ML20091E507

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 42 to License NPF-58
ML20091E507
Person / Time
Site: Perry 
Issue date: 03/20/1992
From:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20091E502 List:
References
NUDOCS 9204140224
Download: ML20091E507 (6)
v • d • e


Text

h t tQg*#

,o, UNIT ED sT ATES j

NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.t W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20556 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE Offl[E Of NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION BLMIED TO AMENDMEN1 NO. 42 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-58 JHE CLEVE QNJ_ILECTRIC lllRONATING COMPANY. ET AL.

j PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. VHlT NO. 1 DOCKET N0. 50-449 1.0 INTRODU(IlQH By letter dated September 13, 1990, and supplemented October 16, 1990, the Cleveland Electric 111uminating Company (the licensee), requested changes to the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) Technical Specifications (ISs) by making several administrative corrections related to previous amendments, to apply certain existing surveillance requirements to all appropriate operational conditions, and to make changes to the Administrative Controls section to reflect recent organizational changes.

In addition, other minor editorial corrections to the TS and Bases are also proposed.

2.0 LYAl,i)ATION The reference to " Figure 6.2.1-1 Corporate Organiza' ion" and " Figure 6.2.

2-1 Unit Organization" on page xxv of the TS index are to be deleted.

These figures, along with pages 6-3 and 6-4, were deleted from the TS on June 30, 1988 by Amendment No. 13.

Therefore, the index references for Figures 6.2 1-1 and 6.2.2-1 are no longer applicable and should have been removed as part of Arendment No.13.

Removal of the index references to Figures 6.2.1-1 and 6.2.2-1 is a purely administrative change.

Technical Specification 3.3.2, Table 3.3.2-1, Action 20, is being modified to provide the required actions to be taken during core alterations and operations with a potential for draining the reactor vessel (Operational Condition #).

Per Table 3.3.2-1, the Primary Containment Isolation Trip Functions for Vessel Level 2 and Vessel Level 1 are applicable in Operational Conditions 1, 2, 3 and in Operational Condition #.

However, Action 20 yevides actions applicable only for Operational Conditions 1, 2 and 3 (be 3 at least Hot Shutdown within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> and Cold Shutdown within the next 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />), while failing to provide actions applicable for

~

Operational Condition f.

Action 20 should also provide required actions for Operational Condition #.

Therefore, Action 20 is revised to include the proper conservative actions to be taken in Operational Condition #

(suspend core alterations and operations with a potential for draining the reactor vessel).

This change is conservative and constitutes an additional limitation, restriction or control not presently included in the TS.

9204140224 920320 PDR ADOCK 05000440 P

PDR

/pS "eg'o, UNITED sT ATES

['

  • j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION m

w As utecton. o. c. rossa p

\\,,,,,.*#

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULAT103 BELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 42 TO FAClllTY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-58 THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC IL1,UMINATING COMPANY. ET AL.

PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-440

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated September 13, 1990, and su)plemented October 16, 1990, the Cleveland Electric 111uminating Company (tie licensee), requested changes to the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) Technical Specifications (TSs) by making several administrative corrections related to previous amendments, to apply certain existing surveillance requirements to all appropriate operational conditions, and to make changes to the Administrative Controls section to reflect recent organizational changes.

In addition, other minor editorial corrections to the TS and Bases are also proposed.

2.0 EVALVATION The reference to " Figure 6.2.1-1 Corporate Organization" and " Figure 6.2.

2-1 Unit Organization" on page xxv of the TS it.dex are to be deleted.

These figures, along with pages 6-3 and 6-4, were deleted from the TS on June 30, 1988 by Ar;endment No. 13. Therefore, the index references for Figures 6.2.1-1 and 6.2.2-1 are no longer applicable and should have been removed as part of Amendment No. 13.

Removal of tha index references to Figures 6.2.1-1 and 6.2.2-1 is a purely administrative change.

Technical Specification 3.3.2, Table 3.3.2-1, Acticn 20, is being modified to provide the required actions to be taken during core alterations and operations with a potential for draining the reactor vessel (Operational Condition #).

Per Table 3.3.2-1, the Primary Containment Isolation Trip functions for Yessel level 2 and Vessel Level 1 are applicable in Operational Conditions 1, 2, 3 and in Operational Condition f.

However, Action 20 yevides actions applicable only for Operational Conditions 1, 2 and 3 (be D at least Hot Shutdown within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> and Cold Shutdown within the next 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />), while failing to provide actions applicable for Operational Condition #.

