ML20070K165
| ML20070K165 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20070K159 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-01, GL-88-1, NUDOCS 9103180330 | |
| Download: ML20070K165 (3) | |
Text
-
1.-
7 s
?
\\
UNITED STATES
.t ; [
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N W A5HINO TON, D. C, 20666
%.....)
SAFETYEVALUATIONBYTHEOFUCEOFNUCLEARREACTORREGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N05. 4g AND 12 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N05. NPF-39 AND NPF-85 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 1
DOCKET NOS. 50-352 AND 50-353
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 21, 1990, Philadelphia Electric Company (PEco)(the licensee) requested an amendment to Facility Operating 1.icense Nos. MPF-39 and NPF-85 for the Limerick Generating Station Units 1 and 2.
These proposed amendments would change the Technical Specifications (TSs) to
~
conform to the NRC staff position on Inservice Inspection (ISI) and monitoring of unidentified leakage in Generic Letter (GL) 88-01, "NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping."
2.0 DISCUSSION NRC GL 88-01, issued January 25, 1988, provided guidance in the form of NRCpositionsregardingIntegranularStressCorrosionCracking(IGSCC) problems in Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) piping made of austenttic stainless steel that is four (4) inches or larger in nominal diameter and contains reactor coolant at a temperature above 200 degrees F during reactor power operation regardless of ASME Code classification.
NRC GL 88-01 requested licensees of operating BWRs and holders of construction permits for BWRs to p,avide information regarding conformance with the NRC positions.
Two of the items which the GL requested licensees to address
- 1) a TS change to include a statement in the TS section on were:
Inservice Inspection (ISI) that the ISI program for piping covered by the scope of NRC GL 88-01 will be in conformance with the NRC positions on schedule, methods and personnel, and sample expansion included in the GL, and 2) confirmation of the licensee's plans to ensure that the TSs related to leakage detection will be in conformance with the NRC positions on leak detection included in the St.
The NRC position on leakage detection specifically stated that unidentified leakage be limited to an increase of 2 gpm over a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period, and that leakage be monitored every eight (8) hours.
3.
EVALUATION We previously completed an evaluation of PEco's programs to meet the 13 staff positions and other guidance in GL 88-01.
By letters dated March 6, 1990 and October 22, 1990, we informed PECo that their programs were fully acceptable and satisfied all of the requirements in GL 88-01 except for the TSs on ISI and unidentified leakage.
9103180330 910305 PDR ADOCK 05000352 P
-2 with the guidance-in GL 88-01:The licensee has proposed the following 1.
Add new Serve 111ance Requirement 4.0.5.f to read "The Inservice Inspection (!$1) Program for piping identified in NRC Generic Letter 88-01 shall be perforised in accordanca with the staff positions on schedule, methods and personnel, and sample expansion included in the Generic Letter.
Detoils for implementation of these requirements are includ(4 as augmented inspection requirements in the 151 Program."
Additionally, a revision to Bases Section 4.0.5 is being proposed to indicate that such conformance is as approved in NRC Safety Evaluations dated March 6, 1990 and October 22, 1990.
2.
Add new Limiting Condition for Operation 3.4.3.2.f to read "2 gpa ircrease in UNIDENTIFIED LEAKAGE over a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period." and corresponding Action statement 3.4.3.2.e to read "With any reactor coolant system leakage greater than the limit in f above, identify the source of leakt9 within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> or be is:
at least HOT SHUTOOWN within the nn : 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 24.surs." to confom with the i guidance provided in NRC GL 88-01. Additionally, a revision to Bases Section 3/4.4.3.2. is being proposed to address the new Limiting condition for Operation and corresponding Action statesent, and indicate that they confom with the guidance-provided in NRC GL 88-01.
3.
Revise Surveillance Requirement 4.4.3.2.1.b to read " Monitoring the drywell floor drain sump and dr flow rate at least once per alght (ywell equipment drain tank
- 8) hours," to conform with l
the guidance provided by NRC GL 88-01.- Additionally, a revision to Bases Section 3/4.4.3.2 is being proposed to indicate that this Surveillance Requirement conforms with the guidance provided in NRC GL 88-01 as modified by NRC Safety Evaluation dated March 6, 1990.
i 4.
Revise Bases Section 3/4.4.8 on Structural Integrity to include the statement " Additionally, the Inservice Inspection Program t
conforms to the NRC staff positions identified in NRC Generic Letter 88-01 March 6, ping,, MRC Position on IGSCC in 8WR A Steel Pi as approved in NRC Safety Evaluations dated 1990 and October 22, 1990."
i the structural integrity of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3TS Section 3 components be maintained in accordance with Surveillance i
Requirement 4.4.8 which strictly references TS Section 4.0.5 described in Item #1 above.
This revision to Bases Section 3/4.4.8 is being proposed accordingly for completeness. No change is required to Surveillance Requirement 4.4.8 for the reasons stated above.
5 l
5 e
i
- s'.'
3-The above changes are generally in accordance with the model TSs and wording in GL 88-01.
The staff has concluded that the TS changes satisfy the intent and objectives of GL 88-01 and are acccptable.
An administrative change was made on page B 3/4 0-5 with the concurrence of the licensee to replace the word "for" with "of" in the first paragraph.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments involve a change to 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 to the surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that these 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 Ccunission has previously issued a proposed
-g finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no nublic cossent on such finding.
amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion setAccordingly, th 1
forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b no environmentalimpactstatementnorenvironmentalassessme)n,tneedbe prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal 4
Register (56 FR 895) on Januar Connonwealth of pennsylvania. y 9,1991 and consulted with the No public comments were received and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did not have any comments.
The steff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, (1) there is reasonable' assurance that the health and safet that:
p[2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the and ssion's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the 1
common defense and the security nor to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
March 5, 1991 1
i Principal Contributor: Richard Clark i
l
[
l l
e
, - - - - +
, -, - -,.. -