ML20154A759
| ML20154A759 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1997 |
| From: | CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154A756 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9810020436 | |
| Download: ML20154A759 (20) | |
Text
I'.
i.*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
' BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT ATTACHMENT 1 CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY BIG ROCK POINT PLANT DOCKET 50-155 ANNUAL REPORT-MODIFICATIONS i
I i
1 I
9810020436 981001
{
PDR ADOCK 05000155
?
R PM
{
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT SPECIFICATION CHANGE 97-009 JUSTIFICATION FOR USE OF EXISTING BREAKER 72-11 During a DC Breaker project review to support DC Breaker testing, a potential conflict was identified that was associated with Breaker 72-11. Although some plant documents iden:ified the breaker as a " Thermal only" unit, the breaker nameplate data identified it as a Thermal / Magnetic unit. The breaker w as tested and determined to have a functional magnetic trip. The thermal trip portion of the breaker (400 amps) is as assumed in the plant documents and the magnetic trip was determined to be set on the high range (4000 amps) with a test pick up value of 4250 amps. In order to support the continued use of this breaker, Consumers Energy System protection modified the coordination curves for this breaker in accordance with the vendor data. The UFHSR was revised to incorporate the identification of the thermal and adjustable magnetic trips, and references to the specification change package and supporting I
analysis.
)
SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
The safety evaluation review concluded that the breaker was not expected to operate under new parameters or in a different environment. However, a minor coordination discrepancy was identified and determined to be acceptable based on an analysis of fault location. Therefore, the breaker was not replaced. The proposed change did not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
I
,,,rory, y-w
__mr y
-,--y-
4 NUCLEAR RE'3ULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT FACILITY CHANGE 676-04 ELECTRIC AND SEWAGE TO THE MAINTENANCE BUILDING ENGINEERING DESIGN CHANGE Changes were required to this facility change to reflect the correct number of neutral conductors due to a design error. Transformer X-1445A (500 KVA) was installed for the maintenance building without a " load flow analysis". The affect on safety-related equipment (at that time) fed from the 46 KV line during a LOCA would be the potential for inoperability if the line voltage were to fall below 43.8 KV. An engineering analysis determined that with the addition of the 500 KVA transformer the voltage limit for the original " base load" calculation was increased slightly from 44.4 to 44.6 KV. This increase was considered to be negligible because the change was less than 0.5%.
SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
The safety evaluation review concluded that due to the negligible impact that the addition of the 500 KVA transformer had on the operation of the 46 KV line, equipment voltages would remain acceptable during a I.OCA or Base load operation. Therefore, the proposed change did not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
J i
- awr, awe-
.n
~ -
e
.. - - ~ - -...
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT FACILITY CHANGE 0694 HEPA FILTER ADDITION TO CONTAINMENT HVAC SYSTEM This change modified the contaimnent ventilation exhaust duct to include a High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filter unit. The unit consists of a pre-filter, HEPA filter, manually positioned isolation dampers, and booster fan. The unit will tie into tees in the existing exhaust path. The HEPA unit will be manually operated and controlled; no automatic functions or operations will be included in this modification. This change does not inhibit the required functions of the containment exhaust system described in the safety analysis report.
SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
r l
The safety evaluation review concluded that the installation of the HEPA unit in the containment exhaust path does not affect fuel handling systems, radiation monitoring systems, containment isolation systems or fuel cooling systems. Therefore, the proposed change did not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
l l
1 l
- i
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT -
1 ATTACHMENT 2 CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY BIG ROCK POINT PLANT 1
DOCKET 30-155 ANNUAL REPORT-PROCEDURES I
L i
l l
l l.'
l
\\
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT l
ANNUAL REPORT 1
l
(-
(
l ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE D511 l
WATER CHEMISTRY GUIDELINES 1
The Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) is expected to be maintained until the fuel is removed. Administrative procedure D5.21 adopts the SFP water quality standards approved for decommissioning of plants by the NRC; these limits are sufficient to ensure that the fuel does not degrade during storage in l
the pool.
l l
SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
The safety evaluation review concluded that changing the limits of the SFP water chemistry does not affect the operation of the equipment important to safety. The new limits being adopted have been approved by the NRC for the decommissioning of plants and are sufficient to ensure that the fuel will not degrade during storage in the pool. Therefore, the proposed change did not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
l
e-h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT l
ANNUAL REPORT l
SITE EMERGENCY h. A.i i APPENDIX C Appendix C revises the geographical identifier used to provide protective actions to the State of Michigan. Protective actions ordered by the State will now be done by geographically boundaried areas versus the former radial sectors. This revision is being made at the direction of the State of Michigan and is in elTect for all nuclear power plants in the State of Michigan.
i SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
{
The safety evaluation review concluded that the changes to the geographical areas for recommendations made to the State to protect the public does not impact any on-site equipment or activities. Therefore, the proposed change did not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
i l
f
t.
l l
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT l-ANNUAL REPORT SITE EMERGENCY PLAN CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 3 APPENDIX H The minimum Protective Action Recommendation (PAR)is being changed from " shelter" to
" evacuation". This revision aligns with Supplement 3 ofNUREG-0654, Revision 1.
SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
The safety evaluation review concluded that changes to the PARS to protect the public does not impact any on-site equipment or activities. Therefore, the proposed change did not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
I 9
i.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT PROCEDURE DI.4 SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE This procedure change addresses a name change to " Safety Review Committee (SRC)" from
" Plant Review Committee (PRC)." This terminology aligns with the Safety Review Committee description in the proposed Defueled Technical Specifications which are currently under review by the NRC Staff.
