ML20028C101
| ML20028C101 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 12/27/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028C100 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8301060533 | |
| Download: ML20028C101 (3) | |
Text
.. _ _ _ - _
ts" "8cg'?
p d
UNITED STATES
[ 'f e f i NUCLEAR REGULATO'RY COMMISSION E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 s
%.m.- p SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 50 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-70 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY, PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, AND ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-272 Introduction By letter dated October 5,1982 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (the licensee) requested that changes be made in Technical Specifications related to the use of borated and caustic solutions during a LOCA. The proposed changes would bring the Technical Specifications for Salem Unit No.1 into agreement with those for Unit No. 2 and with the results of analyses performed to satisfy the conditions of NRR/IE Bulletin 77-04
" Post-LOCA Containment Sump.
Background'-
The proposed changes pertain to the following Technical Specifications:
a.
Section 3.1.2.8 Barated Water Sources - Operating and Section 3.3.5 Refueling Water Storage Tank The Salem Unit 1 refueling water storage tank should contain between 364,500 and 400,000 gallons of water with a boron concentration of between 2000 and 2200 ppm instead of the present minimum contained volume of 350,000 gallons of water and.a minimum baron concentration of 2000 ppm.
b.
Section 3.6.2.2 Spray Additive System-The Salem Unit 1 spray additive systemeshall be operable with a spray additive tank containing between 2568 and 4000 gallons of between 30 and 32 percent by weight NaOH solution instead of a spray additive tank contdining at least 2000 gallons of not less than 30 percent by weight Na0H solution.
8301060533 821227 PDR ADOCK 05000272 P
PDR a
2-These changes are proposed by the licensee to make the Salem Unit 1 Technical Specifications the same as those approved for Unit 2.
Cen-currently, an increase in NaOH concentration and boric acid volume to maintain the same ratio of boric acid and NaOH so that the sump ph will be kept < 7-0 is also proposed.
This review is related to providing and maintaining the proper pH of the containment sump water following a design basis accident to reduce the likelihood of stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steel components.
During the containment spray injection phase, the licensee proposes to educt 30-32 weight percent sodium hydroxide into the containment spray solution which is supplied from the refueling water storage tank con-taining boric acid at a concentration of 2000 to 2200 ppm boron.
During the containment spray recirculation phase, a final pH of at least 7.0 will be achieved in the sump once the borated water has thoroughly mixed with the educted sodium hydroxide.
Evaluation The post-accident cooling water chemistry has been reviewed in accord-ance with Section 6.1.1 of the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800, Revision 2).
The licensee proposes to increase the volume and concentration of sodium hydroxide in the spray additive tank and of boric acid in the refueling storage tank. The increase in boric acid and sodium hydroxide is such that the ratio of acid to base is maintained equi-valent, therefore, the pH will remain 5 7 after thorough mixing of the containment spray solution and containment sump water in the event of a LOCA.
We evaluated the pH of the containment sump water following mixing in the containment sump with the educted sodium hydroxide. We verified by independent calculations that 2568-4000 gallons of 30 weight percent sodium hydroxide when mixed with 364,500-400,000 gallons of boric acid at 2000-2200 ppm will raise the containment sump water pH to greater than 7.
a These calculated values for Salem Unit 1 baron concentration and volume in the refueling water storage tank, and for the sodium hydroxide concentration and contained volume for the spray additive tank are identical to the Salem Unit 2 values. The resulting volume consistent with the minimum pH of 7.0 required by BTP-MTEB 6-1 of SRP 6.1.1, to reduce the probability of stress-corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steel components.
e r
0
L 1
1 Summary The proposed changes to the Salem Unit 1 Technical Specifications, con-cerning concentration and volumes of sodium hydroxide and boric acid in t
l the spray additive tank and refueling water storage tank respectively, are acceptable. On the basis of our evaluation, we conclude that the post accident emergency cooling water chemistry meets the minimum pH i
acceptance criterion of Standard Review Plan Section 6.1.1, the posi-tions of Branch Techr.ical Position MTEB 6-1, and the requirements of General Design Criterion 14 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50.
I Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in cny significant environmental impact. Having made i
this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoir.t of i
environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR $51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact apprais:1 need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment..
I Conclusion i
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
i (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in i
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from I
any evaluated previously, and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the anendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in c<r,cliance with the Canmission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and
-safety of the public.
Date: December 27, 1982 Principal Contributors:
F. Witt, CMEB W. Ross, ORB #1 i
j i
-