ML20212Q924
| ML20212Q924 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212Q900 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8704240146 | |
| Download: ML20212Q924 (20) | |
Text
_
m p Kig
'o UNITED STATES "g
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
i 7.
ej WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING ISSUANCE OF FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-62 i
-i ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
j WESTERN ILLIN0IS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
j
]
DOCKET NO. 50-461 CLINTON POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 1 1
INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION l
1.1 Introduction i
l The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff (referred to as the NRC staff or staff) issued its Safety Evaluation Report (SER) (NUREG-0853) in February 1982 regard-ing the application by Illinois Power Company et al. (hereinafter referred to as the licensee) for a license to operate the Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, Docket No. 50-461. Supplement No. 1 (SSER 1) to the Clinton SER was issued in July 1982; SSER 2 was issued in May 1983; SSER 3 was issued in May 1984; SSER 4 was issued February 1985; SSER 5 was issued in January 1986; SSER 6 was issued in July 1986; SSER 7 was issued in September 1986; and SSER 8 was issued in i
March 1987.
The purpose of the present safety evaluation is to close out all the remaining requests and commitments made by the licensee that have to be resolved before the full power license is issued.
These are:
^
(1) four Technical Specifications changes requested in a March 20, 1987 sub-mittal (Section 16)
(2) completion of two low power license schedular exemptions (Section 14) 1 (3) modification of a low power license condition (Section 18)
Each of the following sections or appendices of this safety evaluation is i
numbered the same as the section or appendix of the SER that is being updated, and the discussions are supplementary to and not in. lieu of the discussion in t
the SER unless otherwise noted. All the outstanding and confirmatory licens-ing issues have been resolved and all but six license conditions have been fully resolved. These six appear as license conditions in the full-power license.
i Section 1 of Supplement 8 to the SER identifies the SER or SER supplement and section where the resolution for each.of the above issues is discussed.
ayo$
.g
14 INITIAL TEST PROGRAM Preoperational Test Deferrals In Supplement 6 to the SER the licensee's proposed deferral is addressed for various preoperational tests (with different completion schedules, each ending after issuance of the low power license).
Those preoperational tests that re-quired schedular exemptions from Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 were discussed in Appendix N to Supplement 6 to the SER and appeared as schedular exemptions from Appendix A in the low power license No. NPF-55 (Section 20, items a-f and item i). An extension of the schedular exemption for item g (fuel handling system) was granted in Supplement 8 to the SER.
By letter dated March 3, 1987, the licensee stated that all the schedular deferrals for preoperational tests through heatup authorized in Section 2D of the low power license No. NPF-55 have been completed in accordance with com-pletion schedules specified in Section 2D of the low power license.
In Sup-plement 8 to the SER, the staff stated that since the licensee has completed these preoperational tests in accordance with the schedules specified in the low power license, the exemptions identified in Table 14.1 are no longer required.
By letter dated March 27, 1987, the licensee stated that the two preoperational tests have been completed for which schedular exemptions authorized in Section 2D of the low power license No. NPF-55, were to remain in effect until exceeding 5% of rated reactor power.
Since the licensee has completed these preopera-tional tests in accordance with the schedules contained in the low power license, the associated exemptions identified in Table 14.1 are no longer required.
l f
]
l
Table 14.1 Completion schedules for deferred preoperational testing of systems for which schedular exemptions were authorized Low power license NPF-55 Plant system exemption /SSER 6 section Completion milestone Turbine electrohydraulic 2.D(a)/ Appendix N, S2.1 Heatup control Traversing incore probe 2.D(b)/ Appendix N, S2.2 5% power Offgas 2.D(c)/ Appendix N, $2.3 Heatup Containment monitoring 2.D(d)/ Appendix N, $2.4 Initial criticality Leakage detection 2.D(e)/ Appendix N, S2.5 Initial criticality Fuel pool cooling and 2.D(f)/ Appendix N, $2.6 5% power cleanup system In placa filter testing of 2.D(h)/ Appendix N, S2.8 Initial criticality control rool heating, ventilation, and air conditioning Heating, ventilation, and 2.D(i)/ Appendix N, S2.9 Heatup air conditioning f
l l
I 3
O D
16 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS The Technical Specifications in a license define certain features, characteris-tics, and conditions governing the operation of the facility that cannot be changed without prior approval of the NRC staff. The Clinton Technical Speci-fications are included as Appendix A to the Clinton license.
