ML20065E236

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 145 to License DPR-77

ML20065E236
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	09/20/1990
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20065E229	List: ML20065E227 ML20065E236
References
NUDOCS 9010020055
Download: ML20065E236 (4)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:_.

p 1, -

h

.wouq -

k . UNITED STATES j 48 'a NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION - f ', J. E j. WASHINGTON D. C. 20566 I y y V FHCLOSURE 2-~ .SA.F.E.T.Y..E.V.A.LU.A.T.I.O.N..B.Y. T.H.E..O.F_F.I..C.E_O F NU.C.L_ EAR RE,A.C.T.O..R. REGUL AT ION ' SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.145 - TO FACILITY OPERATING LICFNSE NO. 'DPR-771 j ~ f 'w TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY SE000YAH NUCLEAR,,P,L,A,NT,,, UNIT 1 T M CKET NO. 50-327 '1.0~ l_NTR_0 DUCTION ~ -By letter dated Pay 21','1990, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) proposed to ~ modify the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 1,cTechnical Specifications (TSs)~. The proposed' changes would revise salve' not.enclature in TS Table 3.6-2, Contain-a ment Isolaticr. Valves. The' norrenclature of 14 would be changed from flow control velve'(FCV). sampling valves-in'the TS table-c" to. flow solenoid valve (FSV). The Unit 1 velves were changed in the Unit 1 Cycle:4 refueling outage. This is-j TVA Change Rcquest 90-14. 1 This application-also included similar proposed changes for Table 3.6-2 of U Unit 2 -TSs. The Unit 2 valves will be replaced in the Unit 2 Cycle 4 i refueling outage which began in Septernber 1990. A' separate evaluation will be'issutd for-the proposed changes to the' Unit 2 TSs;_ however, the evalua- + tion below also. applies to the proposed changes to the Unit 2 TSs. y]j .. _g. ~2.0 EVALUATION' ~ + 1 9:4 In its1 application,'TVA stated that 14 air-operated FCVsLwere replaced with j ,s s FSVs because the FCVs-have limit switches that are not environmentally ~ qualifiable. The> FSVs-are totally-enclosed and have reed switches internal 'to the valve, and are environmentally qualified This' replacement was-required as'part of TVA's commitment for complying with RG 1.97 (1.e., Condition 2.C.(24); of the Unit l' Facility Operating License DPR-77 and License Condition 2.C.(14) y

of the Unit' 2 Facility Operating License DPR-79)'.-

a w

The.14 containment isolation valves'are'on sampling;1ines for the reactor y

blowdown (SGBD)(. TVA stated that the change'in valve nomenclature for~ coolant system RCS), cold leg ~ injection accumulator, and. steam generator ; 3 cW, 1 valves froreFCV to FSV:does not affect the containment' isolation function for: g ithese valves. 'TVA erplained that closure times for the new FSYs was evaluated -to ensure that these valves will meet the 5-~and 10-second maximum isolation time requirements in TS Table 3.6.-2. The new FSVs are designed to closef 9 agair.st a pressure ~ drop of 2,485 pounds per square inch gauge with a terpera-0 ture of!640' degrees Fahrenheit. These valves are compatible with the RCS d*. andt capable of closing against RCS. pressure. Pith the exception of four SGBD sampling valves, local leak-rate testing was conducted as a premodificati:.a ctest to det m ine the "as-found" leak-rate and again following' installation of 190ioo200rs 900920 5 PDR-ADOC4 05000327 P- - PDC jg- -,7 N4h

1l. y .6.

