ML20082C572
| ML20082C572 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082C568 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9107190210 | |
| Download: ML20082C572 (4) | |
Text
. _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
d
- pa nog %,
UNITED STATES
! " 1,,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{.
.,i W ASWNO TON, D. C. 20b55
\\
/
SAFETY EVALUA_T ION, B,Y,,Tff, OffJ,CE,0[, pp,Cl[ AR, RE AC, TOR,,REGyl,AJJ ON ff Lb] Ep_ Jp, pp,Eppf,EpJ, pp,S,., 43,, ppp,, 45,,Tp, f,A,CJ,LJ,T Y_ OP E R AT 1 NG L ICE!!SE NO5,, p[f,,44,,a nd, p,PF,-p PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY P UBL l t'llWill' Il lt'l kl t' AIF BA3' GMP AN Y DELithM POWEP AtFlltW tbkhAir-
'ATLAldlt'llTY ELEC,T,hl O } M F ff0.Cp,pp,T,Tpp,p,TppjC,fp,W{f,M3T10N,UNJJ,NOS.2AND3 DOCKETNOS,.,5p,-277AllD50-278
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 22, 1989, the Philadelphia Electric Company, Public Service Electric & Gas Company, Delmarva Power and Light Company and Atlantic City Electric Company (the licensees) submitted a request for changes to the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, l' nit Hos. 2 and 3, Technical Specifications (TS). The proposed amendments would revise TS Section 3/4.7 to incorporate a Surveillance Requirement for the safety grade pneumatic supply system which supplies the containment purge / vent valve inflatable seals.
On May 8, 1989, the Commission issued Amendnent Nos. 144 and 146 for Peach Botton Units 2 and 3, respectively, to resolve generic issue t'PA B-24 on Containment Purge and Venting stemming from NUREG-0737 Item 11.E.4.2.
These TSs incorporated 90 hour0.00104 days <br />0.025 hours <br />1.488095e-4 weeks <br />3.4245e-5 months <br /> purging restrictions, operability requirements on containment purge and vent isolation valves and other restrictions.
In the Safety Evaluation (SE) accompanying these amendments, the staff approved a n.cdification proposed by the licensee in their letter of November 6,1985.
In lieu of proposing leakage testing requirements for a safety grade seal air supply system, which relies on backup bottled nitrogen supplies, the licensee proposed to modify the system to connect the seal air supply system for these valves to the existing Containment Atmospheric Dilution System (CADS) 6000 gallon liquid nitrogen storage tank. The staff's SE stated that this was acceptable provided the TSs were modified to include two specific requirements which we spelled out in the SE. The May 8, 1989 letter requested the licensee to submit the specific TS change in a time frame consistent with the schedule for completing the modifications.
The licensee's application of November 22, 1989, which is the subject of this Safety Evaluation, submitted exactly what the staff had previously proposed.
5)ecifically, the licensee proposed, as requested by the staff, the following Clanges.
I i
9107190210 910703 ADOCK 05000277 PDR PDR P
.im
--i-1)
Add Surveillance Requirement 4.7.E.3 which states:
"The valve operator and inflatable seal safety grade backup pneumatic supply system shall be demonstrated operable for the Atmosphoric Dilution System (CADS) gen supply from the Containment isolation valves with backup nitro nitrogen storage tank by:
- a. Verifying at least once per day that the CADS nitrogen storage tanks contain a minimum of 2500 gallons.
- b. Once per operating cycle, conduct a functional test that demonstrates the operability of the backup (CADS tanks) nitrogen supply system upon loss of the normal supply system.
2)
Change Specification 3.7.A.6.b to increase the minimum liquid nitrogen requirement for the post LOCA Containment Atmospheric Dilution System from 2000 gallons to 2500 gallons.
3)
Revise surveillance requirement 4.7.A.6.b for recording the level in the liquid nitrogen storage tank from a weekly basis to refer to the proposed specification 4.7.E.3.a which requires daily verification of the nitrogen storage tank volume.
4)
Correct a typographical error in Unit 3 Surveillance Requirement 4.7.B.P.b by adding the word "or" which was missing in Amendment No. 146.