The Technical Specifications contain sections covering definitions, safety limits, limiting safety system settings, limiting conditions for operation, surveillance re-quirements, design features, and administrative controls.
In letters dated January 8, February 4, and March 3 and 20, 1987, the licensee requested certain changes to the Technical Specifications that were issued as part of the Clinton low power license.
These changes would be incorporated into the Technical Specifications for the full power license and would be ef-fective upon issuance of that license. The licensee requested these changes based on experience to date, to clarify and enhance the Clinton Technical Speci-fications, and to provide consistency between the FSAR, the SER, and the as-built facility.
In addition, the staff audited the final Clinton Technical Specifications in accordance with NRR* Office Letter No. 51, dated July 31, 1986.
Several of the findings of this audit were identified in a November 20, 1986 memorandum and resulted in a number of staff-initiated changes to the Clinton Technical Specifications.
Supplement 8 to the SER contains the staff's evaluations of all the proposed changes to the Technical Specification as contained in the January 8, February 4, and March 3, 1987 submittals filed by the licensee. The remaining proposed changes to the Technical Specifications as requested in the licensee's March 20, 1987. submittal are addressed in.this safety evaluation. All the li-censee's requested changes, their status, and the staff-initiated audit recom-mendation changes are listed in Table 16.1.
- NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
4
Table 16.1 Technical Specification changes Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation January 8,1987 TS 3/4.3.1, Table 4.3.1.1-1, Change frequency of surveillance require-Unacceptable.
See SSER 8, pp. 3/4 3-8,
-9, -10 ments for some of the reactor protection Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.1, system instrumentation.
pp. 3/4 3-8,
-9, -10.
TS 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3.2-1, Add a note to identify operability relief Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 3-13 and Table 3.3.2-1, for the containment high pressure trip Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.2,
- p. 3/4 3-18 function for containment isolation when pp. 3/4 3-13, -18.
associated valves are sealed closed.
TS 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3.2-1 Modify Action statements 21, 25, and 29 Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 3-19 to provide clarification.
Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.2,
- p. 3/4 3-19.
TS 3/4.3.7, Table 3.3.7.1-1, Permit a channel of the main control room Acceptable.
See SSER 8, u,
pp. 3/4 3-71, -72 air intake radiation monitor to be placed Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.7, in inoperable status during required sur pp. 3/4 3-71, -72 veillance without placing the tripped sys-tem in the tripped condition, provided there is at least one other operable channel.
TS 3/4.6.4, p. 3/4 6-29
[ Action statement for primary containment The BWR licensing staff agrees isolation valves should address valves with the audit findings and a which have dual functions and the effects footnote has been added to this of their inoperability on their other specification identifying the safety function.]t problem.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Update the TS to satisfy the commitment of Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 6-38.
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation January 8, 1987 (Continued)
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Delete valve 1E12-F351 from the table.
Acceptable.
See SSER 8, Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.4,
- p. 3/4 6-44
- p. 3/4 6-44.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Delete valves 1821-F098A, B, C, D from the Acceptable.
See SSER 8, pp. 3/4 6-51, -52 table.
Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.4, pp. 3/4 6-51, -52.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Delete valves IIA 128A, B from the table.
Acceptable.
See SSER 8, pp. 3/4 6-56, -60 Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.4, pp. 3/4 6-56, -60.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Add a note (c) to valve ICM053 td be Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 6-59 consistent with FSAR.
Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.4, m
- p. 3/4 6-59.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Delete words in note (g) and insert revised Acceptable.
SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 6-61 note wording to satisfy TMI Item II.E.4.2 See Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.4, requirements.
- p. 3/4 6-61.
TS Bases B 3/4.6.4, Revise the Bases to clarify that TMI Item Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. B 3/4 6-7 II.E.4.2 is satisfied for containment Appendix Q, TS Bases B 3/4.6.4, integrity.
- p. B 3/4 6-7.
TS 3/4.7.6, p. 3/4 7-17
[An inconsistency exists between the The staff agrees with the applicability and Action statement.]t audit findings.
See SSER 8, Appendix Q, TS 3/4.7.6,
- p. 3/4 7-17.
TS 3/4.8.4, Table 3.8.4.1-1, Delete from table columns entitled:
"Cir-Acceptable. These columns are pp. 3/4 8-27 through 43 cuit Breaker Trip," " Penetration Cable purely informational and do not Size," and " Cable Number."
contain any safety requirements related to the TS.
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request 4
and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation January 8,1987 (Continued)
TS 3/4.8.4, Table 3.8.4.2-1, Add valves 1WO551A, B and 1WO552A, B to the Acceptable.
This is in accordance table of mo. or-operated valves that have with Position C.1 of RG 1.106
- p. 3/4 8-52 t
thermal overload protection devices.
" Thermal Overload Protection for Electric Motors on MOVs."
TS 3/4.9.12, p.3/4 9-19, -20 Extend the surveillance times to determine See staff evaluation under March 3, the operability of the inclined fuel 1987 submittal, TS change 3/4.9.12, i
transfer system (IFTS) after system is pp. 3/4 9-19, -20.
determined operable.
TS 6.1.2, p. 6-1 Change the appropriate level of management Acceptable.
See SSER 8, to the Vice President-Nuclear for issu-Appendix Q, TS 6.1.2, p. 6-1.
ance of the endorsement letter describing the control room command function.
w i
TS 6.2.1, Figure 6.2.1-1, Change the organizational chart to reflect Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 6-3 current organization.
Appendix Q, TS 6.2.1, p. 6-3.
TS 6.4.1, p. 6-7 Revise training requirements for the unit Unacceptable.
See SSER 8, 1
staff.
Appendix Q, TS 6.4.1,
- p. 6-7.
TS 6.5.1.2, p. 6-7 Change the membership of Facility Review Acceptable.
See SSER 8, Group.
Appendix Q, TS 6.5.1.2,
- p. 6-7.
l February 4, 1987 TS 1.28, Table 1.2, Delete word "recoupled" and insert word Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 1-11
" moved." Additional justification provided Appendix Q, TS 1.28, p 1-11.
in March 3, 1987 submittal.
TS 3/4.2.3, Figure 3.2.3-2, Replace current figure, which was incor-Acceptable.
This is an editorial
- p. 3/4 2-9 rectly drafted, with new figure, change and has been incorporated into the TS.
4 I
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation February 4, 1987 (Continued)
TS 3/4.3.6, Table 4.3.6-1, Change the surveillance frequencies for Unacceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 3-68 channel functional tests for some control Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.6, rod block instrumentation.
- p. 3/4 3-68.
TS 3/4.3.7, Substitute Action statement 121 for 126 Acceptable.
See SSER 8, Table 3.3.7.12-1, for items 2.a and 2.b.
Delete Action 126.
Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.7, pp. 3/4 3-102, -104 pp. 3/4 3-102, -104.
TS 3/4.3.9, Table 3.3.9-2, Change the trip setpoint and allowable Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 3-113 value for the high containment pressure Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.9, trip setpoints.
- p. 3/4 3-113.
i TS 3/4.3.10, p. 3/4 3-115 Change the note to permit self-test system Acceptable.
