ML20138M129
| ML20138M129 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138M112 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-59360, TAC-59361, TAC-59362, TAC-59363, TAC-59364, TAC-59365, NUDOCS 8510310524 | |
| Download: ML20138M129 (3) | |
Text
______
[
o na jo,,
UNITED STATES y
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
(
ti
- p WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%,...../
SAFETY EVALUf!0N BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-29 9-GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT COMPANY MIDDLE SOUTH ENERGY, INC.
SOUTH MISSISSIPPI ELECTRIC POWER ASSOCIATION INTRODUCTION By letter dated July 12, 1985, Mississippi Power & Light Company (the licensee) proposed to change the facility Technical Specifications to implement; (1) a change in the Grand Gulf Unit 1 operating organization, (2) a design change in i
the ventilation system for a reactor water sample station inside containment (3) a change in the upper limit on the scram accumulator pressure setpoints
'(4) surveillance of fire detection instrumentation in additional fire protection zones in the control building, and (5) a design change to the diesel generator protective trip for ground overcurrent. The staff's evaluation of these changes is presented herein. By letter dated August 12, 1985, the licensee withdrew its request to amend License Condition 2.C.(2).
EVALUATION Change (1) would change Section 6.0 " Administrative Controls" of the Technical Specifications. The propo.ed change takes the responsibilities of the Radiation
- ~
Control Supervisor shown on Figure 6.2.2-1, Unit Organization, and divides these responsibilities between two new positions of Radiation Control Supervisor-Operations and Radiation Control Supervisor-Technical Support. The Radiation Control Supervisor, Operations would be responsible for radiological aspects of plant maintenance and operations activities. The Radiation Control Super-visor, Technical Support would be responsible for health physics support activities including dosimetry, radwaste, emergency planning, and radiation protection equipment. The staff finds this change acceptable because it does not delete any function currently reporting to the unit General Manager and meets the acceptance criteria of Section 13.1.2 of NUREG-0800 (the Standard ReviewPlan).
Change (2) the addition of circuit breakers in Table 3.8.4.1-1 " Primary Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices", is proposed as the result of a design change to decrease airborne radioactive contamination at a reactor water sample station inside containment. A heater and fan would be added to the ventilation system at the sample station to improve filter efficiency. Circuit breakers would be included in the electrical circuits for the fan and the heater as overcurrent protection for the conductors which penetrate the containment.
In addition, a typographical error in Table 3.8.4.1-1 is corrected. Because the inclusion of the breakers is in accordanca with NRC guidance (" Boiling Water Reactor-Standard Technical Specifications,"
NUREG-0123, Rev. 3), the staff finds the changes to be acceptable.
8510310524 851021 PDR ADOCK 05000416 P
- Change (3) would change the upper limit on the setpoint for the low pressure alarm in Technical Specification 4.1.3.3 " Control Rod Scram Accumulators".
The existing surveillance requirement for control rod scram accumulators in Technical Specification 4.1.3.3.b.1.b requires the performance-of a channel calibration of the pressure detectors and verification of an alarm setpoint of 1520 + 30, -0 psig on decreasing pressure. The licensee proposed to change the subject specification to read " Channel calibration of the pressure detectors, and verifying an alarm setpoint of greater than or equal to 1520 psig on decreas-ing pressure." As justification for the proposed change', the licensee states that most of these pressure switches have been found to drift to as-found setpoints higher than the allowable value of 1550 psig during their surveillance interval. The median drift was approximately 30-35 psi when comparing 173 data sheets for two calibrations. By letter dated September 26, 1985, the licensee provided us with a Service Information Letter from General Electric Company which states that this 30 psi band for the low pressure alarm setpoint may not always provide sufficient low side instrument drift margin for the installed pressure switches based on data from several BWRs. Therefore, General Electric recomends that the owners of plants with the 1520 + 30, -0 psig requirements should take the necessary actions to amend their Technical Specifications to state that the low pressure alarms be set at greater than or equal to 1520 psig on decreasing pressure.
Based on its review, the staff finds that any setpoint above 1520 psig is in the conservative direction as it will provide the intended indication on decreasing pressure. Therefore, proposed change (3) is acceptable..
Change (4) would add fire protection zones in the Unit 2 side of the control building to Technical Specification Table 3.3.7.9-1 " Fire Detection Instrumen-tation". The licensee discovered that certain Unit I safe-shutdown-related raceways pass through certain Unit 2 areas. The proposed change reflects the inclusion of the smoke detectors in these particular areas in the list of Unit 1 detectors which are subject to surveillance. The detectors associated with the actuation of carbon dioxide fire systems in some of these areas are not included. These C0 systems and the associated fire detectors are not 7
required by our fire protection guidelines for the Unit I raceways because only one shutdown division exists.in each area. Since change (4) lists detectors in accordance with NRC guidelines, the staff finds the proposed addit.ional fire detection instrumentation in Table 3.3.7.9-1 to be acceptable.
Change (5) would delete the diesel generator ground overcurrent protet.tive trip frca Technical Specification Section 4.8.1.1.2.d.8.a wnich exempts certain,
protective trips from bypass during accident conditions. Change (5) would also add this ground overcurrent protective trip to Technical Specification Section 4.8.1.1.2.d.16 which identifies lockout features which are retained to prevent diesel generator damage during testing. Based on its review of the July 12, 1985, submittal, the staff finds these changes in compliance with the recomendations of Regulatory Guide 1.9 which requires all diesel generator protective trips other than engine overspeed and generator differential to be bypassed during accident conditions. Therefore, we find the proposed changes to be a'cceptable.
~ ~ '
. i ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment involves changes of requirements of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR 20. The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there have been no comments on that proposal. Based on its evaluation, the staff concludes that there is no significant change in types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite. There is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure because change (2) would decrease occupational radiation exposure and the other changes do not affect personnel exposure.
Accordingly the amendment meets the eligibility criteria far categorical ex-clusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). ! arsuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no en-vironmental impact statement or enviror..;, ental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
CONCLUSION The Ccmmission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (50 FR 34943) on August 28, 1985, and consulted with the state of Mississippi.
No public comments were received, and the state of Mississippi did not have any comments.
I 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 Commission's regulations, and issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the cormon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors: Om P. Chopra, Power Systems Branch, DSI D. Kubicki, Chemical Engineering Branch, DE Lester L. Kintner, Licensing Branch No. 4 DL F. R. Allenspach, Licensee Qualification Branch, DHFS N. Trehan, Instrumentation and Control Systems Branch, DSI J. Minns, Radiological Assessment Branch, DSI Dated: October 21, 1985
V i
}
)
October 21, 1985 AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF Grand Gulf Unit 1 DISTRIBUTION:
v0 et No. 50-416 NRC PDR local PDR NSIC PRC System i
LB #4 r/f E. Adensam L. Kintner M. Duncan Attorney, OEl.D j
R. Diggs, ADM T. Barnhart (4)
E. L. Jordan, DEQA:I&E L. Harmon, ISE i
- 8. Grimes J. Partlow M. Virgilio F. Allenspach, LQB 4
N. Trehan, ICSB J. Minns, RAB
- 0. Chopra, PS8 D. Kubicki, CHEB I
i I
I I
i i
b l} ) '*' n l
ce t,g g
' U'AL l
- j - xfdf m
-s.
-n~-
.<, nam,-.m
..--...-an.
a.
w.
.