ML20112G513
| ML20112G513 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 06/05/1996 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20112G510 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9606120055 | |
| Download: ML20112G513 (4) | |
Text
.
g 4 Kit g'
UNITED STATES s
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. M1
\\*****/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMEN 0 MENT NO.119TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-38 ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. UNIT 3 DOCKET N0. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated May 19, 1995, as supplemented by letter dated December 7, 1995, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), submitted a request for changes to the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3), Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested changes would revise the recombiner surveillance requirements (SRs) to conform with the staff guidance provided in NUREG-1432, " Standard Technical Specifications Combustion Engineering Plants".
Waterford 3 is a 3390 megawatt Combustion-Engineering pressurized water 3
reactor located 20 miles west of New Orleans, LA.
It has a 2,677,000ft, dry, cylindrical steel primary containment enclosed by a reinforced concrete shield building.
The primary containment design pressure is 44 psig. The shield building serves as a secondary containment fission product control structure.
2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION 2.1 Recombiner Safety Function The function of hydrogen recombiners is to preclude the formation of a combustible mixture in the closed containment atmosphere during the post-i accident period of a design basis accident, without having to resort to
. containment venting and purging through use of the Containment Atmosphere i
Release System (CARS). The recombiners accomplish this by recombining hydrogen and oxygen internally in a controlled manner to form water vapor.
l This process takes place within the primary containment thereby eliminating any discharge to the environment such as might occur if the CARS were used to reduce the containment hydrogen concentration. Recombiner operability is demonstrated by periodic surveillance testing.
9606120055 960605 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P
PDH
. 2.2 Recombiner Surveillance Requirements Current Requirements: Waterford 3 has two installed hydrogen recombiners.
The current TSs require:
4.6.4.2 Each hydrogen recombiner system be demonstrated OPERABLE:
a.
At least once per 6 months by verifying during a recombiner system functional test that the minimum heater sheath temperature increases to greater than or equal to 700*F within 90 minutes. Upon reaching 700*F, increase the power setting to maximum power for 2 minutes and verify that the power meter reads greater than or equal to 60 kW.
b.
At least once per 18 months by:
1.
Performing a CHANNEL CALIBRATION of all recombiner instrumentation and control circuits, 2.
Verifying through a visual examination that there is no evidence of abnormal conditions within the recombiner enclosure (i.e., loose wiring or structural connections, deposits of foreign materials, etc.).
3.
Verifying the integrity of the heater electrical circuits by performing a resistance to ground test following the above functional test. The resistance to ground for any heater phase shall be greater than or equal to 10,000 ohms.
Proposed Changes:
The licensee proposes to replace the above with the following:
4.6.4.2 Each hydrogen recombiner system shall be demonstrated OPERABLE at least once per 18 months by:
a.
Performing a system functional test for each hydrogen recombiner.
b.
Visually examining recombiner enclosure and verifying there is no evidence of abnormal conditions.
c.
Performing a resistance to ground test for each heater phase.
. The amendment would combine the 6-month functional test and 18-month functional test into a single 18-month functional test and remove specific test method and acceptance criteria from the SR statement. The relocated criteria would be stated in the Bases.
The licensee's basis for the proposed changes is' consistency with the staff guidance provided in the Improved Standard Technical Specifications (ISTS).
The proposed TSs are consistent with the ISTS guidance which represents the staff position and standard practice applicabic to surveillance testing of thermal recombiners for large, dry containments having a backup vent / purge capability. The staff has previously determined that surveillance testing during each refueling outage is an appropriate test interval for thermal recombiners (see also:
NUREG-1366, "Isprovements to Technical Specifications Surveillance Requirements"). The use of the Bases to specify certain specific test methods and acceptance criteria is also consistent with staff guidance.
A TS amendment to bring the Waterford 3 recombiner surveillance requirements into consistency with the guidance of the ISTS is appropriate since the Waterford 3 hydrogen control systems conform to standard practice (i.e.,
redundant thermal recombiners with a backup vent / purge capability). The proposed changes to the SRs are therefore acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Louisiana State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The 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 requinments.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significast 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 pro-posed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (61 FR 180).
Accordingly, the an'endment 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.
0 4
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 amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
W. Long Date: 30ne 5,1996 I
_