ML20081G664
| ML20081G664 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 03/20/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20081G662 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9503230248 | |
| Download: ML20081G664 (2) | |
Text
_
puc
{.kflh[.j UNITED STATES
.ye NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'f WASHINGTON, D.C. 2056M001
\\. %
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 95 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-30 UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY CALLAWAY PLANT. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-483
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 9,1994, as supplemented on December 22, 1994, Union Electric Company (UEC) requested an amendment to Operating License NPF-30, which would revise the Callaway Plant Technical Specifications' (TS) Surveillance Requirements (SR) 4.8.1.1.2f.7 and 4.8.1.1.2f.13.
Specifically, the proposed changes would eliminate the required loss of offsite power (LOOP) in conjunction with an engineered safety features (ESF) actuation signal test after the 24-hour endurance test. The changes also separate the hot restart test of the emergency diesel generator (EDG) from the 24-hour loaded r:4n test and add a new surveillance requirement for a simple hot restart test after a 2-hour loaded run of the EDG.
Separating these two tests will give plant operators added flexibility and prevent critical path complications during outages.
2.0 EVALUATION The current SR 4.8.1.1.2f.7 requires that within 5 minutes of shutting down the EDG after the 24-hour endurance test run, a LOOP in conjunction with an ESF actuation signal test be simulated.
The licensee proposes to separate the 5-minute EDG hot restart test from the 24-hour endurance test, eliminate the requirement for the LOOP plus ESF signal test after the 24-hour endurance test, and add a new surveillance requirement of a simple hot restart test after a 2-hour loaded run of the EDG.
The new proposed SR 4.8.1.1.2f.13 provides the verification of EDG hot restart capability by starting the EDG and verifying that et attains rated voltage and frequency within the required time. The purpcce of the EDG hot restart surveillance is to demonstrate functional capabilities of the EDG to restart from full-load temperature conditions.
The proposed SR 4.8.1.1.2f.13 requires an 18-month surveillance test to restart the EDG after at least 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of operation at the continuous rating.
This would adequately demonstrate restart capability of the EDG from full-load temperature conditions. The hot restart test could be scheduled for a different time, so as to alleviate test scheduling difficulties and the financial burden that would result from an extended outage.
This modified surveillance requirement has been examined and accepted by the NRC staff in the new improved Standard Technical Specifications (NUREG-1431).
9503230248 950320'~
PDR ADOCK 05000483 p
y The staff also finds the licensee's proposal _ to eliminate the requirement for the LOOP coincident with an ESF actuation signal test after the 24-hour endurance test to be acceptable, because the objective of this test will continue to be met by SR 4.8.1.1.2f.6b at Callaway. On the basis of the above, the staff finds the proposed changes to be acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Missouri State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
l The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission i
has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no i
significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on l
such finding (60 FR 6315). Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria 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 need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
}
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of tN l
public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2)
{
such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's r
regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical i
to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: 0. Chopra Date: March 20, 1995 t
i i
f
, _.-