ML20072L391
| ML20072L391 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 08/24/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072L381 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9408310242 | |
| Download: ML20072L391 (4) | |
Text
.
e* *'%
y n
a g
UNITED STATES l'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'g
/
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.193'T0 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-53 AND AMENDMENT N0. 170 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-69 BALTIM0RE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPa#1 CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-317 AND 50-318 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 27, 1994, the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2, Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes would revise the TS surveillance test interval from monthly to quarterly for several channel functional tests for the Reactor Protective System (RPS) and the Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System (ESFAS).
In addition, an administrative change to the ESFAS table would remove an out-of-date footnote concerning the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) logic circuit modifications.
2.0 BACKGR0VND The staff issued Supplement I to Generic Letter (GL) 83-28, " Required Actions Based on Generic Implications of Salem ATWS Events," on October 7, 1992.
Item 4.5.2 of the GL requested licensees to confirm that on-line functional testing of the RPS is being performed and that existing test intervals required by their TS are adequate for achieving high RPS reliability.
In response, Combustion Engineering (CE) performed an analysis, CEN-327, to evaluate the availability of the RPS given the 30-day test interval required by the TS. A follow-up to the original analysis, CEN-327 Supplement 1, was performed to determine the impact of extending the surveillance test interva;s for selected components in the RPS and ESFAS.
In March 1989, CE issued CEN-327, Supplement 1, which presented changes in RPS reliability that resulted from extending the test intervals from 30 days to 90 days for all RPS trip parameters, and recommended a 90-day test interval with sequential testing.
It was demonstrated that the surveillance test interval for RPS and ESFAS components can be increased to 90-days with no significant increase in RPS unavailability.
In November 1989, the staff issued a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for CEN-327 and CEN-327, Supplement 1.
The staff stated that it was acceptable to extend the surveillance test intervals for the RPS and ESFAS from 30 days to 90 days for all CE plants (excluding Maine Yankee). This approval was 9408310242 940824 PDR ADOCK 05000317 P
\\
- contingent on each plant confirming that instrument drift occurring over the proposed survei'llance test interval would not cause the setpoint values to exceed those assumed in the safet'y analysis and specified in the TSs.
In addition, the staff stated that licensees:
(1) must confirm that they have 1
reviewed instrument drift information for each channel involved, (2) have to j
determine that drift occurring in that channel over the period of extended surveillance test interval would not cause the setpoint value to exceed the allowable value as calculated for that channel by the licensee's methodology, (3) should have onsite records of the as-found and as-left values showing actual calculations and supporting data for planned future NRC audits.
3.0 EVALUATION The RPS and ESFAS provide actuation signals to the safety equipment needed to mitigate the consequences of accidents and transients.
The licensee is l
requesting to extend the surveillance test interval for the RPS and ESFAS from monthly to quarterly.
Specifically, it is requested that Table 4.3-1, Reactor Protective Instrumentation Surveillance Requirements, Functional Units 1 - 14 and Table 4.3-2, ESFAS Instrumentation Surveillance Requirements, Functional Units 1 - 9 surveillance interval be changed from monthly to quarterly. The I
licensee performed a plant-specific instrument drift analysis to determine the effect on instrument drift when the RPS and ESFAS instrumentation functional surveillance test interval in increased from monthly to quarterly. A 120-day i
drift interval was calculated to bound the quarterly interval plus the 25 percent maximum allowable extension period permitted in the TS. A review of the affected RPS and ESFAS instrumentation channels determined that the i
instrument drift for the extended surveillance test intervals do not exceed the current 30-day setpoint assumptions.
Three years of observed, monthly, as-found and as-left data for each channel of the applicable instrumentation
)
functions were reviewed for the plant-specific evaluation.
The onsite records of the as-found and as-left values showing the calculations and supporting data are available onsite for inspection.
The requested changes to the ESFAS and RPS surveillance test are consistent with the changes that were evaluated by CE in CEN-327 and CEN-327, Supplement 1.
The staff prepared a SER based on the CE documents and approved the CE methodology to satisfy requirements set forth in GL 83-28.
The requested changes to increase the surveillance test intervals from monthly to quarterly satisfies the requirements set forth in GL 83-28 and the analysis was perform utilizing accepted methodology; therefore, the changes are i
acceptable.
In addition, it was request to remove an out-of-date footnote from TS Table 4.3-2.
Previous amendments added a footnote to the ESFAS Table 4.3-2 that exempted the monthly test for the Safety Injection Actuation Signal logic circuits A-10 and B-10 until the EDG logic circuit modifications were completed. The proposed removal of the footnote from the ESFAS Table 4.3-2 is an administrative change.
The modifications referenced by the footnote have been completed; therefore, this change is acceptable.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance w'ith the Commission /s regulations, the Maryland State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDER 8TL@
The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component 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 l
significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative i
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 37062). 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.
6.0 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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Jeffrey F. Harold Date: August 24, 1994
\\
Docket Nos. 50-317 August 24, 1994 and 50-318 Mr. Robert E. Denton Vice President - Nuclear Energy Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 1650 Calvert Cliffs Parkway Lusby, Maryland 20657-4702
Dear Mr. Denton:
SUBJECT:
ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS FOR CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT N0. 1 (TAC N0. M89587) AND UNIT N0. 2 (TAC N0. M89589)
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 193to Facility Operating License No. DPR-53 and Amendment No.170 to Facility Operating License No.
DPR-69 for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2, respec-tively. The amendments consist of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application transmitted by letter dated May 27, 1994.
The amendments revise the TS surveillance test intervals from monthly to quarterly for several channel functional tests for the Reactor Protection System and the Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System.
In addition, an administrative change was made to remove an out-of-date footnote concerning the emergency diesel generator logic circuit modifications.
A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular biweekly Federal Reaister notice.
Sincerely, WUINAL SIGNED cy, Daniel G. Mcdonald, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-l Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Cffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
Amendment No.193 to DPR-53 2.
Amendment No.170 to DPR-69 3.
Safety Evaluation Distribution:
.c w/ enclosures:
See attached sheet 1
See next page A
Jc, LA:PDI-l PE:PDI-l.
PM:PDI-V}Jk)HICB ksf OGCMM D:PDIfIE JHaroldhIb DMcDonaldb JWermiel 8/ichM4 MBey4$ PUD CVogan od i I//l94h 1 /li/94 07/d/94 I / [/94 8//[/94
?/N94
- /
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY FILENAME: CC89587.AMD