ML20214K430
| ML20214K430 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214K414 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-53219, NUDOCS 8608210078 | |
| Download: ML20214K430 (4) | |
Text
.
o UNITED STATES -
g
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
[
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655
...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 99 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-40 OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION, UNIT N0. 1 DOCKET N0. 50-285 INTRODUCTION By application for a license amendment dated November 18, 1983, the Omaha Public Power District (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS). The proposed changes are either administrative in nature or make the TS consistent with upgraded regulations that became effective January 1, 1984. Broadly, the application dealt with TS changes necessary as a result of the new Licensee Event Report System regulation (10 CFR 50.73), TS changes necessary as a result of amending the immediate notification regulation (10 CFR 50.72), TS changes necessary as a result of amending the shift manning regulation (10 CFR 50.54), and Quality Control (QC) personnel reporting. The Comission has provided guidance to licensees regarding changing the TS to make them consistent with changes to 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73. The guidance is contained in Generic Letter No. 83-43 entitled " Reporting Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Sections 50.72 and 50.73, and Standard Technical Specifications," which was issued on December 19, 1983.
By letter dated May 16, 1984, the Commission issued Amendment No. 78, which was in partial response to the licensee's November 18, 1983 amendment application. The amendment addressed and acted on the licensee's proposal to amend the TS to reflect the change in the shift manning regulation and to change to whom the QC personnel report.
In its safety evaluation in support of the amendment, the staff stated that the evaluation related to the proposed changes dealing with NRC notification and reporting was continuing and that these changes would be the subject of a separate evaluation.
By letter dated June 17, 1985, that was superseded by a letter dated July 8, 1986, the licensee updated that portion of the November 18, 1983 application that dealt with TS changes associated with NRC notification and reporting.
The following evaluation addresses the remaining aspects of the licensee's amendment application dated November 18, 1983, as supplemented by letters dated June 17, 1985 and July 8, 1986.
%?*2iggCK05000285 7e esosaa P
PDR 1
, EVALUATION The licensee proposes to change the section reference for prompt reporting of steam generator tube results (TS 3.3.(2)e(iii) and Table 3-8).
The current reference is section 5.9.2 which is entitled " Reportable Occurrences." The proposed reference is section 5.6 entitled " Reportable Event Action." This is acceptable since prompt notification pursuant to 10 CFR 50.72 (at least a 4-hour report) will still be made.
The licensee proposes to add the review of all reportable events to the responsbilities of the Plant Review Committee (TS 5.5.1.6).
This is consistent with the guidance contained in Generic Letter 83-43 and is acceptable.
The licensee proposes to change a review requirement of the Safety Audit and Review Comittee (SARC) (TS 5.B.2.7).
The comittee will review all reportable events instead of only those events requiring NRC notification within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. This is consistent with the guidance contained in Generic Letter 83-43 and is acceptable.
The licensee proposes to 'elete the administrative controls section dealing d
with reportable occurrence action (TS 5.6) and add a section entitled
" Reportable Event Action" (TS 5.6). This is consistent with the guidance contained ia Generic Letter 83-43 and is acceptable.
The licensee proposes a number of changes to the Administrative Controls Section dealing with safety limit violations (TS 5.7). The licensee states that the changes are consistent with the Standard Technical S and the Fort Calhoun Station Technical Specification 2.0.1(1)pecifications Since the Generic Letter did not provide guidance related to Safety Limit Violation reporting, the staff used the Combustion Engineering Standard Technical Specifications (CE STS) for guidance.
Regarding subsection a of TS 5.7, the present TS requires imediate compliance with 10 CFR 50.36(c)(1)(1) which, in part, specifies reactor shutdown if any safety limit is exceeded. The CE STS st.ites that the unit shall be placed in at least Hot Standby within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> when a Safety Limit is violated. Hot Standby for the CE STS requires the reactor to be subcritical. The licensee proposes to comply with this requirement and the proposed TS change is acceptable.
Subsection b of TS 5.7 requires the licensee to notify the Commission, the Division Manager - Nuclear Production, and the Chairman of the SARC within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of a safety limit violation.
It is acceptable for the Division Manager
- Nuclear Production and the Chairman of the SARC to be notified within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and this part is consistent with the STS. However, it is unacceptable for the licensee to be permitted to wait up to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to notify the Comission. The licensee proposes to delete the reference to the Comission in this subsection and the staff finds this acceptable.
. Regarding subsection d of TS 5.7, the licensee proposes to provide the violation report to the Commission, Division Manager - Nuclear Production, and Cahirman of the SARC within 14 days of the violation. The current specification requires 10 days. The proposed TS is consistent with the CE STS and is acceptable.
The licensee proposes to change a Commission addressee for the monthly operating report (TS 5.9.1.c).
The proposed addressee is Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement. The current addressee is Director, Office ot Management Information and Program Control. Regulatory Guide 10.1 recommends the Director of I&E as the addressee. A copy to the Regional Office TS will remain unchanged. The change is acceptable because this is consistent with the Regulatory Guide and because the licensee, in practice, also sends a copy to the Office of Resource Management.
The licensee proposes to delete administrative controls section 5.9.2 entitled " Reportable Occurrences." This section addresses prompt notification with written followup and 30-day written reports. This is consistent with the guidarice contained in Generic Letter 83-43 and is acceptable.
The licensee proposes to add a new administrative controls section 5.9.2 entitled " Reportable Events" stating that a report shall be submitted to the Commission pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73. This is consistent with Generic Letter 83-43 and is acceptable.
The licensee proposes to change the administrative controls section dealing with record retention (TS 5.10.1). The licensee proposes to delete the words
" reportable occurrence reports" and add the words " licensee event reports" (TS 5.10.1.c). This is consistent with the guidance contained in Generic 4
Letter 83-43 and is acceptable.
t Based upon the evaluation above, the TS changes proposed by the licensee by application dated November 18, 1983 as supplemented by letters dated June 17, 1985 and July 8,'1986 are acceptable.
I Environmental Consideration l
i This amendment relates to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or l
adminstrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, this amendment meets j
the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
f
[
Conclusion l
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 i
y
"-----y+
m-t--ig+--eaws+-+
---wes-meg
--m.--
g-,,
g,-9-y
,-qyg
.-e,g g9--,ewy9
,,g
-+yv,yvy-mvv-wgw-,-.a,
-- -, - - -.-eew,
.m-w--,.cos-,y-w-g p-
-.---w,-iwe,-w.-.--
.,e,oqye-ip-
4-be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
August 13, 1986 Principal Contributors:
E. Tourigny D. Sells 6
+-
l
{
f i
- _..... _. _ -.. -... -.... -.. _ _, -,. _. _ _ - - -. _, _ _ _ -