ML20094P486

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 18 to License NPF-11

ML20094P486
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	08/08/1984
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20094P484	List: ML20094P480 ML20094P486
References
NUDOCS 8408170247
Download: ML20094P486 (10)

Text

u,a

~

UNITED STATES

+

8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a

g a

wAsHwcTom. o. c.aoses A...../

SAFETY EVALUATION AMENDMENT NO. 18 TO NPF-11 LA SALLE COUNTY STATION, UNIT 1 i

DOCKET NO. 50-373 Introduction By letter dated January 13,1984, and as modified by letters of March 11, 1984, and April 5,1984, Commonwealth Edison Company (the licensee) proposed an amendment that would revise the La Salle Unit 1 Technical Specificaticns to reflect changes incorporated into the La Salle Unit 2 Technical Specifi-cations. The licensee comitted to update the Unit 1 Technical Specifications to those issued for Unit 2 where the changes did not involve specific design differences. These changes are required for consistency and uniformity between Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Specifications; will minimize the poten-l tial for confusion and Technical Specification violation; and allow a consis-tent basis for operating, maintenance and surveillance procedures for both units.

The following is a list of the changes to the Unit 1 Technical Specifications based on the Unit 2 Technical Specifications:

1.

Page XIX through XXIII - add list of Tables and Figures.

2.

Page 1-9, *** footnote would be modified to state " moved" instead of " coupled" so as to allow control rod testing required by the Technical Specifications in addition to coupling.

3.

Single recirculation loop operation previously approved for Unit 1 would be moved into the body of the Tech Specs, pages 2-1, 2-4, I

3/4 2-1, 3/4 2-3, 3/4 2-4, 3/4 3-53, 3/4 4-1, 3/4 4-la, 3/4 4-2, 1

and 3/4 4-3.

4.

Page 3/4 1 Tech Spec 4.1.1.c would be revised to allow 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> instead of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for the performance of specified surveillance.

l l

$$8888EES$0S$i P

p_

s 5.

Page 3/4 1 add word " withdrawn" to action statement b.1.a)1) a' to clarify that, if an inoperable control rod is not " withdrawn" its safety function is met and need.not be considered in detemining separation from withdrawn ofer'able control rods.

6.

Page 3/41 add footnote to allow reactor startup to perfom test i

if necessary.

i 7.

Pages 3/4 1-6, 3/4 1-8, 3/4 1-9 and, 3/41-14.- control rods I

specifications 3.1.3.2., 3.1.3.4, 3.1.3.5., and 3.1.3.7 woul d add

.I "3.0.4 not applicable" thus pemitting reactor startDp with various control rod parameters not met as long as Tech. Spec action state-ments are followed.

8.

Pages 3/4 3-4, 3/4 3-5, 3/4 3 would delete startup test.

setpoint verification footnote since the startup tests are completed.

9.

Pages 3/4 3-11, 3/4 3 add footnote (i) to allow bypass 01 MSIV delta T leak detection trip channels for up to 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />.

10.

Pages 3/4 3 revise reactor water cleanup ambient and differential temperature setpoints.

l 11.

Pages 3/4 3-15, 3/4 3-16, 3/4 3 would delete startup test setpoint verification footnote since the startup tests are completed.

12. Pages3/43-18,3[43 add greater than or equal to 5 second time delay reference based on the requirements in license condition 2.C.(30).(b) that time delay relays be used.

i a

4

e 1

13. Pages 3/4 3-39, 3/4 2-4, 3/4 2 add change to allow operation i

if EOC-RPT inoperable in accordance with the provisions of the

[

t Standard Technical Specificantions for GE Boiling Water Reactors.

14.

Page 3/4 3 revise APRM calibration frequency to semi-annually in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Technical i

Specifications for GE Boiling Water Reactors.

15. Pages'3/43-60,3/43 add footnote to clarify that the siismic and meteorological monitoring systens are comon systems i

shared by Units 1 and 2.

16. Pages 3/4 3'-72 and 3/4 9 add footnotie'to require a signal-to-noiseratiogreaterthan2forsourcera$gecountratesbetween 0.7 counts per second and 3 counts per second.

17.

Pages 3/4 3-81, 3/4 11-13, 3/4 11 revise radioactive effluent reporting requirements.

18. Page 3/4 3 would specify that isolation of the off gas system is required only during channel calibration.

19. Page 3/4 4 modify the surveillance and operability requirements for the jet p0mps to reflect the fact that there is no requirment for imediate scram upon* loss of both recirculation pumps.

20. Page 3/4 4 revise tolerance on safety relief valve settings from +1% to + or - 1%.

21.

Page 3/4 4 revise tolerance on reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure at which leak rate limits for RCS isolation valves are applied from + or - 10 psig to + or - 50 psig.

