ML18012A634

Application for Amend to License NPF-63,incorporating Enhancements to TS Identified in Plant Review Performed IAW GL 96-01.Changes Affect Specs 4.3.2.1.1.a,4.3.2.1.4.b, 4.3.2.1.6.g,4.3.2.1.10.a,4.3.2.1.10.b & 4.7.3.b.3

ML18012A634
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	04/23/1997
From:	Robinson W CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML18012A635	List: ML18012A634 ML18012A636
References
GL-96-01, GL-96-1, HNP-97-066, HNP-97-66, NUDOCS 9704290311
Download: ML18012A634 (13)

Text

CATEGORY

..4--

ACCESS .ON REGULA10Z ZNEORMATION DISTRIBUTZO 4QR:9704290311 DOC.DATE: 97/04/23

-ZSTEM (RIDE)

NOTARIZED: YES DOCKET ¹ FACIL:50-400 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Carolina 05000400 AUTH. NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION ROBINSON,W.R. Carolina Power & Light Co.

RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Document Control Branch (Document Control Desk)

SUBJECT:

Application for amend to license NPF-63,incorporating enhancements to TS identified in plant review performed IAW GL 96-01.Changes affect specs 4.3.2.l.l.a,4.3.2.1.4.b, 4.3.2.1.6.g,4.3.2.1.10.a,4.3.2.1.10.b a 4.7.3.b.3.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: A067D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR I ENCL l SIZE, i( + 22 TITLE: GL 96-01 Response-Testing of Safety-Related Logic NOTES:Application for permit renewal filed. 05000400 Q

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL 0 PD3-3/KELLY,G 1 1 LE,N 1 1 INTERNA  : .FILE CENTER 1 1 NRR/DRCH/HICB 1 1 EXTERNAL: NOAC 1 1 NRC PDR 1 1 D

0 U

M E

N NOTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:

PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE. TO HAVE YOUR NAME OR ORGANIZATION REMOVED FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS OR REDUCE THE NUMBER OF COPIES RECEIVED BY YOU OR YOUR ORGANIZATION, CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK (DCD) ON EXTENSION 415-2083 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 6 ENCL 6

p~ gt pj' f

)

/4g E

V"

Carolina Power & Light Company William R. Robinson PO Box 165 Vice President New Hill NC 27562 Harris Nuclear Plant SERIAL: HNP-97-066 10 CFR 50.90 u,I~ SS 19s7 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTENTION: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-400/LICENSE NO. NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT CHANGES TO SURVEILLANCEREQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED IN GL 96-01 REVIEW

Dear Sir or Madam:

In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50.90, Carolina Power &

Light Company (CP&L) hereby requests a revision to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the Harris Nuclear Plant (HNP). These changes incorporate enhancements to the Technical Specifications identified in our plant review performed in accordance with Generic Letter 96-01 ~

The proposed changes affect specifications 4.3.2.1.1.a, 4.3.2.1.4.b, 4.3.2.1.6.g, 4.3.2.1.10.a, 4.3.2.1.10.b, and 4.7.3.b.3. provides a detailed description of the proposed changes and the basis for the changes.

Enclosure,2 details, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(a), the basis for the Company's determination that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration. provides an environmental evaluation demonstrating that the proposed amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental assessment is required for approval of this amendment request. provides page change instructions for incorporating the proposed revisions.

'F7042'F03 PDR i i.,'st70423 ADOCK'05000400

$ 8+7 }

P PDR IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII State Road 1134 New Hill NC Tel 919 362-2502 Fax 919 362-2095

Document Control Desk HNP-97-066 / Page 2 provides the proposed Technical Specification pages.

E In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(b), CP&L is providing the State of North Carolina with a copy of the proposed license amendment.

Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Ms. D. B. Alexander at (919) 362-3190..

In order to allow time for procedure revision and orderly incorporation into copies of the Technical Specifications, CP&L requests that the proposed amendment, once approved by the NRC, be implemented within 60 days of issuance of the amendment.

Sincerely, Vice President Harris Nuclear Plant CSB/twk

Enclosures:

1. Basis for Change Request

2. 10 CFR 50.92 Evaluation

3. Environmental Considerations

4. Page Change Instructions

5. Technical Specification Pages W. R. Robinson, having been first duly sworn, did depose and say that'the information contained herein is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and belief; and the sources of his information are employees, contractors, and agents of Carolina Power & Light Company.