See SSER 8, to be taken out of automatic mode of opera-Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.10, ao tion for up to 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to perform surveil-
- p. 3/4 3-115.
lance testing, preventive or corrective maintenance.
TS 3/4.4.1, SR 4.4.1.1,tt Correct a typographical error.
Acceptable.
Change is editorial
- p. 3/4 4-2 and has been incorporated into the TS.
i TS 3/4.4.4, SR 4.4.4.c,tt Delete the number of days the continuous Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 4-15 recording conductivity monitor may be in-Appendix Q, TS 3/4.4.4, operable before obtaining in-line conduc-
- p. 3/4 4-15.
tivity measurements.
TS 3/4.6.2, SR 4.6.2.2,tt Change to permit the drywell bypass leak-Acceptable.
See March 3, 1987
- p. 3/4 6-15 age rate test to be performed during each submittal, TS 3/4.6.2, p. 3/4 6-15.
refueling outage.
See footnotes at end of table.
O Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation February 4, 1987 (Continued)
TS 3/4.6.3, SR 4.6.3.1.c.3,tt Correct a typographical error.
Acceptable.
Change is editorial and has been incorporated into
- p. 3/4 6-25 the TS.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-4, Add a note related to B and R isolation Acceptable.
See SSER 8, pp. 3/4 6-32, -33 signals for valves 1E51-F031 and 1E51-F064.
Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.4, pp. 3/4 6-32, -33.
TS 3/4.6.4, Table 3.6.4-1, Correct a typographical error.
Acceptable.
Change is editorial
- p. 3/4 6-51 and has been incorporated into the TS.
TS 3/4.8.4, Table 3.8.4.2-1, Add valve IE51-C002E to table of motor-Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 8-49 operated valves with thermal overload Appendix Q, TS 3/4.8.4, e
protection.
- p. 3/4 8-49.
TS 3/4.9.12, pp. 3/4 9-19, -20 Change the appropriate note to state that See staff evaluation under two components of the inclined fuel trans-March 3, 1987 submittal.
fer system need not be operable until prior TS 3/4.9.12, pp. 3/4 9-19, -20 to off-loading irradiated fuel.
TS 3/4.4.3, p. B 3/4 4-3 Withdrawn TS 5.1.1 and 5.1.3, Change unrestricted area boundary as shown Acceptable.
See SSER 8, Figures 5.1.1-1 and 5.1.3-1, in figures.
Appendix Q, TS 5.1.1 and 5.1.3, pp. 5-2, -4 pp. 5-2, -4.
TS 6.2.2, Change the " Director" Plant Operations to Acceptable.
See SSER 8, Figure 6.2.1-1, p. 6-4
" Assistant Manager" Plant Operations and Appendix Q, TS 6.2.2, p. 6-4.
correct typographical error.
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation February 4, 1987 (Continued)
TS 6.2.3.4, p. 6-6 Correct a typographical error.
Acceptable.
Change is editorial and has been incorporated into the TS.
TS 6.7.1.d, p. 6-14 Require safety limit violation report to Acceptable.
See SSER 8, be provided to all parties within 30 days Appendix Q, TS 6.7.1.d, p. 6-14.
of violation.
TS 6.12, p. 6-23 Incorporated portions of TS 6.12.2 and TS Acceptable.
See SSER 8, 6.12.3 inadvertently left out upon issu-Appendix Q, TS 6.12, p. 6-23.
ance of low power license into these TS sections.
g March 3, 1987 TS 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3.2-2, Withdrawn.
- p. 3/4 3-23 TS 3/4.3.3, Table 3.3.3-2, Change the trip setpoint and allowable Acceptable.
See SSER 8, pp. 3/4 3-39, -40 value for the low pressure systems injec-Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.3, tion valve permissives.
Additional justi-pp. 3/4 3-39, -40.
fication provided in March 20, 1987 submittal.
TS 3/4.3.7, LC0 3.3.7.12,tt Add a note to table applicable to minimum Acceptable.