Action 20 should also provide required actions for Operational Condition #.

Therefore, Action 20 is revised to include the proper conservative actions to be taken in Operational Condition #

(suspend core alterations and operations with a potential for draining the reactor vessel).

This change is conservative and constitutes an additional limitation, restriction or control not presently included in the TS.

9204140224 920320 PDR ADOCK 05000440 i

P PDR

. TS Surveillance Requirement 4.3.7.7 is being changed to clarify that the traversing in-core probe (T!P) system !s required to be demonstrated operable prior to use when required for monitoring core thermal limits (Average Planer Linear Heat Generation Rate (APLHGR), Linear Heat Generation Rate (LHGR), and Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR)), as well as prior to recalibrating the Local Power Range Monitors (LPRMs).

TS j

3.$.7.7 requires the TiP system to be operable when used for recalibration of the LPRM detectors and when monitoring thermal limits.

However, Surveillance Requirement 4.3.7.7 currently requires the T!p system to be demonstrated operable (by normalizing each of the required detector outputs within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> prior to use) only when required for the LPRM calibration functions. After reviewing the Applicability, the Actions Statements, and the Bases, it is apparent that the intent is to demonstrate TIP system operability prior to monitoring core thermal limits, as well as prior to recalibrating the LPRMs.

Therefore, Surveillance Requirement 4.3.7.7 is being revised to clarify when the TIP ;ystem shall be demonstrated operable.

This change is conservative and constitutes an additional limitation, restriction or control not presently included in the TSs.

TS 3.3.7.7, item b, Applicability, lists the Maximum Fraction of Limiting Power Density (MFLPD) as one of the_ thermal limits, along with APLHGR, LHGR and MCPR.

The NFLPD-is a thermal limit that was used in part to define the "I factor" in PNPP's low power operating license (Facility Operating License NPF-45), TS 3.2.2, APRM Setpoints, but was eliminated as part of the Maximum Extended Operating Domain (ME0D) changes when PNPP's full power op6.ating license (Facility Operating License NPF-58) TSs were approved.

Deletion of the APRM Setpoints specification (and approval of HE00) is discussed in Perry Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report (SSER) Number 10, Section 16.2.1, items 2 and 3.

Since this limit is no longer utilized (as this method of APRM setpoint monitoring is not applied) it is appropriate to delete NFLPD as one of the thermal limits listed under the Applicability of Specification 3.3.7.7, item b.

In addition, related TS definitions 1.15. " Fraction of Limiting Power Density," (FLPD) and 1.16, " Fraction of Rated Thermal Power," (FRTP) and their corresponding references within the TS Index are also to be deleted.

These definitions are applicable only to terms used within the previously deleted APRM Setpoints Section 3.2.2 described above (FRTP as used to define the T factor).

Since this specification no longer exists, t h above definitions are no longer necessary within PNPP's TSs.

The footnotle

This note extended the initial surveillance test interval on a one-time basis to the first refueling outage for demonstrating operability of the turbine overspeed protection system. Since PHPP's first refueling outage was completed on July 23, 1989 (first Operational Condition 2 entry following refueling), this extension is no longer applicable. This change, therefore, constitutes a purely administrative change to PNPP TSs.

a

. The asterisks (*) contained within TS 3.4.1.4 are to be deleted from the 50 degree F temperature differential limitations of TSs 3.4.1.4.a and 3.4.1.4.b.

The associated footnote rendered the 100 degree F temperature differential limitation of TSs 3.4.1.4 and the 50 degree F temperature differential limitations of TSs 3.4.1.4.a and 3.4.1.4.b not applicable below 25 psig.

Removal of this exemption from the 50 degree F temperature differential limitations of TSs 3.4.1.4.a and 3.4.1.4.b is a conservative chhnge that constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presePly included in the TSs.

This change will in no way affect the footnote as it applies to the 100 degree F temperatt.re differential limitation of TS 3.4.1.4.

The # '.'ootnote contained or, page 3/4 6-5 applicable to Surveillance Requirements 4.6.1.2.d and 4.6.1.2.h is to be deleted.

This footnote provided a one-time test interval extension to the first refueling outage for containment isolation valves listed in Table 3.6.4-1, which are identified in letter PY-CE!/NRR-0714L dated September 11, 1987, as needing a plant outage to test.

Since the referenced Type C test interval extension has expired with the completion of PNPP's first refueling outage, this note is no longer applicable.

This change, therefore, constitutes a purely administrative change.

