ML20092M064
| ML20092M064 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 02/21/1992 |
| From: | Vaughn G CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092M066 | List: |
| References | |
| NLS-92-328, NUDOCS 9202270142 | |
| Download: ML20092M064 (7) | |
Text
.
Carolina Power & Light Company PJ Box 1551
- Rawgtt N C 27607 iFEB 211992 SERIAL: NLS 91328 10 CFR 50.00 o e vauosN vce Preasdent
'iSC 91TSB09 Nxtear sewes Depanment United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTENTION: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 & 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. OPR-71 & DPR-62 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REFUELING PLATFORM MAST REPLACEMENT Gentlemen:
In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts 50.90 and 2.101, Carolina Power & Light Company hereby requests a revision to the Technical Specifications for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEPL Units 1 and 2.
The purpose of this request is to revise Technical Specification 3/4.9.6 to allow use of a new General Electric Model NF500 main hoist grapple mast, which directly replaces the existing NF400 mast. The NF500 is more rigid than the previous mast design and, therefore, is less prone to mast bowing. The weight of the existing NF400 refueling platform mast is approximately 550 pounds, compared to an approximate weight of 1,015 pounds for the., NF500 mast. Because the NF500 mast weighs approximately 465 pounds more than the existing NF400 mast, the setpoints for detecting loaded and overloaded conditions or-ae fuel grapple hoist specified in Technical Speci..crion 3/4.9.6 also must be revised.
Enc:osure 1 provides a detailed description of the proposed changes and the basis for the changes.
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(a), Enclosure 2 details the bask for the Company's determination that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration. provides an environmental evaluation which demonstrates that the proposed amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental assessment needs to be prepared in i
connection with issuance of the amendment. provides marked-up Technical Specification pages for Unit 1. provides marked up Technical Specification pages for Unit 2.
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(b), CP&L is providing the State of North Carolina with a copy of the proposed license amendment.
/
9202270142 920221 f
I O
0t PDR ADOCK 05000324 p
In order to support planned fuel movements, CP&L is requesting simultaneous NRC review of this proposed license amendment request for both BSEP Unit No.1 and Unit No. 2. CP&L will
-[
coordinate with the NRC Project Manager to establish a requested approval date for the proposed
{
license amendment for both BSEP Unit No.1 and Unit No. 2, based upon the mast installation schedule for each unit, in order to allow time for procedure revision and orderly incorporation into copies of the Technical Specifications, CP&L requests that the proposed amendment for each unit, once approved by the NRC, be issued with an effective date to be no later than 60 days from the issuance of the amendment.-
l Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. J. C. Presley at (919) 546-6132.
Yours very truly, A
s G. E. Vaughn JCP4cp (mast tsc.wpf)
Enclosures:
1.
Basis for Change Request 2.
10 CFR 50.92 Evaluation 3.
Environmental Considerations 4.
Technical Specification Pages - Unit 1 5.
Technical Specification Pages Unit 2 cc:
Mr, Dayne H. Brown Mr. S. D. Ebneter Mr. N. B. Le Mr. R. L. Prevatte G. E. Vaughn, having been first duly sworn, did depose and say that the information contained herein is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and balief; and the sources of his information are officers, employees, contractors, and agents of Carolina Power & Light Company.
[N4CLM6L kAnaL b Notary (Seal) I I My commission expires:
hhy omi es,,,,
o O. C l
WW
\\
!c:i Ii s
t 5 \\ PUBUL i.?
,..Cd@b,, '
)
a 5
ENCLOSURE 1 BRUNSWICK STEAM LLECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 l
NRC DOCKET NOS. 50 325 & 50 324 OPERATING LICENSE NOS. OPR 71 & DPR 02 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REFUELING PLATFORM MAST REPLACEMENT BASIS FOR CHANGE REQUEST Dannd Chanot:
i Revis9 the refueling platform overload cutoff setpoint for the fuel grapple hoist specified ia Technical Specification 4.S.O.a from *less than or equal to 1250 pounds' to *1000 pounds.* Also revive the refueling platform loaded Interlock setpoint for the fuel grapple hoist specifieriin Technical Specification 4.9.6.b from *less than or equal to 435 pounds
- to '750 pounds."
l-HAlla The purpose of this request is to revise Technical Specification 3/4.9.6 to allow use of a new General Electric Model NF500 main hoist grapple mast, which directly replaces the existing NF400 l
mast.
The new NF500 mast consists of four telescoping stainless steel tubular sections. Rotational i
controlis obtained by a special grooved wheel assembly. Mast operation is identical to the existing mast including maximum lift.
The welght of the existing NF400 refueling platform mast is approximately 550 ponds, compared to an approximate weight of 1,015 pounds for the NF500 mast. Because the NF500 mast weighs l
approximately 465 pounds more than the existing NF400 mast, the setpoints for detecting loaded
[
and overloaded cotiditions on the fuel grapple hoist specified in Technical Specification 3/4.9.6 also
- must be revised. The revised setpoint values were chosen to provide the appropriate interlocks consistent with the change in mast weight and yet prevent the possibilities of unwarited interlocking with different grapple loading conditions. The existing setpoint values have correlation with the weight of the NF400 mast only to the extent of providing correct cont olinterlocking.