SAFETY EVALUATION REVIEW The safety evaluation re view concluded that the administrative procedure outlines the responsibilities of the SRC which will replace the existing PRC upon approval of the Defueled Technical Specifications and the Quality Program, CPC-2A. Direction for operating plant systems / equipment or changes to the facility is not given by the SRC; therefore all accident and malfunction assumptions and associated conclusions in the safety analysis report remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change involves a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license, but does not constitute an unreviewed safety ruestion.
J 4
1 J
i
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT j
ANNUAL REPORT T1-09 HEAT BALANCE CALCULATION T1-09, Heat Balance Calculation was deleted. Calculating steady state reactor power, or calibration of the Wide Range Monitors is no longer required since the fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor. Note..this change was completed prior to Revision 7 of the UFHSR.
SAFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
The safety evaluation review concluded that since the reactor has been permanently defueled, there is no longer a requirement to calculate steady state reactor power or calibrate the wide range power monitors. All accident and malfunction assumptions and associated conclusions in the safety analysis report remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
i-
{~
l l
k 3
I NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT TI-02 PRIMARY SYSTEM LEAKAGE TEST l
l T1-02, Primary System Leakage Test was deleted. The daily test is no longer required since the fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor. Note..this change was completed prior to Revision 7 of the UFHSR.
3AFETY EVALUATION
SUMMARY
The safety evaluation review concluded that since the reactor has been permanently defueled, there is no longer a requirement to determine the leak rate of the primary system since the system will remain at atmospheric pressure and less than 212 F. All accident and malfunction assumptions and associated conclusions in the safety analysis report remain unaffected.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a change in the technical specifications incorporated in the license or an unreviewed safety question.
i l
.~
/
. NUCLEAR RiiGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT i
i l
i ATTACHMENT 3 CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY BIG ROCK POINT PLANT DOCKET 50-155 ANNUAL REPORT-UFHSR CHANGES i
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT 1
UFilSR CHAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
C1 apter 1 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 1 Infonnation with regard to the The safety evaluation concluded that 1.5.2.4 installation / replacement of the change did not create a potential new locking devic es on two for valve failure or other component Post Incident System '.aives failure. Adequate barriers existed to was incorporated into the ensme that the valves are locked in the UFHSR. (NOTE:This section spjropriate position. Therefore, the has since been deleted / revised proposed change did not involve an with the submittal of Revision unreviewed safety question.
7 of the UFHSR to the Commission).
Chapter 2 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptiona associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT UFHSR CHAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
Chapter 3 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility, accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
1 Chapter 4 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 4 A description of new The safety evaluation concluded that 4.7.4.3 administrative controls for the failure of the scram outlet valves maintaining the Scram Dump to close because of timing Tank vent and drain valves malfunctions or safety system closed until the scram outlet resetting was reduced. Therefore, the valves were closed, were proposed change did not involve an added to the UFHSR.
unreviewed safety question.
(NOTE:This section has since been deleted / revised witn the submittal of Revision 7 of the UFHSR to the Commission).
.s_.,
-n.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT UFHSR CIIAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
i 1
Chapter 5 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 6 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an i
unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 6 The change incorporated a The safety evaluation concluded that 6.3.1.3.1 revised ECCS analysis into the the revised ECCS hydraulic analysis 6.3.1.3.3 descriptions for the core spray updated previously acceptable and enclosure spray systems, accident conditions and ECCS The hydraulic analysis was hydraulic configurations. Therefore, based on an updated hydraulic the proposed change did not involve model and a more conservative an unreviewed safety question.
fire pump operating curves.
(NOTE:This section has since been deleted / revised with the submittal of Revision 7 of the UFIISR to the Commission.
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT UFHSR CHAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
Chapter 7 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, thera is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the
)
proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 8 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently l
and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the
)
proposed change does not involve an
)
I unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 9 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
d NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION B!G ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT UFHSR CHAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
Chapter 9 This change addressed the The safety evaluation concluded that 9.2 and 9.3 addition of air compressor #4 the changes would actually decrease and the splitting of the the probability of the failure of the Instrument Air System from Instrument Air System. There was no the Service Air System.
affect on the consequences of an (NOTE:This section has since accident that had been previously been deleted / revised with the evaluated. Therefore, the proposed submittal of Revision 7 of the change did not involve an unreviewed UFHSR to the Commission.
safety question.
Chapter 10 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 11 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
I
c.
a d
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION % JECT ANNUAL REPORT UFilSR CIIAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
Chapter 12 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation con::luded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All i
current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed chrnge does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 13 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All j
current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Chapter 14 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that i
structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety que : a.
d
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO' MISSION M
BIG ROCK POIN'1 RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT UFHSR CilAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
Chapter 15 A procedure change was The safety evaluation concluded that 15.4.1 required to allow operators to the probability of analyzed failures place thejog bypass switch in and the consequences of fuel damage the run position to allow had not been changed. Therefore, the withdrawal of those control change did not involve an unreviewed rods which are on 00 and safety question.
cannot be withdrawn with this switch in the jog position. A single notch at a time will be withdmwn using this method.
The UFHSR was revised to clarify the position of thejog bypass switch during rod movement. (NOTE: This section has since been deleted / revised with the submittal of Revision 7 of the UFHSR to the Commission.
Chapter 15 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and prcgrams not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and prograr. s that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
I 1
.---p w
~
i NUCLEAR REGUI.ATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT RESTORATION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT UFIISR CIIAPTER DESCRIPTION SE
SUMMARY
Chapter 18 Descriptions of plant systems, The safety evaluation concluded that structures, components (SSCs) since the reactor has been permanently and programs not required for defueled, there is no longer a need to decommissioning have been describe SSCs and programs that are deleted / revised to reflect the required for plant operation. All current status of the facility.
accident and malfunction assumptions associated with the storage of spent fuel remain unaffected. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
v
,