TS 3.6.1.8.b is to be modified by replacing the limit for purge system operation of 3000-hours-per-365-days with a limit of 1000-hours-per-365-days (as provided in footnote ** on page 3/4 6-12) and by deletion of the footnote. According to the footnote, the 3000-hour-per-365-day limit was applicable only from initial fuel load until 3 months following the completion of the first refueling outage.

Since PNPP's first refueling outage was completed July 23,1989 (first Operational Condition 2 entry following refueling), the 3000-hours-per-365-day limit on purge system operation contained in TS 3.6.1.8.b has expired and is therefore no longer applicable.

The currently applicable 1000-hour-per-365-day limit contained in the footnote is to be inserted directly into TS 3.6.1.8.b.

This change is for clerification only and does not constitute a change in current TS 3.6.1.8.b limits on purge system operation, and therefore this is a purely administrative change. Note that consistent with the NRC's July 18, 1989, response to PNPP's ' Containment Purge Evaluation and Technical Specifica-tion Change Request" letter PY-C N /NRR-1025L, dated June 30, 1989, PNPP has resolved to adhere to the 1000-hvur-per-365-days containment purge limit contained it TS 3.6.1.8.b, unless PNPP can show that the existir.g limit is inadequate.

However, based upon second cycle containment purge system operating experience, PNPP has determined that, at this time, no current need exists to increase the current 1000-hours-per-365-day TS limit.

Consequently, PNPP will not be submitting a second cycle re-evaluation of the purge system's operation as proposea in letter PY-CEI/NRR-1025L.

i

l 4

The Bases for TS 3/4.7.4 are to be corrected by changing the required sample size of additional snubbers required o be functionally tested for each functional test failure from 10% to 5% in functional Test Method 1 on page B 3/4 7-3 (first sentence).

This change (to 5% sample size) is consistem with the sample site requirements of Surveillance Requirement 4.7.4.e.1 which provides that "...for each snubber of a type that does not meet the functional test acceptance criteria of Speelfication 4.7.4.f. an additional 5% of that type of snubber shall be functionally tested until no more failures are found or until all snubbers of that type have been functionally tested." Note that Surveillance Requirement 4.7.4.e.1 contained in PNPP's low power operating license (Facility Operating License NPF-45) initially specified a 10% sample size of additional snubbers required to be tested for each functional test failure.

This requirement was changed to 5% in the TSs issued with PNPP's full power operating license (Facility Operating License NPF-58). However, Bases 3/4.7.4 was never updated consistent with the change in sample size in Surveillance Requirement 4.7.4.e.l.

Thi, change to Bases 3/4.7.4 is a purely administrative change to correct the above error and to achieve consistency throughout PNPP's TSs.

TS 3.8.1.1, Action a, sentence 1 is to be revised by inserting the words "once per" to read as follows:

"With one offsite circuit of the above required A.C. electrical power sources inoperable, demonstrate the OPERABILITY of the remaining A.C.

sources by pcrforming Surveillance Requirement ;.8.1.1.1.a within I hour and at least pet 13tr 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> thereaf ter."

This change is a purely administrative change to achieve consistency and clarification.

Table 4.8.1.1.2-1, note

These changes are purely administrative changes to correct ext.stino errors.

The following corrections are proposed for page B 3/4 3-$ of the Bases:

(1) In, Bases Section 3/4.3.7.6, paragraph two, the third "0PERABLE" is changed to "0PERATIONAl" to read as follows: "The SRMs are required OPERABLE in OPERATIONAL CONDITION 2 to provide for rod block capability, and are required OPERABLE in OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 3 and 4 to provide monitoring capability which provides diversity of protection to mode switch interlocks." This change maintains consistency with the term "0PERATIONAL CONDITION" as defined in TS Definition 1.30 (page 1-6).

_ _ __.~.

va[

1. 4 1 l

'(2).In Bases Section 3/4.3.7.7, paragraph two, sentence two, the word "be" is.to be inserted between the final two words of the sentence l

to read as follows: " Monitoring core thermal limits may-involve utilizing -individual detectors-to monitor selected areas of the reactor core, thus all detectors may not be required to hg OPERABLE."

The above changes to Bases page B 3/4 3-5 are purely administrative changes designed to achieve consistency and correct errors for clarification, Bases Figure B 3/4 3-1 on pago B 3/4 3-8 is to be replaced.