See SSER 8, Table 3.3.7.12-1, number of operable channels to enable Appendix Q, TS 3/4.3.7, pp. 3/4 3-102, -103, -104 channels to be placed in an inoperable pp. 3/4 3-102, -103, -104.
status for up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> to perform surveillance of this TS and TS 3/4.11.2.1.
TS 3/4.4.3, SR 4.4.3.2.1.a,tt Delete surveillance requirement related to Unacceptable.
Change to TS
- p. 3/4 4-11 monitoring drywell atmospheric particulate proposed is inadequate to and gaseous radioactivity once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. support requested change.
See footnotes at end of table.
)
Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation March 3, 1987 (Continued)
TS 3/4.6.1, SR 4.6.1.4.c.2,tt Change the surveillance requirements of the Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 6-7 MSIV leakage control system blowers.
Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.1,
- p. 3/4 6-7.
i.
TS 3/4.6.2, SR 4.6.2.2,tt Change to permit the drywell bypass leakage Acceptable.
See SSER 8,
- p. 3/4 6-15 rate test to be performed during each re Appendix Q, TS 3/4.6.2, l
fueling outage.
Amends the February 4,
- p. 3/4 6-15.
l 1987 submittal.
i TS 3/4.9.12, Additional changes related to inclined fuel Acceptable.
See SSER 8, pp. 3/4 9-19,-20 transfer system (IFTS) TS were provided Appendix Q, TS 3/4.9.12, to supplement January 8, 1987 submittal.
pp. 3/4 9-19, -20.
These changes ensure that sufficient pre-cautions are taken to prevent personnel s.
from entering areas adjacent to where 1
irradiated fuel is being handled by the IFTS.
TS Bases 3/4.4.3, Update Bases to be consistent with a revi -
Unacceptable.
Change to TS
- p. B 3/4 4-3 sion to the FSAR.
(Related to revision on proposed is inadequate to TS 3/4.4.3, SR 4.4.3.2.1.a
- p. 3/4 4-11 of support requested change.
March 3, 1987 submittal.)
March 20, 1987 TS 3/4.3.3, Table 3.3.3-2 Clarification of same TS change request See TS 3/4.3.3, pp. 3/4 3-39, -40, pp. 3/4 3-39, -40 contained in the March 3, 1987 submittal.
under March 3, 1987 submittal.
TS 3/4.3.7, p. 3/4.3-92 and Modify appropriate TS to account for an Acceptable.
See Appendix Q,**
TS Bases 3/4.3.7.8, alternative method for use and storage of TS 3/4.3.7, p 3/4 3-92.
- p. B 3/4 3-7 and TS 3/4.7.2, chlorine gas on site in individual con-
- p. 3/4 7-5 tainers having an inventory capacity of
< 150 pounds.
See footnotes at end of, table.
Table 16.1 (Continued)
Date of IP letter request and TS section Licensee change request description
- Staff evaluation March 20, 1987 (Continued)
TS 3/4.6.1., SR 4.6.1.7,tt Add a note regarding the instrument loca-Acceptable.
See Appendix Q,**
j
- p. 3/4 6-11 tions and the number of instruments to be TS 3/4.6.1, p. 3/4 6-11/
used to determine primary containment TS 3/4.6.2, p. 3/4 6-20.
average air temperature.
TS 3/4.6.2, SR 4.6.2.6,tt Add notes regarding the instrument loca-Acceptable.
See Appendix Q,**
- p. 3/4 6-20 tions and the number of instruments to be TS 3/4.6.1, p. 3/4 6-11/
used to determine drywell average air TS 3/4.6.2, p. 3/4 6-20.
temperature.
TS 3/4.8.2, Revise the load profile for the Division Acceptable.
See Appendix Q,**
SR 4.8.2.1.d.2.att I, II, and III batteries due to installa-pp. 3/4 8-13, -14.
pp. 3/4 8-13, -14 tion of a prelubrication system on the diesel engines.
p.
m l
- For a more complete description, see the referenced letter.
