ML20080L950
| ML20080L950 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 02/27/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20080L941 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9503030066 | |
| Download: ML20080L950 (2) | |
Text
/
UNITED STATES
[
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~' 5
\\.....]!
(
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20086 0001 i
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 195 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY CENTERIOR SERVICE COMPANY AND THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-346 i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated October 7, 1994, the licensee requested an amendment to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS), Unit 1, operating license to revise plant Technical Specifications (TS). The proposed amendment would remove the existing Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.5.2.d.3 for the Low Pressure Injection (LPI) System and the existing SR 4.6.2.1.c for the Containment Spray (CS) System since the requirement to leak test these systems is programmatically covered in TS 6.8.4.a, " Primary Coolant Sources Outside Containment." Additionally, changes are proposed to TS Bases 3/4.5.2 and 3/4.6.2.1 to reflect the elimination of the above SRs.
2.0 EVALUATION TS 6.8.4 requires a program be established, implementec and maintained to reduce leakage from those portions of systems outside containment that could contain highly radioactive fluids during a serious transient or accident to as low as practical levels. The systems include makeup, letdown, seal injection, seal return, low pressure injection, containment spray, high pressure injection, waste gas, primary sampling and reactor coolant drain systems.
The program must include integrated leak test requirements for each system at refueling cycle intervals or less. Additionally, TS 4.5.2.d.3 requires that portions of the LPI System located outside containment be leak tested when pressurized to operating pressure or hydrostatic test pressure to verify a total leak rate s 20 gallons per hour.
TS 4.6.2.1.c. requires verifying a total leak rate s 20 gallons per hour for the CS System located outside containment when pressurized to normal operating pressure or hydrostatic test pressure.
The Bases for both TS 4.5.2.d.3 and TS 4.6.2.1.c requires assuring that the leakage rates assumed for the system during the recirculation phase of operation will not be exceeded for the LPI and CS systems. The surveillance tests performed for each system are used to satisfy TS requirements for TS 6.8.4, TS 4.5.2.d.3, and TS 4.6.2.1.c.
In fact, the program requires the leakage to be as low as practical.
Consistent with NUREG-1430, Revision 0, " Improved Standard Technical Specifications for B&W Plants," these proposed changes do not include similar requirements that reflect DNBP's existing SR 4.5.2.d.3 for the LPI System and the existing SR 4.6.2.1.c for the CS System.
During the development of the 9503030066 950227 DR ADOCK 050003 6
~
i
- Improved Standard Technical Specifications (ITS), these two surveillances were removed on the basis that the type of leakage they were to identify was already j
addressed by the overall program surveillances required under ITS 5.7.2.
The staff finds that the proposed changes are consistent with NUREG-1430 and, therefore, acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Ohio State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no l
comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluent 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 amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 55893). Accordingly, the amendment meets 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 amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff 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 this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
L. L. Gundrum Date:
February 27, 1995 l
I t