ML20076K728
| ML20076K728 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076K724 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9411020033 | |
| Download: ML20076K728 (3) | |
Text
____
4%q y+
t UNITED STATES j
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20M1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RFLATED TO AMENDMENT NO.193 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-32 AND AMENDMENT NO. 193 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-37 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-280 AND 50-231 L
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated October 19, 1993, Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) requested Technical Specification (TS) changes which would add specific operability and surveillance requirements for the Recirculation Spray Heat Exchanger (RSHX) service water outlet radiation monitors. Although these monitors (four per unit) do not have any actuation function, they do serve to detect leakage of radioactive containment sump fluid into the Service Water System if there is a breach in a break in RSHX integrity. As such, the licensee has categorized them as accident monitoring instrumentation and l
classified them as Regulatory Guide 1.97 Type C Category 2 instruments.
Finally, the licensee has also proposed TS changes which would serve to reinstate surveillance requirements for accident monitoring instruments into TS's.
These requirements were inadvertently relocated when Radioactive Effluent Technical Specifications were moved to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM).
2.0 EVALUATION In the event of a design basis accident at Surry Units 1 or 2, four RSHX's are available. These heat exchangers, located inside containment, are cooled by the Service Water System.
Service water outlet radiation monitors are provided to detect leakage of radioactive containment sump fluid into the Service Water System; while these monitors do not provide a protection or control function, they do indicate the potential, or actual breach of the barriers to fission product release. As such, the RSHX service water outlet radiation monitors have been classified as Regulatory Guide 1.97 Type C, Category 2 instruments by the licensee. Consequently, these monitors are considered as accident monitoring instruments. While these monitors and associated sample pumps are not required for either the Recirculation Spray System or the Service Water Systems to accomplish their safety related function, they do sorve to identify a breach of a fission product barrier.
The output of these monitors is displayed on individual ratemeters and recorded on the radiation monitoring panel recorders in the Main Control Room.
9411020033 941027 PDR ADOCK 05000280 4
P PDR
.=-
--~
2 While these monitors do not provide a protection or control function, they do have Main Control Room alarms and annunciators to guide proper operator action to isolate the potential release path. The staff has reviewed the TS changes proposed by the licensee for the RSHX Service Water Outlet Radiation Monitor and has found that the licensee has proposed appropriate operability
' requirements, surveillance requirements, and reporting requirements.
In addition, the TS changes proposed by the licensee provide that a pre-planned i
alternative method of monitoring be implemented with less than the minimum number of operable channels-Consequently, the staff finds the TS changes proposed by the licensee with respect to the RSHX service water outlet radiation monitors are acceptable.
i Finally, the licensee has proposed TS changes which would re-establish surveillance requirements for certain post-accident monitoring instruments.
These TS surveillance requirements were incorporated as part of the Radioactive Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS).
However, when RETS were i
subsequently removed from the TS, surveillance requirements for post-accident radiation monitors were inadvertently deleted.
The licensee, in its current application, has proposed adding surveillance requirements for the affected post-accident radiation monitors to TS Table 4.1.2.
The tests and frequencies proposed are unchanged from those in effect before they were inadvertently deleted from the TS's.
Consequently, the staff finds this proposed change is acceptable as an administrative change implementing a previously reviewed and approved staff position.
3.0
SUMMARY
Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that the TS changes proposed by the licensee with respect to the RSHX service water outlet radiation monitors are acceptable.
l i
In addition, the staff concludes that the licensee has proposed TS changes for l
post-accident monitoring instrumentation which would restore TS's which had been applicable and were subsequently inadvertently deleted. These-changes
{
are acceptable as an administrative change.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Virginia State official.
was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official i
had no comment.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These 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 i
significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types,
3 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 these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 67864). Accordingly, these 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 these amendments.
6.0 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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
K. Eccleston Date: October 27, 1994