- See Appendix Q in this safety evaluation.
fBracketed material [] is a staff audit recommendation.
ftSR = Surveillance Requirement; LCO = Limiting Condition for Operation.
l 18 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW 18.3 Conclusions In Supplement No. 5 to the SER (SSER 5) the staff identified certain items of the detailed control room design review (DCRDR) that remain to be completed or verified and that are to be addressed in a supplemental summary report.
The submittal of this summary report which addresses of all these items was made a license condition of the Clinton low power facility operating license No. NPF-55 (license condition 2.C(11)c).
By lettter dated March 28, 1987, the licensee submitted the final summary report which addressed all the items in SSER 5.
Although all the items were addressed in this submittal, not all the items were fully resolved. Table 18.1 prevides the status of all the DCRDR open items identified in SSER 5.
Since all the items have not been fully resolved, the low power license condition will be continued and modified to require comple-tion of the remaining items within 50 days of issuance of the full power li-cense. The full power license condition will read as follows:
The licensee shall submit a datailed control room design final sup-plemental summary report within 90 days of issuance of the full-power license that completes all the remaining items identified in this safety evaluation.
The staff will review the information provided in the supplemental summary report dated March 28, 1987 when the final supplemental summary report is sub-mitted and will provide a safety evaluation.
Region III will verify the implementation of r.ay modifications required after the staff has completed its review.
i Dated: April 17,1987 6
13
O Table 18.1 Status of DCRDR open items Item Status *
(1) Evaluation of communications from the remote shutdown panel Completed to other local control stations that would be manned when shutdown could not be accomplished from the control room.
I (2) Reassessment and resolution of the human engineering discrep-Completed ancy (HED) addressing the potential for accidental actuation of controls located along the front edges of the benchboards.
(3) Confirmation that annunciators with faded or dirty tiles, or Partially that used poor letter styles have been corrected.
Provision completed of a description of how corrections were accomplished.
4 (4) Verification of the following system and function task analy-sis activities:
(a) All tasks needed to identify emergency operating proce-Partially dure (EOP) entry and exit conditions have been included completed in the task analysis.
(b) All E0P steps have been included in the task analysis.
Partially completed (c) Cathode-ray tube (CRT) displays used as primary operator Partially information sources have been reviewed for suitability.
completed (d) Assessment of display instrument accuracy has taken into Partially l
account the accuracies of all components of the instru-completed l
mentation loop under the plant conditions implied by the need to perform the E0P.
i (e) Display instruments provide direct indication where Partially needed for operator feedback.
completed l
j (f) Instrumentation specified to be used under station black-Completed cut conditions has been identified and assessed for suitability.
(g) Assessment of the suitability of instrumentation range Partially j
has taken into account the overall instrument loop.
completed (h) Feedback characteristics for control room instruments Partially were identified and instruments were surveyed for these completed features.
f (5) Description of the administrative control procedures appli-Completed cable to control room operations.
(6) Reconfirmation and formalization of the DCRDR verification Completed processes.
14 i
~.
, - - - ~
-.. > ~ - - --,-
-l Table 18.1 (Continued)
Item Status *
(7) Confirmation of completion of corrective action for those Partially HEDs where application of the design impro'vement has been completed postponed until completion of control room construction.
(8) Resolution of the readability problem with recorders using Partially non glare glass.
completed (9) Description of the applicant's conventions for meter banding, Partially and verificaticn that meter color banding is consistent with completed this convention.
(10) Confirmation that annunciator controls have been. arranged in Partially completed a consistent manner.
(11) Completion of those environmental survey items to be conducted Partially after completion of control room construction.
' completed
- Status based on licensee's March 28, 1987 submittal.
