REFUELING.
The licensee deleted the definition of DEGREE OF INSTRUMENTATION REDUNDANCY as this term is no longer used in the Prairie Island TS.
The proposed definitions are consistent with the Westinghouse STS Revision 4a or with the improved Westinghouse STS except for the following minor exceptions:
1)
The title for MODES 2, 3, and 4 are not consistent with the STS.
However, the mode numbers are consistent with the STS.
This exception 9408170071 940810 PDR ADOCK 05000282 P
PDR 3
, was needed because of the use of these titles throughout the current Prairie Island TS and plant procedures.
Because this is only a minor terminology deviation, the exception is acceptable to the staff.
2)
The RATED THERMAL POWER conditions for MODES 1 and 2 are based on 2% of full power rather than 5% as stated in the STS.
This exception was needed because current Prairie Island TS and procedures use 2% rated thermal power for Modes 1 and 2.
Since a value of 2% compared to 5% is conservative, changing the rated thermal power to 5% would provide no improvement in plant safety and may increase the possibility of operator error as the operators would need to adjust to a new power level value for these operating matters. The staff, therefore, finds the exception acceptable.
3)
The status of the reactor vessel head closure bolts is specified in a separate column rather than as an asterisked statement.
This is an editorial change and is acceptable to the staff.
4)
The reactivity conditions are specified by the terms " critical" and "subcritical" instead of the K, values which are used in the STS.
This exception is required bec,a,use in the current Prairie Island TS, all operating modes are specified in terms of the shutdown margins.
The term " critical" and "subcritical" are consistent with the K conditionsspecifiedintheSTSand,therefore,thestafffYn'dsthe proposed exception acceptable.
5)
The reactivity conditions for refueling are as previously described in the Prairie Island TS, therefore, the staff finds this note acceptable.
The licensee also revised the definition of SHUTDOWN MARGIN in Section 1.0 and the requirements of Shutdown Margin in Section 3.10.A.
These are consistent with the STS except that the part of the definition which provided guidance on how to calculate Shutdown Margin was added to the bases for Section 3.10.A, rather than being incorporated directly in Section 1.0.
These changes expand the Shutdown Margin requirements to the Intermediate and Cold Shutdown conditions and have no effect on the actual shutdown margin limits in the TS.
Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable to the staff.
The staff finds the definitions as proposed in Section 2.1 above, including the exceptions noted, acceptable.
2.2 Clarification to TS Section 2.3.A.2.a and Bases for TS Section B.2.3.
TS Section 2.3.A.2.g and the associated bases for this section were revised to clarify that the reactor coolant pump bus undervoltage reactor trip is the direct undervoltage trip and not the indirect trip which results from the reactor coolant pump circuit breaker undervoltage trip.
This change was required because the accident in the Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR),
Section 14.4.8.1, utilizes the direct reactor coolant pump bus undervoltage trip.
This change is acceptable to the staff as it is consistent with the assumption of the USAR.
~
a.
.. 2.3 Editorial Chanaes to TS Sections 2.3.B.1 throuah 2.3.B.5. TS 4.1-2B and TS 3.10-1
]
The licensee proposed the following editorial changes to the TS:
1)
TS 2.3.B.1 through 2.3.B.5 were revised to include the headings of the interlock names for clarity.
2)
TS Table 4.1-2B was revised to delete the footnote at the bottom of page 2 of 2 and a footnote was added at the bottom of page 1 of 2.
The footnote on page 1 of 2 provides the information which was previously provided in the footnote on page 2 of 2.
Incorporating the footnote on page 1 of 2 makes the existing requirement more readily apparent to the operators.
3)
The term " POWER OPERATION" in TS 3.10-1 has been fully capitalized because it is a defined term. This is consistent with the treatment of other defined terms in the TS.
The staff finds the above changes acceptable, as they are editorial in nature, and will aid the operator in reading the TS.
2.4 Chanaes to TS Section 3.5 and TS Tables 3.5-2 throuch 3.5-6 2.4.1 Functional Unit 15 of TS Table 3.5-2 The licensee proposed to delete Functional Unit 15, " Control Rod Misalignment Monitor," from TS Table 3.5-2 as this function is not associated with the RPS.