The load on the hoist cables _ varies as the grapple is raised and lowered due tc two main factors:
(1) the number of mast sections that are actuany being suspended by the cables, and (2) the buoyancy of the submerged portion of the mast, in addition, the totalload depends on whether or
[
not the grapple is carrying a fuel bundle.
t l-i El 1 l.
Y
- ~..,..._......_-_..- _ _. ~..
u..
i t
i The main hoist grapple mast is mounted on the refueling platform trolley, and is raised and lowered l
by a hoist cable. The main holst cable does not support the full weight of the mast and the weight supported will depend upon the mast used.
i f
1st _
Mast Approximate Mast Dry Highest Approximate Weight Ci.ble Supported Weight (pounds)
(pounds)
NF400 550 370 i
NF500 1015 660 Because the NFEDO mast exerts approximately 290 pounds more on the main hoist than the NF400 mast, the setpoints for detecting loaded and overloaded conditions on the fuel grapple holst specified in Technical Specificatk,n 3/4.9.0 also mest be revised.
The fuel grapple hoist overload cutoff demonstration load of 1000 pound is based on the subrnerged fuel bundle loads of 650 pounds, the highest unloaded hoist cable supported load of approximately 600 pounds, and a tolerance for fuel bundle friction and load spikes of 290 pounds.
The fuel grapple hoist loaded interlock demonstration load of 750 pounds is based on th' highest unloaded hoist cable supported load of approximately 660 pounds plus a tolerance for load spikes i
of 90 pou,$ et sections are raised and lowered.
The only accident previously evaluated that could be impacted by the proposed change is the fus!
handling accident. A fuel handling accident can be postulat00 to occJr as a result of the fuel bundle lifting mechanism failing, thereby resulting in the dropping of a taised fuel bundle onto fuel bundles either loaded in the reactor core or stored in the spent fuel storage racks.
f The drop of a spent fuel assembly onto other spent fuel assemblies in either the reactor vessel or the spent fuel pool storage raaks is no more likely with the new design. The NF500 mast functions identically to the NF400 in grappling, lif ting, moving, and lowering fuel assemblies. Design features of the NF500 refueling mast, which serve to protect against the drop of a fuel assembly during movement are not degraded from those inhrtent to the NF400 design. Specifically, it does not i
degrade platform design features such as gi apple fail safe on loss of air, two independent fail safe brakes, and the grapple interlocks, all of which serve to protect against a fuel drop or fuel damage event. The platform structural integelty will not be degraded by the weight increase, as the original design for the platform was to accept an equipment mast weighing approximately 1165 pounds total (015 pounds more thari the NF400 mast or 150 pounds more than the NF500 mastl.
The NF500 is more rigid than the previous mast design and, therefore, is less prone to mast bowing. No margins or assumptions related to the fuel bundle drop analyses are changed, and the NF500 mast has the same single failure protections as the old mast.
El 2 j
~, _ - -,,, - -
~ ~.- _-. -~ - - - - - ~. -
t ENCLOSURE 2 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKET NOS. 50 325 & 50 324 OPERATING LICENSE NOS. OPR 71 & DPR 02 i
REOUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT I
REFUELING PLATFORM MAST REPLACEMENT I
l 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATlQB l
The Commission has provided standards in 10 CFR LO.92(c) for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists. A proposed amendment to an operating license for a f acility involves no significant barards consideration if aporation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not: (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from
- any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
~
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(1), Carohna Power & Light Company has reviewed this proposed l
license amendment request and determined that its adoption would not involve a significant
- harards consideration. The bases for this determination are as follows:
bpoosed Changg:
Revise the refueling platform overload cutoff setpoint for the fuel grapple holst specified in f
Technical Specification 4.9.6.a from *less than or equal to 1250 pounds" to "1000 pounds." Also s
revise the refueling platform loaded interlock setpoint for the fuel grapple hoist specified in
{
Technical Specification 4.D.O.b from *less than or equal to 435 pounds' to '750 pounds."
D2515:
The change dots not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:
I 1.
The proposed amendment does not involve an increase in the probability or consequences
.of an accident previously evaluated. The only accident previously evaluated that is potentially affected by the proposed change is the fuel handling accident (see Section 15.7 of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) fcr the Drunswick Steam Electric j
Plant, Units 1 & 2h The drop of a spent fuel assembly onto other spent fuel assemblies in either the reactor vessel of the spent fuel pool storage racks is no more likely with the new design of the NF500.- Deslon features of the NF500 refueling mast, which serve to protect against the drop of a fuel assembly during movement are not degraded from those inherent to the NF400 design. Specifically, it does not degrade platform design features such as e
grapple fail safe on loss of air, two independent fall safe brakes, and the grapple interlocks, all of which serve to protect against a fuel drop or fuel damage event. Therefore, the prob 3bility of an accident remains unchanged.
