ML20097D834
| ML20097D834 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 05/28/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20097D831 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9206110153 | |
| Download: ML20097D834 (3) | |
Text
-. -
. _ - -. ~,
Weeg#o UNITED STATES y
[.
- g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WALHINGTON. D. C. 20665 k.....,/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.
43 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-58 THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY, ET AL.
PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET-NO. 50-440
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By letter dated February 8, 1988, as supplemented March 14, 1990, the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, et al. (the licensee) requested a revision to Technical Specification (TS) Table 3.3.2-2 by changing one Isolation Actuation Instrumentation Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value based on startup test results, and deleting a footnote throughout Table 3.3.2-2 which referred to setpoint adjustments found during the Startup Test Program for Perry Unit 1.
TS Table 3.3.2-2 was written recognizing that the, initial trip setpoints and allowable values were best approximations based on the design of the plant.
Ten were verified to be acceptable during startup testing and no changes are required.
For one trip function, Residual Heat Removal / Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RHR/RCIC) Steam Line Flow-High, the licensee determined that changes to the Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value were necessary.
2.0 EVAtUATION The Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value are being changed based on the Startup Test Program results of normal RHR and RCIC steam. condensing steam flow rather than being based solely on calculations. -The design basis.
accident assumption used for establishing the-Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value has not changed, i.e. 125% total maximum RHR and RCIC Steam Condensing steam flow.
The purpose of this instrumentation is to initiate the isolation of the RHR/RCIC steamline in the event of a steamline break.
The proposed changes are as follows.
Existing Value Proposed Value Trip Setpoint 5 105"H 0 5 52.1'! H 0 Allowable Value-5 114"H 0.
-S 55.6" H G h[kDO O
~
P
.2,
These new values are more conservative than the existing values, and the results of the Startup Test Program demonstrate that the proposed setpoints will appropriately indicate an abnormal high steam flow condition without causing inadvertent trips during normal steam flow condit1ons.
In the course of its review, the staff identified the need for additional information relating to the basis for the proposed values.
The licensee responded to this request by letter dated March 14, 1990 (CEI Letter No.
PY-CEI/NRR-1146 L).
The attachments to that letter provide discussions of the calculations for the RHR/RCIC Steam Line Flow-High Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value, and the method used to detect RHR/RCIC flow.
Some of that information is based on a proprietary report submitted to NRC by the General-Electric Company (GE), " General Electric Instrument Setpoint Methodology,"
NEDC-31336, dated October 1986.
By letter dated March 18, 1992, GE submitted an affidavit for GE Report NEDC-31336 and requested that it continue to be withheld from public disclosure.
By letter to GE, dated April 13, 1992, the NRC has determined that GE Report NEDC-31336 will be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(b)(5) and Section 103(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
Staff review of this report has not been completed at this time and, as a result, sny findings resulting from our review of this report may need to be factored into the Perry setpoint methodology in the future.
The staff has reviewed the proposed changes to TS Table 3.3.2-2, the RHR/RCIC Steam Line Flow-High Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value, and finds them to be acceptable.
This change also proposes to delete a footnote from the eleven isolation actuation instrument trip functions, since the footnote is no longer applicable.
This is an administrative change and tN staff finds this deletion to be acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, ths Ohio-State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the instal-lation 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 dat may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumelative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously.
issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, J
i.
3-this amendmer.t meats the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
This amendment also involves changes in record-keeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, with respect to these itens, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclu*ien set forth in 10 CFR 651.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmemcs1 impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepated in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
- 5. 0 CONCLUSION The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed a;'e>e, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of tne 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 amendmert will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to ',ne health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J. Lombardo Date: May 28, 1992 I
I
.-9