ML18005A294
| ML18005A294 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18005A293 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8802180164 | |
| Download: ML18005A294 (6) | |
Text
g,R
~
Cy I
0
/7 REGS+
'o oO gO
- ++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NlJCLEAR REACTOR RERULATIO>
RELATFD,O AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO FACILITY OPERATINA LICFNSE NO.
NPF-63 CAROLINA POWER.
8( LIC'HT COMPANY SfIEARON HARRIS NIJCLEAR PONER PLANT, UNIT 1 POCKET NO. 50-400
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 23, 1987, the Carolina Pnwer 5 Light Company (the licensee) requested a change to the Shearon Harris, Unit 1, Technical Specifications (TS) (Appendix A to Facility Operating License NPF-63>.
The proposed change would delete Surveillance Requirement 4.4.11.1, which requires quarterly testing of the reactor coolant system (RCS) vent path block valves.
In addition, Surveillance Requirement 4.4. 11.R.h would be modified to include the testing o+ the above cited block valves at least once every 18 month interval.
R.O DISCIJSSION AND EVALUATION The RCS high point vent system consists n+ four parallel vent valves, two each for the reactor vessel and the pressurizer, discharqing to a common
- header, followed hy two block valves, one of which would vent to the containment atmosphere when required, and the other block valve would vent tn the pressurizer relief tank
{PRT).
The RCS vent system is designed to remove noncondensibles, following a loss of coolant accident, to enhance natural circulation within the PCS.
The testing of the block valves on a quarterly basis during power operation makes the RCS vent system more vulnerable to a single active failure because it removes one of the two RCS pressure isolation boundaries.
If a failure of any of the upstream valves were to occur while testing the block valves, it would result in the release of reactor coolant to either the containment atmosphere or the PRT.
Subsection IIIV of Section YI of the ASME Code allows pDR gDCICK 05000400
t
~ W PP I
flexihilitywith respect to the test frequency in circumstances where the testing frequency, such as requiring a quarterly test, is judged to be impractical.
Testing of these valves during cn1d shutdown will enhance plant safety.
The plant in-service tes+ing proqram requires testing of these valves when the plant is in a cold shutdown condition.
Testing of valves during cold shutdown is allowed by the ASIDE Code,Section XI, Paragraph IWV-3412, when the valves cannot be exercised during plant operation.
Therefore, the proposed change conforms with the code.
Thus the staff concludes that the proposed revision to the TS to require testing of the RCS vent sy tern block valves at least once every 18 months is acceptab1e.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change in surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the
- amounts, and no significant change in the types, of anv effluer ts that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase ir. indi-vidual or cumulative occupatinnal radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
There has been no puh.ic comment on the proposed finding.
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exc1usion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22{c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environ-mental assessment reed he prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.O CONCLuSION The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no signi:icant hazards consideration, which was puh>ished in the FEDFRAL RFGISTER (52 FR 47780) on December 16, ].987.
No public comments or requests for hearing were received prior to issuance nf the amendment:.
The staff consulted with the State of North Carolina, and it had no comments.
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed
- ahove, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that. the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed
- manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Coomission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Princi al Contributors:
A. Masciantonio B. Buckley Pated:
February 12, 1988
~ P IC L
V' V
AMENDMENT NO, 4
SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER P ANT, UNIT 1
OPERATING LICENSE NO.
NPF-63 4
DISTRIBUTION:
~ Docket No,50-40~0 NRC PDR Local PDR PD21 r/f SVarga GLainas PAnderson BBuckley OGC-B DHagan JPartlow TBarnhart (4)
Wanda Jones EButcher FRosa OChopra ACRS (10)
GPA/PA ARM/LFt<B I
k
~
V e
f'I,(% ' l
'%' <I I
5) ill)s c, H4 iV,"'~
's)
P1 4 ",).".
. t1
/ IL
.'i'
- ~ J, p Ig A
1 ill L<<N >I ~
,j LI I