ML20114B396
| ML20114B396 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1985 |
| From: | Murphy W VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORP. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20114B397 | List: |
| References | |
| FVY-85-05, FVY-85-5, NUDOCS 8501290137 | |
| Download: ML20114B396 (4) | |
Text
\\
VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION RD 5 Box 169 Ferry Road, Brattleboro, VT 05301 y
ENGINEERING OFFICE FVY 85-03 1871 WORCESTER ROAD FRAMINGHAM. MASSACHUSETTS 01701 e
TELEPHOPdE 617-872-4100 Proposed Change No. 126 January 15, 1985 United States Nuclear Regulatory Comis:ilon Washington, D. C. 20555 Attention:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director
References:
(a) License No. DPR-28 (Docket No. 50-271)
(b) Letter, USNRC to VYNPC, NVY 84-50, dated March 12, 1984 (c) Letter, USNRC to VYNPC, NVY 84-108, dated May 22, 1984 (d) Letter, VYNPC to USNRC, FVY 84-66, dated June 27, 1984 1
(e) Letter, VYNPC to USNRC, Proposed Change No. 121 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-28, dated June 26, 1984
Subject:
Request for License Amendment - Operation of Purge and Vent Valves
Dear Sir:
Pursuant to Section 50.59 of the Comission's Rules and Regulations, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation hereby proposes the following l-modification to Appendix A of the operating License.
Proposed Change:
k Replace pages 106, 107, 119, 135, and 146 of the Vermont Yankee Technical g
Specifications with the attached revised pager 106, 107, 119, 135, and 246;
)
and add the attached pages 106a and 107a.
Please note that page 135 is also pending revision for Proposed Change No.121 [ Reference (e)].
Reason for Change:
1 By letter dated June 27, 1984 [ Reference (d)], we committed to providing you with a request for amendment to our operating license to addre.es the
[T operation of purge and vent valves at our facility.
8501290137 850115 egeO PDR ADOCK 05000271 qa. w M
4,qa M
L t-United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 15, 1985 Attention:
Mr. Harold R. Denton Page 2 i
r Specifically, this change proposes:
- 1) an iodine spike limit for the reactor coolant concentration to assure that the radiological consequences of a postulated Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) while purging are within 10CFR Part 100 dose guidelines; and 2) a limit on the opening of purge and vent valves V16-19-7 and 7a to no more than 500 while operating.
4 Basis for Channe:
By letter dated March 12, 1984 [ Reference (b)], the NRC requested that we provide an iodine peak or spike limit for the reactor coolant concentration to assure that the radiological consequences of a postulated loss-of-coolant accident, while purging, are within 10CFR Part 100 dose guidelines. _An iodine spike limit of four (4) microcuries of I-131 dose equivalent per gram of water was evaluated to be appropriate for Vermont Yankee. Technical Specification pages 106 - 107a tad 118 have been revised or added to incorporate this limit and clarify the specification, i
By letter, dated May 22, 1984 [ Reference-(c)), the NRC requested that we i.
provide a Technical Specification for~ limiting the opening of purge and vent valvas V16-19-7 and 7a to no more than 500 while operating. The basis for this limit is that although purge and vent valve testing performed by Allis-Chalmers has demonstrated that all butterfly, purge, and vent valves installed at Vermont Yankee can close from full open conditions at design basis containment pressure; these tests showed that the flow from accident pressures tended to interfere with the valves ability to close when the valve started from the-full open position. Therefore, as an additional conservatism, limit stops have been added to those valves (V 16-19-7 and 7a).
Thus,' valves V 16-19-7 and 7a are blocked at less than 500 open and pages 135 and 146 of the Technical Specifications have been revised to incorporate this limit.
Safety Considerations:
These proposed changes were requested by NRC and represent more conservative operating restrictions than those presently included in the
-Vermont Yankee Technical Specifications.
i The proposed iodine spike limit for the reactor coolant concentration establishes a maximum value permitted by the Technical Specifications, which would require reactor shutdown if exceeded. As a result, this spike limitation on the reactor coolant iodine concentration assures that the radiological consequences of.a LOCA, while purging, will be within the 10CFR Part 100 dose guidelines.
The proposed change limiting the opening of purge and vent valves V16-19-7 and 7s.to no more than 500 while operating, constitutes implementation of the corrective action requested by NRC.
This action satisfies the NRC's interim position and is part of the bases for NRC's Safety i
I
F-
!~.
i United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 15, 1985
]
Attention:
Mr. Harold R. Denton Page 3 Evaluation of Vermont Yankee's Containment Purge and Vent Valve Operability
[ Reference (c)]. This change constitutes an additional limitation and control not presently included in the Vermont Yankee Technical Specifications.
Therefore, these changes are not considered to constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR50.59(a)(2).
These changes have been reviewed by the Nuclear Safety Audit and Review 4
Committee.
Sinnificant Hazards Consideration:
The Connission has provided guidance concerning the application of the standards for determining whether a "significant hazards" consideration exists by providing certain examples (48FR14870).
One of these examples (ii) states that a change which constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the Technical Specifications; for example, a more stringent surveillance requirement does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
As described above, the changes being proposed result in restrictions on plant operations not previously required by our Technical Specifications. The I-131 limit and the limits on the opening of the subject purge and vent valves j
while operating, represent more conservative operating restrictions and clearly fall within the bounds of the example cited above. Therefore, we conclude that this proposed change does not cont,titute a significant hazards consideration as defined in 10CFR50.92(c).
Fee Determination:
i In accordance with the provisions of 10CFR170.12, an application fee of
$150.00 is enclosed.
Schedule of Chanze:
l L
This change will be incorporated into the Vermont Yankee Technical l
Specifications as soon as practicable following receipt of your approval.
We trust that the information provided is sufficient to allow for your i
review and for the subsequent issuance of a license amendment. We also understand that this proposed change completes all actions necessary by l
1 i
)
i i
1 l
1 l
1 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 15, 1985 Attention:
Mr. Harold R. Denton Page 4 Vermont Yankee to address the issue of purge and vent operability at our facility. Should you have an questions in this matter, please contact us.
Very truly yours, VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION h
L Warren P.
rphy Vice President and Manas of Operations RC/cmj Enclosure cc:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Document Control Desk (40 copies)
Vermont Department of Public Services 120 State Street Montpelier, Vermont 05602 STATE OF VERMONT )
)ss OF WINDHAM COUNTY)
Then personally appeared before me, Warren P. Murphy, who, being duly l
sworn, did state that he is Vice President and Manager of Operations of l
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation, that he is duly authorized to l
execute and file the foregoing document in the name and on the behalf of l
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation and that the statements therein are j
true to the best of his knowledge and belief.
~,O
%. >' QL 0
1 YY d
l Notary Public g M,A(cpu (
Diane McCue My Comission Expires February 10, 1987 g\\
HOTAM c
PUBUC
~
C "f-Cound,@
/4 l
-