ML20056D970

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 174 & 54 to Licenses DPR-66 & NPF-73,respectively
ML20056D970
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley
Issue date: 08/11/1993
From:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20056D954 List:
References
NUDOCS 9308190101
Download: ML20056D970 (3)


Text

.

y' ** c%

['

?!

[

e

.)*(

E UNITED STATES l

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gv,/

WASHINGTON, O C. 20555-0001 I

=,..*

i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.174TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-66 AMENDMENT NO. 54 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-73 DUOVESNE LIGHT COMPANY OHIO EDISON COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA POWER COMPANY THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY THE TOLEDO EDIS0N COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-334 AND 50-412

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letters dated November 16, 1992, and March 11, 1993, Duquesne Light Company, (the licensee) for Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, proposed modifications to the station's Technical Specifications, Section 3.6.2.2, containment recirculation spray system.

The supplemental letter dated March 11, 1993, did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination. The proposed change in TS 3.6.2.2 for Beaver Valley Unit I will add a new Action Statement b. to address the inoperability of two (2) subsystems. Additionally, the expired portions of Figure 3.6-1 which was applicable for Cycle B, will be removed.

The proposed change in TS 3.6.2.2 for Beaver Valley Unit 2 will add a new Action Statement

c. to address the inoperability of two (2) subsystems in the same train.

Also, for Beaver Valley Unit 2, the Surveillance Requirements 4.6.2.2.d and e were shifted to page 3/4 6-13 during typing of page 3/4 6-12.

2.0 EVALUATION The proposed changes for Beaver Valley Unit 1 Technical Specification 3.6.2.2 will be the addition of Action Statement b.

Action Statement b. requires restoring at least one inoperable subsystem to operable status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or placing the plant in hot standby within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in cold shutdown within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />. This action requirement is consistent with the design of the system described in Updated Final Safety Analysis i

Report (UFSAR) Section 6.4 and does not affect the accident analyses described in Section 14 since with two subsystems inoperable the remaining two subsystems are available to supply 100 percent of the required flow.

The proposed changes for Beaver Valley Unit 2 Technical Specification 3.6.2.2 will be the correction of a misspelled word in Action Statement a., the 9308190101 930811 fDR ADOCK 05000334 PDR

L

. addition of Action Statement c., and the addition of Bases for TS 3.6.2.2 Action Statement c., explaining the function of Action Statement c.

Action Statement c. provides for two (2) inoperable subsystems in the same train and requires the application of Action Statement a. to inoperable subsystem A or B and the application of Action b. to inoperable subsystem C or D.

This action requirement is consistent with the design of the system described in UFSAR Section 6.2 and does not affect the accident analyses described in Section 15 since with two (2) subsystems inoperable the remaining two subsystems are available to supply 100 percent of the required flow.

The proposed change for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1 TS 3.6.2.2 is below:

b.

With two (2) containment recirculation spray subsystems inoperable restore at least one inoperable subsystem to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or be in HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

The proposed changes for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2 TS 3.6.2.2 are l

below:

~

a.

For subsystems containing recirculation spray pumps 2RSS-P21A or 2RSS-P21B: with one containment recirculation spray subsystem inoperable restore the inoperable subsystem to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or be in HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />; restore the inoperable spray subsystem to OPERABLE status within the next 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> or be in COLD SHUTDOWN within the next 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

c.

For subsystems containing recirculation spray pumps 2RSS-P21A and 2RSS-P210, or 2RSS-P21B and 2RSS-P21D; apply Action a above if the inoperable subsystem contains recirculation spray pumps 2RSS-P21A (or B), and apply Action b above if the inoperable subsystem contains recirculation spray pumps 2RSS-P21C (or D).

The chang ; are consistent with the UFSAR system description, the accident analyses and the Standard Technical Specifications since continued operation is allowed only as long as a combination of recirculation spray subsystems is operable which gives 100 percent of the flow required in the safety analyses and the difference between those subsystems which are capable of switching to the cold leg recirculation mode of emergency core cooling system operation and those that are not is accounted for in the action statements. This is clearly explained in the bases provided by the licensee.

The proposed changes ensure the continued function of the recirculation spray system (RSS) to reduce the containment temperature and return the containment pressure to subatmospheric following a break in either the primary or secondary system piping inside containment with one or two RSS subsystems inoperable. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.

e i

, Based on the above evaluation, the staff has determined that the licensee's proposed changes to Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, TS 3.6.2.2, containment recirculation spray systems, and associated TS Bases, containment systems, are acceptable.

3.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 5430). Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 the amendments.

5.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor: Narvaez L. Stinson Date: August 11, 1993

.