ML20072V425
| ML20072V425 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072V418 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9409190366 | |
| Download: ML20072V425 (2) | |
Text
--
4 y asam%
,,s i
B UNITED STATES 3t "i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 79 AND 40 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-39 AND NPF-85 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY LIMERICK GENERATING STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-352 AND 50-353
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 13, 1994, as supplemented by letter dated July 20, 1994, the Philadelphia Electric Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would revise TS Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2e.8, which would eliminate the required diesel generator test currently performed within 5 minutes after completing a 24-hour endurance run. The changes are.in accordance with the guidelines of NUREG-1433,
" Standard Technical Specifications General Electric Plants, BWR4." The sup'plemental letter provided TS pages and did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration.
2.0 EVALUATION 1
Current TS Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.8.1.1.2e.8 requires that an emergency diesel generator (EDG) be retested within five (5) minutes after completing a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> endurance run.
The proposed TS change involves separating SR 4.8.1.1.2e.8 into two parts: 4.8.1.1.2e.8a and 4.8.1.1.2e.8b, and deleting the footnote marked '**** which applies to EDG hot restart.
While 4.8.1.1.2e.8a involving the EDG 24-hour test run would remain unchanged, 4.8
.1.2e.8b would revise the test on the capability of an EDG restart within five (5) minutes of shutting down the EDG after the EDG has operated for at least two hours at an indicated 2700-2800 kw, instead of immediately after the 24-hour test.
In addition, the SR requires demonstrating that an EDG can restart and achieve required voltage and frequency within 10 seconds from a hot condition.
The hot restart test, which focuses on the demonstration of EDG functional capability from full load temperature condition, is discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.108 (RG 1.108), Rev. 1, " Periodic Testing of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Systems at Nuclear Power Plants".
Further, as stated in NUREG-1433, a diesel restart that achieves voltage and frequency within the required time after operating for two hours at full load, is an adequate demonstration of the functional capability of EDG hot restart test.
The staff finds the proposed revisions to be consistent with the guidelines contained in NUREG-1433 and RG 1.108, Rev. 1.
Therefore, the proposed changes are acceptable.
9409190366 940912 PDR ADOCK 05000352 P
v s
. 3.0 STATE CONSULTATIOJ 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 (59 FR 32234). 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 w'll not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activitiec 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 Contributors:
T. Liu F. Rinaldi Date: September 12, 1994