\\

22. Page 3/4 4 revise withdrawal times for reactor vessel material specimens to conform to regulations.

I

23. Pages 3/4 5-3, 3/4 5-4, 3/4 5 water tight doors specifications

--~

for ECCS corr.er rooms would be added.

24.

Page 3/4 5 revised High Pressure Core Spray delta P setpoint.

25.

Page 3/4 5 delete footnote for startup test setpoint l

I verification since startup tests are completed.

j.

26.

Pages 3/4 6-2, 3/4 6-3 -- revise calculation method of Main Steam

~

Isolation Valve leakage rate limit in accordance with *the Standard Technical Specification for GE Boiling Water Reactors.

27.

Pages 3/4 6-8, 3/4 6 revise action statements and surveillance requirements ~and make table clarifications for containment tendons.

28.

Pages 3/4 6-15 and 3/4 11 add limitation on using standby gas treatment system for purging the primary containment.

29.

Pages 3/4 3-70, 3/4 6-16, 3/4 6-17, 3/4 6 delete Safety Relief Valve test footnote since tests have been completed.

30.

Table 3.6.3-1.

(Pages 3/4 6-24, 3/4 6-25, 3/4 6-26, 3/4 6-27, 3/4 6-28, 3/4 6-32, 3/4 6-34)

(Primary Containment Isolation System valves) add f (3.0.4 no't a.

applicable) to various valves to reflect that the valves, when closed, maintain containment integrity and need not be operable.

b.

Revise butterfly valve closure times after first refueltng outape.

(Also some VQ valve closure times would be changed immediately.)

I i

a-G

,,-,m.-.. - -

y--,

. - +

--,w,,

,e

a' t

Valves ICM023B & 2CM024A would be deleted from the list of c.

containment isolation valves since these are, in fact, not 9

containment valves.

,t d.

Valve IE12-F0998 would be added to the list of required

)

i containment isolation valves to correct an inadvertant omission.

s

31. Page 3/4 7 delete footnote allowing crosstie of 250 volt batteries as it is inconsistent with other requirements in the Tech. Specs.

32. Page 3/4 7 revise fire pump parameters and fire suppressio,n y

water system pressure.

j

33. Page 3/4 7 (Table 3.7.7-1) revise the temperature range limits for various areas of Unit I to conform to the provisions of the Standard Technical Specifications for GE Boiling Water Reactors and to comply with requirements for certain equipment operability.

34.

Pages 3/4 7-27 through 3/4 7 the entire technical specification for inspection, testing and monitoring of safety-related snubbers

{

would be revisid.

35. Page 3/4 7-46:

Delete calibration requirement for Main Turbine Bypass System a.

and delete valve positioning requirement to conform to the Standard Tech. Spec. for GE Boiling Water Reactor.

h.

Correct the definition of the conditions under which the Main Turbine Bypass System nost be operable to conform to the standard Tech. Spec. for GE Boiling Water Reactor.

s

i l'

Delete startup test footnote since the startup tests have been c.

completed.

36. Diesels:

Page 3/4 8 add explanatioI to diesel generator 2A inoperable a.

I action f. to prevent excessive testing of diesel generator IA when system inoperable.

b.

Page 3/4 8 delete surveillance item 6 which currently requires a verification of diesel generator loading in

. accord with design requirements.

l Page 3/,4 8 delete the requiPemen,t, for diesel generator.

c.

surveillance starts on stored air. -.

37.

Page 3/4 8 change 'and/or' to 'or' to clarify that only I af

^

the Division 1 or Division 2 diesel. generators need be available during reactor shutdown.

38. Page 3/4 8 revise equipment needed for Unit 2 Division 1 AC electrical system.

39.

Page 3/4 8 change 'and/or' to 'or' to clarify that only 1 of' the Division 1 or Division 2 diesel generators need be available

{

i during reactor shutdown.

i 40.

Pages 3/4 8-14, 3/4 8-15, 3/4 8 delete Unit 2 Division 1 DC sources and delete ability to crosstie as it is inconsistent with other requirements in the Tech. Specs.

41. Page 3/4 8 change 'and/or'to 'or' to clarify that Division 3 and only 1 of Division 1 or Division 2 DC sources need be avail-l able during reactor shutdown.

1 i

L

~

42. Page 3/4 8 add drywell hoists and cranes to drywell circuits to be deenergized and delete them from page 3/4 8-24.

43. Page 3/4 8-26 -- add "3.0.4 not applicable" to themal overload

[

bypass specification to indicate that reactor startup need not j.

be restricted when administrative controls in accordance with the f

I action statement are taken for an inoperable thermal overload l

t bypass circuit.

44. Page 3/4 8-27 -- delete valve IVQ041 from thermal overload table since the valve was inadvertantly included in the table.

45. Page 3/4 8 revise requirements -to (Onctionally test the Reactor Protection System Electric PoweI Assemblies only during cold shutdowns greater than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

46.