Also, TS 3.10.I specifically defines the actions to be taken if control rod position deviations are identified, or quadrant power tilt monitors (used for control rod misalignment monitoring) are determined to be inoperable.
Because the TSs adequately address operability of Functional Unit 15, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
2.4.2 Functional Unit 4 of TS Table 3.5-4 The licensee proposed to delete Functional Unit 4, " Emergency Cooldown Equipment Room Isolation," of TS Table 3.5-4 since this requirement is adequately covered in current TS Section 3.4.C.
This change increases the time the instrument channel may be inoperable and makes the action consistent with the actuation logic and actuated component for this function.
In accordance with the current TS, if the sensors are inoperable, the plant must be taken to hot shutdown and subsequently to cold shutdown if the minimum operability conditions are not met in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
If the logic or actuated components (dampers) are inoperable, then the only action required by the current TS is to close the associated damper with no mode change required.
Since there is only one sensor per system train, the proposed change is justified as it will require the same action for inoperability of the sensor, actuation logic and actuated components.
Based on the above, the staff finds the proposed change acceptable.
4,..
,,. 2.4.3 Deletion of TS Table 3.5-5 The licensee proposed to delete TS Table 3.5-5, " Instrument Operating Conditions for Ventilation Systems," because these items are adequately covered in TS Sections 3.6F and 3.6G for the ventilation systems themselves.
This change does not represent a change in requirements and is considered an editorial change.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed change acceptable.
2.4.4 Functional Unit 10 of TS Table 3.5-2 The licensee proposed to remove the Functional Unit 10 single loop and two loop loss of reactor coolant flow reactor trip requirements which were listed separately.
The revised TS listed these trip requirements as a loss of reactor coolant flow reactor trip in Functional Unit 12 of new TS Tables 3.5-2A, and 4.1-1A as a single item with no reference to single loop or two loop trips.
The reason for this change is that the P-7 and P-8 interlock which enables the single loop and two loop loss of flow trips have the same setpoint
(>10% power).
Also, single loop and two loop loss of flow trips utilize the same flow instrumentation.
Therefore, there is no need to list both trips separately.
Based on the above, the staff considers the proposed change editorial in nature and finds it acceptable.
2.4.5 Changes Based on the WCAP-10271 The following changes to TS Section 3.5 and 4.1 are proposed by the licensee:
1)
The licensee replaced TS Table 3.5-2 with new TS Table 3.5-2A.
The new table is consistent with the format and content of Westinghouse STS Revision 4a, and also incorporates allowed outage times (A0Ts) which were approved by the staff in the safety evaluation issued for Westinghouse Topical Report WCAP-10271.
2)
The licensee replaced existing TS Tables 3.5-3, 3.5-4, and 3.5-6 with i
new TS Table 3.5-2B.
This new table is consistent with the format and content of Westinghouse STS Revision 4a, and also incorporates the A0Ts which were appre ed by the staff in the safety evaluation issued fer Westinghouse Topical Report WCAP-10271.
3)
TS Section 3.5 was revised to refer to new TS Tables 3.5-2A and 3.5-28.
Parts C and D of TS Section 3.5 were replaced by incorporating actions or notes into the new tables as appropriate.
4)
The licensee replaced existing TS Table 4.1-1 with new TS Tables 4.1-1A, 4.1-18, and 4.1-1C for Reactor Trip, Engineered Safety Features, and miscellaneous instrumentation surveillance requirements, respectively.
The new tables are consistent with the format and content of Westinghouse STS Revision 4a or with the improved Westinghouse STS, and also incorporate the surveillance frequencies which were approved by the staff in the safety evaluation issued for Westinghouse Topical Report WCAP-10271.
I 4 0 9 q 5)
TS Section 4.1.A was revised to refer to new Tables 4.1-1A through 4 1
IC.
Also, TS Section 4.1.0 was revised to delete the sentence required to be operable at all times.concerning the requirement that into the individual new tables.