Clarifying information was provided by the licensee in a conference call on May 23, 1991.
Specifically, the licensee explained how they would conduct the functional test in Surveillance Requirement 4.7.5.3.
This discussion did not in any way change the proposed TSs and did not af fect the staff's previous "No Significant Hazards Consideration" determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee indicated that the proposed TS change to add surveillance requirement 4.7.E.3 will ensure that the nitrogen supply is monitored on a daily basis and that once per operating cycle a functional test is performed to demonstrate the operability of the backup nitrogen supply system. The functional test will be performed according to surveillance test procedure 3.13-3 to demonstrate the ability of the safety grade instrument gas system to provide sufficient flow to the boot seals for the primary containment vent and surge valves and to the torus to reactor buiiding vacuum breakers under the 11ghest demand to isolate and maintain primary containment upon loss of instrument air. The staff considers the proposed functional test to be acceptable.
f The licensee also stated that the proposed mininum CADS tent liquid nitrogen inventory of 2500 gallons for TS 3.7. A.6.b and 4.7.E.3 is based on an original estimate of 2000 gallons of liquid nitrogen required for con,bustible gas dilution in the containnent and en addition of 500 gallons of liquid nitrogen rcquired to account for the systern lealage during a four hour f ailure of the pressure control valve and the arnount of liquid nitrogen required for the safety grade supply system operation for seven days af ter a loss of Coolant Accid (nt (LOLA) and an additional 25 percent safety rnargin.
The liquid nitrogen requirenent for a n.ininum of seven days is based on the Peach Bottom Updated Final Safety Analysis Peport in Section 5.2.3.9, "Contairirnent Atruospher ic Dilution System." The liquid nitrogen storage tant is accessible and can be recharged from liquid nitrogen delivery trucks.
The licensee assurned a period of four hcurs as reasenable for operator action to stop gas leakage after a failure of the operating pressure control valve through the relief valve n.ounted on the low pressure header.
The operator action will be to valve out the failed pressure regulator and valve in the stardby pressure regulator on receipt of a safety related high pressure alarm from the pressure switches nounted in the low pressure header. The staff considers that the tinie for operator action and the volume of liquid nitrogen required for seven days after a LCCA are reasorable and therefore, the proposed change io increase the minimum liquid nitrogen storage tank volurne from 2000 gallons 1o 2ECO gallons is acceptable.
The proposed change to TS a.7.A.6.b which currently requires weekly verification of the nitrogen storage tants level to refer to the new proposed TS 4.7.E.3.a which requires daily surveillance of the tank inventory is more restrictive than the cur.'ent requirerent and is in compliance with other l
proposed changes and therefore acceptable.
The licensee indicated that the changes to TS a.7.B.2.b regarding testing of the Standby Gas Treatnent System was approved in Arnendment flo.144 for Unit 2.
The word "or", however, was omitted from the Unit 3 TS which was issued on the same date in Arnendrent flo.146. The staff considers that the proposed change for the inclusion of the word "or" is administrative in nature and therefore acceptable.
With the concurrence of the licensee, two minor administrative changes were made to page 175 of the TSs. The word " System" was added to " Standby Gas T~eatrnent" for completeness and in 4.7.B.2.d, the sentence was clarified.
The licensee also provided separate pages 172 and 175 for Units 2 and 3 with the specific Unit tio, at the top of the page.
Pased on the above evaluation, the staff ccncludes that the proposed changes to the Technical Specifications, Sections 3.7.A 6.b, 4.7.A.6.b 4.7.E.3 and 4.7.B.2.b for the surveillance of the safety grade pneumatic supply system are acceptable. These changes are more restrictive and do not increase or create the possibility of a new or a different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
f 3.0 S_ TAT,E, CONSULT AT ION T
in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendnients.
The State official had no convents.
4.0 filVIR0hMEliTAL C0tlSIDERAT10N The amendnents change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility corrponent located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and a change to a surveillance requirement.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and to significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cut.idiative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has becn no public conrent on such finding.
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 environnental 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 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 publi.,
Principal Contributor:
R. Goel Date:
July 3, 1991 i
t i
,