The remainder of the changes to the PNPP TSs requested by this amendment consist of changes to the Administra:1-le Controls section necessitated by the April 1990 reorganization of CEI and its parent company, Centerior Energy Corporationi(reference letter PY-CEl/NRR-1189L-dated July 17,1990).

The proposed changes for TSs Sections 6.1.2, 6.2.1.c, 6.5.1'6.f 6.5.1.8 6.5.2.1, 6.5.2.6.k. 6.6.1.b a:d '6.7.1.a.c were made under Amendment No. 36, dated December 31,-1990.

The additional changes requested-herein are as follows:.

(1)

" Perry Plant Operations Department (PP00)" has been retitled

" Perry Nuclear Power Plant Department (PNPPD)." This change affects the following TS Sections:

6.1.1, 6.2.1.b, 6.5.1.1, 6.5.1.6.k, 6.5.1.7.a 6.5.1.7.c, 6.5.3.1.a 6.5.3.1.b, 6.5.3.1.c, 6.5.3.1.d, 6.5.3.1.f and 6.8.2.- This. change constitutes-a change in title designation only.

(2)

" Nuclear Engineering Department (NED)" and " Perry Plant' Technical Department (PPTD)" have been incorporated into a single

-department entitled " Perry Nuclear Engineering Department (PNED)"

under the management of a single Director. Consequently, all referencesto"NuclearEngineering_ Department (NED)dto" Perry

" and " Perry Plant-Technical bepartment.(PPTD)" are to be change Nuclear Engineering-Department;(PNED)." This change affects the _

following TS:- 5.2.3.1, 6.2.3.4, 6.5.1.2 and 6.5.3.1.b.

Included-othin the benefits to be gained by consolidation of the above departments are the sharing of nuclear operating experience and expert Sc. *nd more effective-communication. This change has no

-effect on N technical qualifications necessary to operate PNPP.

Is adoM TM, w il_ defined lines of_ authority, responsibility and.

etimmuriicatica continue to exist for all activities assumed by the Director of the Ferry Nuclear Engineering; Department that affect the safe operation of the plant. The Director of the Perry Plant Technical Department has: assumed the new role of Director of the Perry Nuclear _ Engineering Department.

=

(3)' TS'6.5.1.2 is to be changed to reflect the following organizational' title changes:

" Operations Section" is retitled 2

" Perry Operations Section," " Technical Section" is retitled h

,&..,,,+.,,'A---

n.-.s-,

..,, ~

,,,,,,.n-

d 5

o "Systea Engineering Section," and " Maintenance Section" is retitled " Perry Maintenance Section." These changes are organizational title changes only and have no effect on existing lines of authority, responsibility and communications.

(4)

TS 6.5.3.1.a. sentence three is to be revised for clarification as follows:

" Instructions shall be approved by appropriate management personnel as designated in writing by PORC, and approved by the appropriate section managers." This change is intended for clarification only.

(5) Changes are also proposed to establish the plant manager, entitled " General Manager, Perry Nuclear Power Plant Department,"

as the single authority which Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC) advises on matters which come bafore it, and as the single authority responsible for approval on items addressed under TS Sections 6.5.3, " Technical Review and Control," and 6.8,

" Procedures / Instructions and Programs."

In order to achieve this goal of establishing the General Manager, PNPPD, as single authority for the above items, the necessary changes, including removal of references to Directors of other Perry Departments, were made to the following TS:

6.5.1.1, 6.5.1.6.k, 6.5.1.7, 6.5.3.1.a 6.5.3.1.b, 6.5.J.l.c, 6.5.3.1.d, 6.5.3.1.f and 6.8.2.

The above changes to PNPP TS 6.0, Administrative Controls section are purely administrative changes designed to provide consistency and clarification.

The proposed changes to the TSs constitute additional limitations, restrictions or controls not presently included in the TS, or the changes are purely administrative designed to achieve consistency throughout the TS by providing clarification, by correcting existing errors, or by deleting material no longer applicable to the TSs. The proposed changes have been determined to result in no change to plant systems or have any effect on accident conditions or assumptions, and the changes have not affected any TS Bases.

The staff has reviewed the proposed revisions to the TSs and finds them to be acceptable.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendahnt involves a change to a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or a change to a surveillance requirement. The 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 Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has

4-A o

7-been no public comment on such finding (56 fr 29271). Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).

This amendment also involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements.

Accordingly, with respect to these items, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion. set forth in 10 CFR 651.22(c)(10).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

4.0 CONCLUSION

The staff 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 this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor:

J. Lombardo Date:

March 20, 1992 L

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20091E507&oldid=4337134"