Notary (Seal)

My commission expires: ~~gQA ICO~~

0 g~ gOTARV SW gee mf

~ll8L'I4 <g 00 4>qiss>si~

Document Control Desk HNP-97-066 / Page 3 c: Mr. J. B. Brady, NRC Senior Resident Inspector Mr. M. Fry, N.C. DEHNR Mr. L. A. Reyes, NRC Regional Administrator Mr. N. B. Le, NRC Project Manager

Document Control Desk HNP-97-066 / Page 4 bc: Mr. Charles S. Bohanan Mr. R. D. Martin Mr. H. Chernoff (RNP) Mr. W. S. Orser Mr. G. W. Davis Mr. G. A. Rolfson Mr. J. W. Donahue Mr. D. L. Tibbitts Ms. S. F. Flynn Mr. M. A. Turkal (BNP)

Mr. H. W. Habermeyer, Jr. Mr. T. D. Walt Mr. W. J. Hindman Nuclear Records Mr. R. M. Krich File: HUA-2D Ms. W. C. Langston (PE&RAS File) File: H-X-0511

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 ENCLOSURE 1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NRC DOCKET NO. 50-400/LICENSE NO. NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT CHANGES TO SURVEILLANCEREQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED IN GL 96-01 REVIEW BASIS FOR CHANGE RE UEST Pro osed Chan e Carolina Power & Light Company proposes to revise surveillances 4.3.2.1.1.a 4.3.2.1.4.b 4 .3.2.1.6.g, 4.3.2.1.10.a, 4.3.2.1.10.b, and 4.7.3.b.3 to provide enhanced descriptions of the tests being performed and the tested components.

~Back round NRC Generic Letter 96-01, Testing of Safety Related Logic Circuits was issued in January of 1996 and required licensees to perform a review of the logic circuits described. HNP has completed this review and identified four enhancements to the Technical Specifications. Changes are proposed to 4.3.2.1.1.a, 4.3.2.1.4.b, 4.3.2.1.6.g, 4.3.2.1.10.a, 4.3.2.1.10.b, and 4.7.3.b.3. In the case of the specification 4.3.2.1 items, the appropriate testing to verify the functionality of a system or component was being properly performed, but the description of the testing requirement in the current Technical Specifications is either not present or incomplete. The proposed change to 4.7.3.b.3 adds additional components to the surveillance as an enhancement to the test. These proposed changes will be discussed individually below.

Basis The change to 4.3.2.1.1.a removes an asterisk and its associated note on page 3/4 3-41. The note allowed a one time surveillance test extension for a safety injection manual switch. This note was incorporated by Amendment 63 and is no longer applicable.

The change to Technical Specification 4.3.2.1.4.b adds a new Note (4) to the Actuation Logic Test of the Main Steam Line Isolation Automatic Actuation Logic and Actuation Relays. The proposed Note (4) to Table 4.3-2 discusses the Steam Line Isolation - Safety Injection Block Switches and their role in arming the Negative Steam Line Pressure Rate High signal for a Main Steam Line Isolation when used below the P-11 setpoint. The new note recognizes the Page E1-1

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 switches as a portion of the actuation logic and requires that their proper operation be verified.

The switches have a dual function of blocking the low steam line pressure safety injection signal and enabling the steam line pressure rate signal for a steam line isolation. These switches are routinely tested since proper operation is required for a normal cooldown and depressurization.

Ifthe switch does not operate properly then an SI signal would be generated during depressurization, therefore its operation is procedurally directed.

The proposed change to Technical Specification 4.3.2.1.6.g adds a new entry with a quarterly frequency modified with Note (3) to the Slave Relay Test column for the Steam Line Differential Pressure High function of the Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) system. The new note clarifies that there are slave relays associated with this circuit which must be tested and that the standard frequency is quarterly. Note (3) which modifies this entry is a list of slave relays which are to be tested on an 1S month frequency rather than quarterly due to the adverse consequences of testing em while the unit is in operation. The relays associated with TS 4.3.2.1.6.g are listed in Note (3) (K615, K616, and K617). These relays are tested on a refueling interval, but the test requirement is not specifically listed.

The proposed Technical Specifications 4.3.2.1.10.a and 4.3.2.1.10.b changes are also intended to provide specific test requirements for tests which are routinely performed. Review of the logic circuits for the P-11 and P-12 interlocks found that portions of the current testing appears to meet the definitions for ACTUATIONLOGIC TEST and SLAVE RELAY TEST, but are not identified as such in Technical Specifications. To clarify this situation, the proposed changes add notations of M(1) for these tests for both the P-11 and P-12 interlocks. This designation indicates that these tests are to be performed every 62 days on a staggered test basis ( i.e. one train is tested each month).