Staff's acceptability pending staff review.
k i
?,
't f
b
. {;V 15 ,
APPENDIX A s
CONTINUATION OF CHRONOLOGY R
March 27, 1987 Letter from licensee stating that deferred testing of pre-operational tests scheduled for the 5% power milestone have been completed.
March 28, 1987 Letter from licensee submitting detailed control room design review supplemental summary report.
O 16
APPENDIX D NRC STAFF CONTRIBUTORS
- Name Title Branch B. Siegel Sr. Project Manager BWR Project Directorate #4 (BWR Lic.)
W. Meinke Nuclear Engineer Plant Systems (BWR Lic.)
C. Schulten Reactor Systems Engineer Facilities Operations (BWR Lic.)
N. K. Trehan Electrical Engineer Electrical, Instrumentation, and Control Systems (BWR Lic.)
e m
e 17 l
?
APPENDIX F ERRATA TO CLINTON POWER STATION SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SSER 8 Appendix Q, page 2, Section TS 3/4.3.3; Change > 478 psig to < 478 psig pages 3/4 3-39, -40 Page 7-1, Section 7.5.3.1, line 22 Change 1987 to 1984 e
1 I
i 18
APPENDIX Q STAFF SAFETY EVALUATIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES PROPOSED BY THE LICENSEE AND THE STAFF FOR THE CLINTON FULL-POWER OPERATING LICENSE By letter dated March 20, 1987, the licensee proposed changes to the Clinton Technical Specifications (TS).
The changes were requested for issuance with the Clinton full power operating license.
The staff evaluations of the pro-posed changes are given below.
TS 3/4.8.2; pages 3/4 8-13, -14 The licensee requested a revision to TS 4.8.2.1.d.2, " Electric Power System DC Sources," for the addition of the de powered prelubrication pump motor to each of the diesel generators.
Based on the as-built configuration, the licensee determined that each battery is capable of supplying the added small loads and the total load is well within its capacity.
The staff has evaluated the proposed Technical Specification change as described in the licensee's submittal and concluded that the dc batteries are adequately sized to supply the additional loads of the de powered prelubrication pump motor load for each of the diesel generators.
This change is, therefore, acceptable.
TS 3/4.6.1; page 3/4 6-11/TS 3/4.6.2; page 3/4 6-20 This requested' change would add a note to define the requirements for the mini-mum number and location of readings for " arithmetical average" and provide for continued plant operation with flexibility in performance of instrument main-tenance that may render an individual instrument inoperable.
Unlike a number of other instrumentation Technical Specifications, the present specification contains no minimum-channel-operable concept to provide relief for temporary loss of an instrument for maintenance or testing.
The proposed note would still provide for at least one instrument reading in each quadrant, and is consistent with the intent of the BWR Standard Technical Specifications, NUREG-0123, Revision 4 (Draft BWP/6).
Therefore, this change is acceptable.
TS 3/4.3.7, page 3/4 3-92 The requested changes would provide for alternate methods for the use and storage of chlorine gas on site.
The present Technical Specifications address the chlo-rine hazard as it is documented in the FSAR.
Specifically, the major contributor to the chlorine hazard is the onsite storage of chlorinc in individual containers having an inventory of greater than 150 pounds.
The staff review of offsite hazards for Clinton had indicated that there were no significant offsite sources of chlorine.
The licensee plans to reduce the use of gaseous chlorine on site 19 i
in treatment of water systems.
In line with these plans, the licensee proposes to take advantage of an alternative position in Regulatory Guide 1.95 that allows manual isolation capability of the control room HVAC system if chlorine is stored in containers with an individual inventory of less than 150 pounds and at a distance from the control room of more than 100 meters.
The licensee's pro-posed changes would only require automatic isolation of the control room HVAC when onsite chlorine is stored in containers with a capacity greater than 150 pounds or at distances less than 100 meters from the nearest control room intake. Therefore, the change is within the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.95.
Furthermore, since there are no offsite chlorine sources near Clinton, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
l 1
20
. -,