y j

4 6,,. j .the new valve to determine the1"as-left" leak-rate -in.accordance with Appen-dix'O of 10 CFR 50.z This'is done to demonstrate an acceptable lenk-rate for' i ~ containment integrity. .TVA explained that the SGDD sampling valves are a part of the steam generator 7, secondary side: piping and are located outside cont 6?nnent. By design, the SGbD piping employs the following two barriers to prevent fission product release fror containment following a loss of coolant accident: (1) the secondary side is a closed system inside containment and (2) SG water level provides a water ( seal. These containn.ent isolatico barriers exempt the SGBD valves from the Appendix-J 1eak-rate test program. This is discussed in the Fiaal Safety 4 ' Arelysis Report, Table 6.2.4-1; notes for Containment Penetrations. X-14A, B,. C, ~ and D. TVA is replacing 14 containment isolsticn valves on sampling lines from FCVs-to i FSVr so that the now valves vill reet the requirements in RG 1.97. TVA is-E proposing te change the valve nomenclature in Table 3.6-2 to reflect the fact that these valves are now FSVs. Nothing else is being changed by'the proposed 4 changes. The existing requirements en the itak-rate testing and the maximum velve closure tin'c of these 'vcives are not being changed. The existing l requirements'on containment. integrity are also not being changed. The new valves are qualified for their function as containment isolation valves. Based I or this, the staff concludes that the proposed' changes are acceptable. L 5.0 FNV! pct 2; ENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respcct to the installation or use of a facility corponent located within the restricted area -as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff.has determined that the amencment ~, involves noisignificant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in theltyper, of any effluents that may'be released offsite, and'that there is no, significant increase-in individual or cumulative occupational radiation a y exposure. The-Comission has previously issued. a ' proposed finding'that this' '1 [ an.endnent involves no significant hazards consideration' and there has been no-. public comr.ent on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets thc eligibil ' o ~ ity criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in~ 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pur ' L a E suant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental im>act statement'nor environmental' J assessment need be prepared in connection wittthe; issuance of this. amendment. Ly

4.0 CONCLUS107

i

Pf LThe Comission rade a proposed determination that the anendment involves.no.

V lsignificant hazards consideration which was published in the' Federal Register e

(55 FRJ26296) on June 27,1990 and consulted with-the State of Tennessee.

Ne public comments were received and the State of Tennessee did not have any; y comments.- w, >d. I;- r ? i u. a

+ c~ fd( ,f, ,l+ -3 n 'x I# .The steff has= concluded, based on the consideratiens discussed above, that:

p

.(1) there is'reaser.able assurance that the health and safety of the public .will1not be endangered by-operation in.the proposed manner, and (2) such Lctivities will be conducted >in cor.pliance with the Comr.ission's regulations, and (3) the. issuance of.the amendu.ents will not be inimical to the common

o defense

and security nor-to the health.and safety' of the public, i

- Principal Contributor: Jack Donchew- . Dated: September 20, 1990 t ( t 'l k ik ri I P f,(' .c.. -{ r 'l 1 a

f ;'

i f 1i

Os {pyfA. p%; w c. 9

• ~

1 u[ gQlSS ( AMENDMENT N0.1145 FOR SEQUOYAH UNIT NO.1 - DOCKET HO Il f,sDAT(0:; ,J_e,p_t_e, ber ' 20. _19L90 - m h; ' ^ u DISTRIBUTION:- 55EeFfilWivm. E MRC PDR 'N Local'PDR- ?n m. Sqn.-Reading File l .$. Varga: '14-E i! G. Lainas! 14-H-3. 4: 1. M.; Krebs. 'F E J. 4 Donohew(2) u, DGC:. F ~ D. Hagan ~MNBB-33021 ,n E. Jordan

MNBB-3302 G. ' Hill' (4.per. docket) -

W. Jones. =P130-A 4 'J. Calvo w-11-F-22 .C. McCracken ACRS(10)1 .GPA/FA 2-G-5

OC/LFNB-

.MNBB-9112 cc:-: Plant-Service ListJ ( - .')- i i 4 .i a-, i-3 3 ) c t I ? j '. N 9 )

ah r

T in: ,s ,t hN >~ ^p. i; i i S.j I; 'j{ ddI ' g l;. U' l;:. f y L d. .,f g ili !; :.e + , ' j-b ,}}