ML20070K624
| ML20070K624 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20070K623 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9407270044 | |
| Download: ML20070K624 (3) | |
Text
.
gkR #f0 A
n.
0 UNITED STATES l
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
WASHINGTO N. D.t..'0555 4001 SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 152 AND 132 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY QfLMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-272 AND 50-311
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated August 6,1993, the Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. I and 2, Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes revise the allowed outage time to restore the boron concentration in the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) accumulators.
2.0 EVALVATION
2.1 Background
The accumulators at Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, are pressure vessels partially filled with borated water and pressurized with nitrogen gas.
The accumulators are passive components in that no' operator.
action or control action is required for them to perform their intended function..The function of the accumulators is to provide inventory to the reactor vessel during the blowdown phase of a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) and to provide reactor coolant system (RCS) make-up during the refill phase of a LOCA.
Each accumulator is piped into one RCS cold leg via an accumulator line and is isolated from the RCS by a motor-operated isolation valve and two check valves in series.
The accumulators' size, water volume, and nitrogen cover pressure are selected so that three of the'four accumulators are sufficient to partially cover the core before significant clad melting or zirconium water reaction can occur following a LOCA.
The need to ensure that three accumulators.are adequate for this function is consistent with the LOCA assumptions that the entire contents of one accumulator will be lost via the RCS pipe break during the blowdown phase of the LOCA.
The internal tank 9407270044 940720 PDR ADOCK 05000272 P
l 2
! pressure is sufficient to discharge the contents to the RCS, if RCS pressure decreases below the accumulator pressure.
2.2 Discussion of Proposed Change f
The licensee is requesting to extend the period that the boron concentration of one accumulator can be outside of the TS limit from I hour to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
Therefore, the ability of that accumulator to perform its intended function is l
in question for a longer period of time.
l The analysis of the blowdown phase of a LOCA does not include the boron concentration of the accumulators, only the volume.
Therefore, if the baron concentration is outside the TS limit in one accumulator, it will not effect the blowdown recovery.
During the refill phase of the LOCA, the accumulator and the refueling water storage tank replenish the RCS. The boron content of the accumulators is of concern during the refill phase. During this phase, the ECCS takes suction from the sump which contains the contents of the RCS and the refueling water storage tank (RWST).
The licensee indicated that in comparing the total volume of the RCS and RWST, the volume of one accumulator contributes less than 2 percent of the water in the containment. Therefore, the boron concentration of one accumulator has a minimal effect on the overall concentration of the refill volume.
The licensee indicated that it is not possible to change and verify the baron concentration within I hour. As discussed above, changing the allowed time for the boron concentration to be outside the TS limits, for one accumulator, will not affect the ability of the accumulators to perform the intended i
function in that (1) the boron concentration of the accumulators is not taken into consideration in the blowdown analysis and (2) one accumulator is only 2 percent of the total available refill volume.
In addition, the change is consistent with NUREG-1430, Standard Technical Specifications, and will have j
an insignificant effect on core subcriticality during core reflood, switchover l
from cold leg to hot leg recirculation injection or sump pH.
]
l The staff has reviewed the licensee's proposed change and based on the licensee's demonstration that the accumulators can continue to function as needed during the blowdown and refill phases of a LOCA, the proposed change is acceptable.
I
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
j l
l In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official l
I had no comments.
l l
l l
i
.s t
8
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 48389). 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 wirl be conaucted 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:
S. Brewer Date: July 20, 1994 a.
,