ML20086D783
| ML20086D783 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 06/26/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086D730 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9507100380 | |
| Download: ML20086D783 (2) | |
Text
F^;b p3 Ef 0g k
s UNITED STATES l
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565 0001
,4
...e SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 105 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-80 AND AMENDMENT NO. 104 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-82 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-275 AND 50-323 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated April 19, 1995, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E or the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 (DCPP). The proposed change would eliminate the surveillance requirement for the emergency diesel generators (EDGs) which required a loss of offsite power (LOOP) restart and load test within 5 minutes of the 24-hour run test conducted every 18 months and replace it with an 18-month hot restart test within 5 minutes of a 2-hour run.
This change is in accordance with NUREG-1366, " Improvements to Technical Specifications Surveillance Requirements," dated December 1992.
l The safety function of the EDGs is to supply AC electrical power to plant safety systems whenever the preferred AC power supply is unavailable.
Consistent with NUREG-1366, the licensee is requesting a revision to the TS for EDG surveillance testing for DCPP.
2.0 EVALUATION The current Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2.b.8 requires that within 5 minutes of shutting down the EDG following the once per eighteen month 24-hour endurance test run, a simulated loss of offsite power (LOOP) surveillance test be conducted.
Performing the LOOP test per the present TS requires the ESF loads sequenced during LOOP to be available immediately following the 24-hour endurance run. This requirement creates scheduling demands by reducing flexibility and imposes unnecessary operational burdens without a l
corresponding increase in EDG reliability.
l The licensee has proposed to limit Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2.b.8 to the current cycle for both units and replace it with Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2.e starting with Cycle 8.
This surveillance will eliminate the requirement for the LOOP test following the 24-hour loaded run and will require an EDG hot restart test within 5 minutes following a 2-hour run of the EDG at a load of at least its continuous rating. The revised surveillance requirement will verify EDG hot restart capability by starting the EDG and verifying that it attains rated voltage and frequency within the required time.
I 1
9507100380 950626 PDR ADOCK 05000275 P
v
.y,
- (
k*
j The proposed surveillance for the EDG hot restart test could be performed during any mode of plant operation. This approach is consistent with the Improved Standard Technical Specifications.
Since the objectives of the hot restart, LOOP, and 24-hour endurance tests will continue to be met at DCPP, the modified test would result in improved scheduling flexibility with no reduction in demonstration of EDG operability. Therefore, the staff finds i
I this test to be consistent with NUREG-1366 and is therefore acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the comission's regulations, the California State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL. CONSIDERATION These amendments changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has l
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 Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (60 FR 27340). 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 r.tatement 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 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 Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
l Principal Contributor:
M. A. Miller Date:
June 26, 1995