t The new NF500 mast is' designed to match or exceed all aspects of the NF400 mast now in i
use. Comparison of the NF400 and NF500 masts and grapples shows that both the i
operational functioning of the mast and grapple and the geometry of the grapple are
[
Identical. The NF500 mast functions identicalc to the NF400 in grappling, lif ting, moving, and lowering fuel assemblies. The platform structural integrity will not be degraded by the l
E21 l
e e---,we
=-
e,w e %..r w -+ui,.w,,-w,rw,,r-ww-,.+en..-ee_
~%.,._i,-,mw%,ww.,ww mm,-ww,-w,,,e-,,,
mc
,-e-m-
ew.,-gy-v-,w.3.-mw,w y pr -,9-y- v-
weight increase, as the original design for the platform was to accept an equipment mast weighing approximately 1165 pounds total (015 pounds more than the NF400 mast or 150 pounds more than the NF500 mast), The NF500 is more rigid than the previous mist design and, therefore, is less prone to mast bowing.
The consequences of a fuel handling accident, using the assumptions contained in the DSEP UFSAR are not changed and are independent of the mast design in current use. The previously evaluated maximurr fuel assembly dmp height (32 feet) has not changed by installing the NF500 mast. Thus, the consequences of dropping a spent fuel assembly onto other spent fuel assemblies in either the reactor vessel or the spent fuel pool storage racks are not significantly increased by the oroposed change.
2.
The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. No new failure modes are introduced as a result of the proposed change. The new NF500 mast is designed to match or exceed all aspects of the NF400 mast now in use and is intended as an exact replacement for the NF400 mast. Comparison of the NF400 and NF500 masts and grapples shows that both the operational functioning of the mast and grapple and the geometry of the grapple are identical. The fd500 mast functions identically to the NF400 in grappling, lifting, moving, and lowering fuel assemblies. It does not degrado platform design features such as grapple fall safe on loss of air, two independent fail safe brakes, and the grapple Interlocks, all of which serve to protect against a fuel drop or fuel damage event. Refueling platform stresses will continue to be below allowables. The platform structural integrity will not be degraded by the weight increase, as the original design for the platform was to accept an equipment mast weighing approximately 1165 pounds total (015 pounds more than the NF400 mast or 150 pounds more than the NF500 masti. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3.-
The proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
Safety margin is established through the CP&L safety analyses as reflected in the Technical Specifications and Bases. Design features of the NF500 refueling mast, which serve to protect against the drop of a fuel assembly during movement are not degraded from those inherent to the NF400 design. The NF500_ mast functions identically to the NF400 in grappling, lifting, moving, and lowering fuel assemblics, it does not degrado platform design features such as grapple fail-safe on loss of air, two independent fail safe brakes, and the grapple loaded interlock, all of which serve to protect against a fuel top event.
The platform structural integrity will not be degraded by the weight increase, as the original design for the platform was to accept an equipment mast weighing approximately 1165 pounds total (015 pounds more than the NF400 mast or 150 pounds more than the NF500 mast). The fuel grapple hoist setpoints exist to prevent damage to reactor internais (such as the fuel support piece) caused t: ; stuck bundle or similar anomaly. These fuel grapple hoist setpoints are not required fo..ae safe shutdown of the reactor. The proposed setpoint changes allow for the _ Increased weight of the new mast plus a slight increase in -
the margins associated with establishing the setpoints. No margins or assumptions related to the fuel bundle drop analyses are changed, and the Nf500 mast has the same single failure protections as the old mast. Thus the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
E2 2 l
t
ENCLOSURE 3 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKET NOS. 50 325 & 50 324 OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR 71 & DPR 02 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REFUELING PLATFORM MAST REPLACEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) provHes criterion for and identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for categorical exclusion from performing an envitcnmental assestment. A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facility requires no environmental assessment if operation of the f acility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not: (1) involve a significant harards cc nvderation; (2) result in a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite: (3) result in an increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Cacolina Power & Li impany has reviewed this tw%t and determined that the proposed amendment meets the eligibility.
.or categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(bL no environmentet mipact statement or environmental assessment needs to be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment. The basis for this determination follows:
i Proposed Chanag:
Revise the refueling platform overload cutoff setpoint for the fuel grapple hoist specified in Technical Specification 4.9.6.a from ' loss than or equal to 1250 pounds' to *1600 pounds." Also revise the refueling platform loaded interlock setpoint for the fuel grapple hoist specified in Technical Specification 4.9.6.6 from *less than or equal to 435 pounds' to '750 pounds."
Eiuiis:
The change meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) for the following reasons:
- 1. As demonstrated in Enclosure 2, the proposed amenoment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
- 2. The proposed amendment does not result in a significant change'in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite. The fuel grapple hoist setpoints exist to
< prevent damage to reactor internals (such as the fuel support piece) caused by a stuck bundle or similar anomaly. As such, these setpoints do not affect the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
- 3. The proposed amendment does not result in an increase in individual or cumulative occupational l
radiation exposure. The functional operation of the refueling platform will remain unchanged by the replacement of the refueling platform mast and the corresponding change to the overload cutoff and loaded interlock setpoints. Therefore, the amendment has no effect on either individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
E3-1
.