Page 3/411 delete P-32 from the list of isotopes for which liquid waste sampling is required in Table 4.11.1-1.

47. Page 3/4 11 revise sampling requirement when Dose Equivalent I-131 concentration in primary coolant and noble gas monitors activity meets certain limits.

48. Page 3/4 12-3 e revise number of sample locations (Table 3.12.1-1) to reflect actual installed sample location defined in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.

49.

Page 5 correct drywell free volume in design features portion l

of the Tech. Spec.

50.

Page 6 revise corporate management Figure 6.1-1 to reflect current approved management configuration.

51. Pages 6-13, 6 new shift manning Table for two units.

n-

52. Pages 6-28, 6 add footnote to clarify that the Process Control Program and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual are comon to both Unit 1 and Unit 2.

Pages with minor changes of a nonsubstantive nature (e.g.

53.

adding coma, parenthesis wording change for clarification, etc.):

a.

. age II, VIII, XV.

b.

Pages 3/4 1-4, 3/4 1-11, 3/4 1-19.

c Pages 3/4 3-1, 3/4 3-58, 3/4'3-82, 3/4 3-83, 3/4 3-84.

Pages 3/4 4-13, 3/4 4-14, 3/4 4-17, 3/4 4-23, 3/4.4-24.

d.

e.

Pages 3/4 5-8 f.- Pages 3/4 6-5, 3/4 6-11, 3/4 5.-19t d[4 6-20, 3/4 6-21, 3/4 6-33, 3/4 6-35, 3/4 6-36, 3/4 6-37, 3/C 6-38, 3/4 6-40, 3/4 6-41.

Pages 3/4 7-14,.3/4 7-17, 3/4 7-18, 3/4 7-22, 3/4 7-24. -

g.

h.

Pages 3/4 8-1, 3/4 8-5, 3/4 8-7, 3/4 8-9, 3/4 8-16.

1.

Pages 3/4 9-16, 3/4 9-17.

J.

Page 3/4 11-9.

k.

Pages 3/4 12-1, 3/4 12-4 1.

Pages 6-3, 6-20 l

l.

Evaluation The bulk of the changes to the Technical Specifications are administrative in nature and are necessary:

(1) To correct typing errors, correction of publication, updating the index (Table of Contents), minor changes to add clarity, updating to reflect two unit operation, updating to current corporate organizational chart which was found acceptable when the Unit 2 license was issued, deleting footnote which apply to an already satisfactory completed startup test setpoint verification, and deletion and addition for inadvertent error:

(items are enumerated as above) Items 1, 5, 8, 11, 15, 17, 20, 21, 25, 29, 30 cad, 31, 35c, 37, 39, 40, 41, 44, 48, 49, 50, 52 and 53 a, b, c, d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k.1.

(2) To incorporate into the Technical Specifications the substance of the previously authorized Amendment 11 to the license for single loop operation and to be consistent with the Unit 2 Technical Specification to incorporate these requirements into the Unit 1 Technical Specification similarly as in Unit 2:

Items 3 and 19 l

(3) To delete duplication of Technical Specifications requirement for t

l sampling to measure possible iodine spiking:

Item 47 (4) To incorporate the option allowed by Generic Letter 84-13 dated May 3,1984, to totally eliminate the table snubber listing which does not alter snubber surveillance or operability requirement but only i

allows removal of snubber listing in the Technical Specification:

Item 34 As stated, all of the above changes are administrative in nature. The remaining 4

changes to the Technical Specification, though, fall into two categories:

(1) Requirements more conservative than the present Unit I requirements (Item l

10, 12, 16, 22, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30b, 32, 33, 42, and 45; or (2) Changes that l

may result in some increase to the probability of accident or may result in some way in a decrease of a safety margin, but the results of the changes are within acceptable criteria (Items 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 18, 27, 30a&b, 35 a&b, j

36, 38, 43, 46, and 51.

These changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated above were submitted i

by the licensee to the NRC staff to make both units' Technical Specifications consistent. The NRC staff reviewed these changes and finds that the requested amendment to the La Salle Unit 1 license, to be consistent with La Salle Unit 2, l

does not result in a reduction of safety and is acceptable.

In view of the foregoing, the NRC concludes that these changes to the La Salle Unit 1 Technical Specifications are appropriate and should be in:.or-porated into the La Salle Unit'l Technical Specifications.

' Environmental Consideration This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area. The staff has detennined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released i

offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumu-lative occupation radiation exposure. The Consission has previously issued I

a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards con-sideration and there has been no public connent on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forthin10CFR51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.2(b) no environmental i

impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

Conclusion We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Connission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the connon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Dated: August 8, 1984 I

,-~m,,

--,.rn.-

+ =,,.--,

--.-~-,-,-,_,-ww,

--___m-.-+-

4--

---