Technical Specification 4.7.3.b.3 deals with testing of the Component Cooling Water (CCW) surge tank level instrumentation. The current specification tests the level instrumentation by verifying the closure of the valves to the gross failed fuel detector when a low surge tank level signal is generated. While this adequately tests the surge tank level instrumentation, the low level signal is also sent to two other valves which supply CCW to the sample system heat exchangers. The proposed change adds verification of closure of the sample heat exchange CCW valves to the surveillance. The change enhances the surveillance by formally including the valves affected by the low surge tank level signal. These four CCW valves also receive an automatic closure signal from a Safety Injection signal which is verified on an 18 month &equency as well.

Page El-2

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 Conclusions These proposed changes each constitute enhancements to their respective specifications either by more clearly stating the type of testing being performed or by providing a more comprehensive list of components to be tested.

Page E1-3

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 ENCLOSURE 2 SHEARON HARIUS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NRC DOCKET NO. 50-400/LICENSE NO. NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT CHANGES TO SURVEILLANCEREQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED IN GL 96-01 REVIEW 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATION The Commission has provided standards in 10 CFR 50.92(c) for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists. A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facility involves no significant hazards consideration ifoperation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not: (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (2) create the possibility of a new or diferent kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Carolina Power & Light Company has reviewed this proposed license amendment request and determined that its adoption would not involve a significant hazards determination. The bases for this determination are as follows:

Pro osed Chan e Carolina Power & Light Company proposes to revise surveillances 4.3.2.1.1.a, 4.3.2.1.4.b, 4.3.2.1.6.g, 4.3.2.1.10.a, 4.3.2.1.10.b, and 4.7.3.b.3 to provide enhanced descriptions of the tests being performed and the tested components.

Basis This change clarification does not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:

The proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The components affected by the proposed changes are not initiators of any accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes to specification 4.3.2.1 items affect only the description of the testing and make no changes in actual operation or testing. The sample heat exchanger valves isolate on receipt of a Safety Injection signal and that feature is Page E2-1

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 unaffected by the additional testing in the proposed change. Therefore, there is no increase in the probability or consequence of a previously analyzed accident.

2. The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident Rom any accident previously evaluated.

The proposed changes to the surveillance frequencies do not involve physical alterations or additions to plant equipment or alter the manner in which safety-related systems function or are normally operated. The additional testing proposed for the sample heat exchanger valves demonstrates the proper operation of a design feature but does not operate the valve in any new way. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident &om any accident previously evaluated.

3. The proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

The proposed changes to specification 4.3.2.1 clarify existing testing. The additional testing for the CCW surge tank level instrumentation adds two components to the surveillance documentation. Therefore, there is no reduction in the margin of safety.

Page E2-2

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 ENCLOSURE3 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NRC DOCKET NO. 50400/LICENSE NO. NPF-63 REQUEST FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT CHANGES TO SURVEILLANCEREQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED IN GL 96-01 REVIEW ENVIRONMENTALCONSIDERATIONS 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) provides criterion for and identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for categorical exclusion from performing an environmental assessment. A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facility requires no environmental assessment if operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not: (1) involve a significant hazards consideration; (2) result in a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any eNuents that may be released offsite; (3) result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Carolina Power & Light Company has reviewed this request and determined that the proposed amendment meets the eligibilitycriteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment needs to be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment. The basis for this determination follows:

Pro osed Chan e Carolina Power & Light Company proposes to revise surveillances 4.3.2.1.1.a, 4.3.2.1.4.b, 4.3.2.1.6.g, 4.3.2.1.10.a, 4.3.2.1.10.b, and 4.7.3.b.3 to provide enhanced descriptions of the tests being performed and the tested components.

Basis The change meets the eligibilitycriteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) for the following reasons:

1. As demonstrated in Enclosure 2, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

2. The proposed amendment does not result in a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any eKuents that may be released offsite.

Page E3-1

ENCLOSURE TO SERIAL: HNP-97-066 The proposed change does not involve any new equipment or require existing systems to perform a different type of function than they are currently designed to perform. The change does not introduce any new effluents or increase the quantities of existing eQluents. As such, the change cannot affect the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.

3. The proposed amendment does not result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

The proposed change does not result in any physical plant changes or new surveillances which would require additional personnel entry into radiation controlled areas.

Therefore, the amendment has no effect on either individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

Page E3-2