This requirement was incorporated u
i The above proposed changes are based on Westinghout2 WCAP-10271, " Evaluation of Surveillance Frequencies and Out of Servi Topical Reports for the Reactor Protection Instrumentation System," dated February 21 o
mes Supplement 1-P-A dated May 1986 for the RPS instrumentation e<
, 1985, WCAP-10271-P-A Supplement 2, Revision 1, dated May 1989 for engine
, and y, j features actuation system ESFAS) instrumentation.
reviewed this topical repor(t and its supplements and issued safety The staff previously dated February 21, 1985, for the RPS, and February 22, 1989 and A ig, 1 ns (STis) and A0Ts for these systems subject to certain ab s
conditions.
The licensee responded to these conditions and provided se,
requirements specifically stated in the staff's safety eva of r i above topical reports or the requirements do not apply.
e nc j to change STis and A0Ts for the RPS and ESFAS instrumentation in acco d ipo with the topical reports and revised the format and content in accorda r ance Westinghouse STS Revision 4a or with the improved Westinghouse STS changes were made unless discussed in this safety evaluation.
34:
No other above, the staff finds the proposed changes to the TS to be acceptable Based on the ce 2.4.6 Changes to TS Requirements for Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System 4,1
'SFt i 2.4.6.1 Addition of Surveillance Requirements for AFW System Instrumentat
- amtI 3d E The licensee added surveillance requirements for AFW system instrum n
rt c Functional Unit 7 in TS Table 4.1-1B which are consistent w on i entation as content of the Westinghouse STS Revision 4a.
ormat and drii as the current requirement in TS Section 4.8. The TS requirement is the same nature, and, therefore, the staff finds the proposed change acceptableThis ind 4-2.4.6.2 Changes to A0T for AFW System as 3 The licensee proposed to increase the A0T for the manual AFW system a s, at circuitry and automatic AFW actuation on main feedwater (MFW) pum he ti uation circuitry from 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> (Actions 26 and 34 in TS Table 3 5
- the, the November 24, 1993, submittal).
d ch!
A0T for the AFW pump actuation logic and actuation relays from 6 houT 19 3,
hours (Action 30 in TS Table 3.5.2.B).
rs to 72 for consistency on the basis that 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> out-of-service time isThe licens the AFW pump by TS Sectinn 3.4.B.2 and because the failure of one ch allowed for affect automatic start of only one AFW pump.
annel will ed fu During the meeting with the stat'f on March 1, 1994, and in subsequent orde discussions with the licensee, the staff asked the licensee to revise thional action statement for the AFW system circuitry to state that inoperability idervo e
this instrumentation results in the inoperability of an AFW pump and of would l
i
,.,. safeguard buses.
These functions initiate a reactor trip signal with a one-out-of-two taken twice logic instead of one-out-of-one logic.
In addition to the logic change, the licensee proposed to add Action Statements 31, 32, and 33 to define the A0T in accordance with the Westinghouse STS Revision 4a.
Based on the above, the staff finds the proposed changes to the TS to be consistent with the previously approved instrumertation design, and therefore, acceptable.
Several TS pages have been updated to reflect changes made by Amendments that were issued since the initial submittal.
Based on its review of the licensee's submittals, the staff concludes that the proposed changes to the Prairie Island TS for the RPS, ESFAS, and other
- miscellaneous instrumentation systems are consistent with the current Westinghouse STS Revision 4a and previously approved topical reports and license amendments, are clarifications, or are editorial in nature. The staff, therefore, finds the proposed TS changes to be acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Minnesota State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change requirements with respect to installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 10012).
Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonabic 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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Hukam Garg Date: August 10, 1994
fi
.c DATED:
A nult_10, 1994 AMENDMENT NO.111 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-42-PRAIRIE ISLAND UNIT 1 AMENDMENT NO.104 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-60-PRAIRIE ISLAND UNIT 2 Docket File NRC & Local PDRs PDIII-l Reading J. Roe J. Zwolinski L. B. Marsh C. Jamerson M. Gamberoni (2)
OGC-WF D. llagan, 3206 MNBB G, Hill (4), Pl-22 C. Grimes, ll/F/23 H. Garg, 8/H/3 II. Richings, 8/E/23 S. Saba, 7/E/4 C. Schulten, ll/E/22 ACRS (10)
OPA OC/LFDCB W. Kropp, R-III SEDB cc:
Plant Service list l