ML20132C070
Text
..
. i?
DISTRIBUTION DOCKET FILE AEB R/F JRead Plant File AD/RP RF Docket No.:
50-418 MAY 0 31984
~
fiEliORAllDUM FOR: Thomas 11. Ucvak, Assistant Director for Radiation Protection Division of Licensing FR0!!:
Daniel R. Muller, Assistant Director for Radiation Protection s
Division of Systems Integration
SUBJECT:
ACCIDENT EVALUATION BRANCH REVIEW 0F GRAND GULF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS-TAC # 54808 AE0 has reviewed the recomendations and problen sheets, and found six prnblen sheets (346, 347, 817, 822, 8?3 and 832) and four rccomendations not referencing problem sheets (4.6.6.1.b.2, 3/4.6.6.3, 3/4.7.2 and 4.7.2) to be at least partially within AEB review areas.
For recomendations in which a problem sheet is referenced AES concludes that the !!P&L proposed resciution is adequate. The four recomendations for which I:P&L has not proposed resolution are discussed in the attached coments.
This review was perforced by J. Read, x08301.
Orgir.al sVEN
~
Ocniel R.Muue!,j Daniel R. ftuller, Assistant Director for Radiation Protection Division of Systems Integration
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
R. !iattson R. Capra A. Schwencer L. Kin
.D..S..I..:.A..E..B..BQ.
DSO: R.......DSI:AEB c,,.m >
..m.
g.qd.:.g.g......
....L._ g.....g........
4 g.. t..............
om>
- ronu m oo.quncu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY uim iai-== h
I
\\
GRAND GULF CONCERNS NOT REFERENCED IN PROBLEM SHEETS 4
4.6.6.1.b.2 As described in the FSAR, the SGTS was designed to operate at high flow during the first minutes of secondary containment,depressurization, after which it would maintain.subatmospheric pressure with a flow of 2300 CFM.
This flow history was modeled in the SER dose computations. AsnotedintheSER(15.3) discussion,due to conservatisms in the SRP procedures, only about 1% of the limiting dose is computed to be caused by releases
'l proportional to SGTS flow.
Increasing SGTS flow to 4000 1
CFM would still yield doses well within 10 CFR Part 100 guidelines. AEB recommends that the FSAR be amended to reflect the proposed performance of the SGTS and secondary
. containment leak-tightness so that all control room and off-site doses can be re-reviewed and corrected in an SSER.
3/4.6.6.3 The SGTS flow test is variously given in 3/4.6.6.1 and 3/4.6.6.3 as "4000 CFM 210%" and as "less than 4000 CFM".
As a measure of the leak-tightness of the secondary l
containment, the SGTS should be tested to be capable of maintaining subatmospheric pressure at the smallest flow possible. As a test of the SGTS capacity, the system should be able to achieve an adequately high flow rate at minimum back pressure. These two surveillance requirements need net be consistent, nor need they refer to the same test.
3/4.7.2 Excessive leakage of the control room boundary is being reviewed (TAC.f51863)asalicensingissue. Resoluthn of this issue may result in future revision of this Technical Specification.
4.7.2 The STS include confirmigg that the control room air temperature is below 120 F at least once every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.
This is clearly an error in the STS, since it does not constitute a surveillance test of the control room EFS unless that system is operating at the time. Revision of this Technical Specification is being considered by the Control Room Habitability Task Force. This spurious test should not be included in the Grand Gulf TS.
4 4
wm
+w+,.,,e.., <
...s.n,,.....,n
.. _