ML20138E058

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 107 to License NPF-1

ML20138E058
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	10/04/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20138E009	List: ML20138E005 ML20138E039 ML20138E058
References
NUDOCS 8510240558
Download: ML20138E058 (3)

Text

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

UNITED STATES

[ S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION U I VWASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k ....

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.107 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-1 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY THE CITY OF EUGENE. OREGON PACIFIC POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-344 3

Introduction and Background ,

As part of the evaluation of Unresolved Safety Issue A-44, Station Blackout, the staff considered requirements that would reduce the risk of core damage

, from station blackout events. The reliability of diesel generators had been i identified as being one of the main factors affecting the risk from station blackout, j NRC Generic Letter 84-15 proposed to all licensees of operating reactors an

approach to assess and enhance the reliability of their diesel generators. One objective was directed toward reducing the number of cold fast start surveillance tests for diesel generators. It is the staff's technical judgment that an overall improvement in diesel engine reliability and availability can be gained by perfor1ning diesel generator starts for surveillance testing using engine prelube and other manufacturer recomended procedures to reduce engine stress and wear. Although the demonstration of fast start test capability for diesel generators from ambient conditions could not be totally eliminated, the licensee was encouraged to reduce the frequency of these tests.

. Portland General Electric Company responded to Generic Letter 84-15 by letter

. dated November 2, 1984 and requested the applicable changes to their Technical Specifications by letter dated January 29, 1985. This submittal was revised at the NRC's request by letter of June 14, 1985. Changes were made to clarify the original submittal by adding surveillance requirements that are already 4 done monthly to a six-month surveillance, as well as to verify that once the

, diesel starts from ambient cor;ditions it can also be synchronized, loaded, operated, and aligned to provide standby power to the associated emergency busses. Also, the original submittal removed the restriction that the 18-month ,

testing be conducted during plant shutdown since some of the testing can be con- ,

i ducted while operating. The revised submittal clarified which tests could be -

j conducted during operation and which should still be conducted during plant shut-down.

4

! Evaluation  !

! l i Technical Specification 3.8.1.1 Action Statement "a" (with either an offsite l circuit or diesel generator inoperable ...) has been revised from requiring

$o2pg g 4 P ,

4 performance of the diesel generator operability test (proposed Surveillance t Requirement 4.8.1.1.2a.5) from "within one hour and at least once per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> thereafter" to "within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />" with no additional tests required thereafter.

Technical Specification 3.8.1.1. Action Statement "b" (with one offsite circuit and one diesel generator inoperable ...) has been revised from  !

requiring performance of the diesel generator operability test (proposed Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2a.5) from "within one hour and at least l once per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> thereafter" to "within 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />" with no additional tests  !

required thereafter.

Technical Specification 3.8.1.1 Action Statement "c" (with two of the above  ;

required offsite A.C. circuits inoperable ...) has been revised from requiring 4

C perfonnance of the diesel generator operability test (proposed Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2a.5) from "within one hour and at least once per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> 3

thereafter" to "within 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />" with no additional tests required thereafter, j In addition the requirement to restore at least one of the inoperable offsite

! sources to OPERABLE status within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or be in at least HOT STANDBY i within the next 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> has been revised to "be in at least HOT STANDBY within l the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />." The latter change would allow more time to conduct an orderly l

shutdown and is consistent with other sections of the technical specifications 4 that require plant shutdown, and is, therefore, acceptable.

i .

Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2a.5 has been revised to allow idle start and wann-up of the diesel generators prior to increasing the speed to the rated RPM.

]

The above modifications to the technical specifications are considered by the i staff to be necessary upon the licensee's implementation of changes which reduce the number of fast starts and changes to the diesel generator reliability i improvement program. Appendix A of Generic Letter 84-15 provides examples of

these necessary revisions to the technical. specifications. The above changes are in accordance with these examples and are therefore considered acceptable i- to the staff.

l Surveillance Requirements 4.8.1.1.2b.1, 2b.2, and 2b.3 have been added to verify

diesel start from ambient conditions and that the generator is synchronized, i loaded and aligned to provide standby power to the associated emergency buses at least once per 6 months. This modification is consistent with the guidance provided in Generic Letter 84-15 and is, therefore, acceptable.

Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.2b has been relettered to "c". This change is purely administrative and acceptable to the staff.

i Subtitle 4.8.1.1.2d; "At least once per 18 months by:" has been added and Surveillance Requirements 4.8.1.1.2c.4 (Verify the diesel generator set operates 60 minutes...)and4.8.1.1.2c.5(Verifythattheautoconnected loads to each diesel generator unit do not exceed 2000 hour0.0231 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61e-4 months <br /> rating...) have -

been placed under the above subtitle. The above technical specification ,

changes will allow more flexibility in the performance of these tests since i i

i i .

they can be conducted while operating, by changing the wording to read "at least once per 18 months" instead of the present requirement of at least

once per 18 months during plant shutdown. This is acceptable to the staff.

b -Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2c has been changed to 4.8.1.1.2d.3 and placed under the above Item 7 proposed subtitle. In addition the words "At i least once per 18 months" have been deleted. The above changes are adminis-  ;

trative in nature and, therefore, are acceptable to the staff.

The staff concludes that the above listed technical specification changes proposed by PGE are directed toward reducing the number of unnecessary

diesel generator tests and the accompanying potential determinal effects of too frequent cold fast start testing. The proposed testing provides a satis-factory measurement of assurance of diesel generator operability and is in accord with Generic Letter 84-15 objectives on the staff's views on the necessary level of DG testing. Thus, we conclude that these changes are in the interest of the health and safety of the public and are, therefore, acceptable.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION L

6 This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillance requirements. 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 published a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the

< eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 651.22(c)(9).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 951.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

CONCLUSION Wehaveconcluded,basedontheconsiderationsdiscussedabove,that(1)there i 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 Comission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

i  ;

Date: Octbber 4,1985 l Principal Contributor:

L. Lazo J. Emami. PSB 1

I  !

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