ML20086P949
| ML20086P949 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086P948 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9507270226 | |
| Download: ML20086P949 (3) | |
Text
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ -
gt@%cy 1
4 UNITED STATES.
l iW c
[l
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.
1 I
WASHINGTON, D.C. enana annt h
kg SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 97 AND 61 TO FACILITY OPERATING i
l!
,+
l
' LICENSE NOS. NPF-39 AND NPF-85 r:
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY h
LIMERICK GENERATING STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 e
DOCKET NOS. 50-352 AND 50-353
]
u
1.0 INTRODUCTION
h By letter dated August 31, 1994, as supplemented by letter dated July 3,1995, l:
the Philadelphia Electric Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Limerick Generating Station (LGS), Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would modify TS Sections 3.4.9.1, 3.4.9.2, 3.9.11.1, 3.9.11.2, Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) ACTION p-statements, and the associated Bases Sections 3/4.4.9 and 3/4.4.11, to permit the use of either an " analytical approach" (i.e., calculation) or
" demonstrations" to ensure the operability of an alternate decay' heat removal ~
method, rather than the existing TS requirement which stipulates that operability of the alternate decay removal method be demonstrated. These amendments address Section 6 of the licensee's August 31, 1994 submittal,
" Reduce' Frequency of Alternate Decay Heat Demonstration." There is one-remaining item to this application.
2.0 EVALUATION l
The licensee proposes to revise TS Sections 3.4.9.1, 3.4.9.2, 3.9.11.1,.
.3.9.11.2, ACTION a, by modifying the phrase, "... demonstrate the operability of at least one alternate method capable of decay heat removal" to read,
... verify the availability of at least one alternate method capable of decay heat removal."
The associated Bases Section 3/4.4.9 and 3/4.9.11 are i
proposed to be revised from "... alternate methods capable of decay heat I
removal be demonstrated.nd that an alternate method of coolant mixing be in operation" to "... alternate methods capable of decay heat removal. be verified available by either calculation (which includes a review of component and--
system availability to verify that an alternate decay heat removal method is available) or by demonstration, and that an alternate method of coolant mixing-H be operational."
'The following information was presented by the licensee in its-Safety i
- Assessment of the TS change request:
" Shutdown Cooling-is a mode of operation of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system, and is designed to remove decay and sensible heat loads from the primary coolant system following a reactor shutdown. The Shutdown Cooling mode of operation of the RHR system has the capability to remove these heat loads in order to facilitate refueling or 9507270226 950718 PDR ADOCK 05000352
_P PDR r
'Y.
v
/
maintenance activities, or for. maintaining the reactor in a HOT SHUTDOWN condition. There are two (2) separate Shutdown Cooling loops, which are manually controlled by operations personnel from the Main Control Room (MCR).
Each loop consists of two (2) RHR pumps, and_ one(l) RHR heat exchanger which is cooled by the Residual Heat Removal Service Water system. Although both loops are usually employed to support reactor
. shutdown operation, the reactor primary coolant temperature can be lowered to 212*F in less than 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> with only one (1) loop in operation."
These TS revisions relate to Shutdown Cooling operation requirements during HOT SHUTDOWN, COLD SHUTDOWN, and Refueling Operations at LGS, Units I and 2.
The staff agrees that these revisions provide clarifications for the intent of the TS statements in Sections 3.4.9.1, 3.4.9.2, 3.9.11.1, 3.9.11.2 and the associated Bases Sections 3/4.4.9 and 3/4.9.11.
Further, the proposed TS changes will not affect the capability, availability, or operation of any decay heat removal systems /metiods.
In addition, the proposed TS changes are consistent with NUREG-1433, " Standard Technical Specifications, General -
Electric Plant, BWR/4," dated September,1992; specifically, Action A of LCO.
statements for Section 3.4.8, 3.4.9, 3.9.8, 3.9.9, and Bases Section B 3.9.8, B'3.9.9, 8 3.4.8, B 3.4.9.
Based on the above evaluation, the staff concludes that the proposed changes will not impact the operation of the RHR and RHRSW systems, and they are consistent with-the recommendations in NUREG -1433. Therefore, the staff-considers the proposed changes acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
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 55884). 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.
t
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Connission 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 public.
Principal Contributor:
T. Liu Date:
July 18,1995 l