ML20134K558
| ML20134K558 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 08/21/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134K545 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8508300264 | |
| Download: ML20134K558 (2) | |
Text
...-
UNITED STATES
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 51 TO
(
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-7 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-339
==
Introduction:==
By letter dated February 11, 1985, the Virginia Electric and Power Company
'(the licensee) requested relief from Surveillance Requirement 3/4.4.7 (Table 4.4-3) of the Technical Specifications (TS) for the North Anna Power Station, Unit No. 2 (NA-2). Surveillance Requirement 3/4.4.7 requires that the reactor coolant system (RCS) chemistry limits for chlorides and fluorides be sampled on a continuing 72 hour8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> basis. The licensee's requested relief would eliminate the requirement for sampling chlorides and fluorides when the reactor coolant system is drained below the reactor pressure vessel nozzle and the internals and/or head are in place.
Our discussion and evaluatJon of the licensee's request is presented below.
In addition, the proposed change for NA-2, as stated above, has been i
previously reviewed and approved by the NRC for NA-1 as indicated in i
Amendment No. 41 to Facility Operating License NPF-4 dated August 4, 1982.
Discussion:
To obtain the required chloride and fluoride samples on a continuing 0
frequency of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> would require personnel ingress to the area of the j
upper core internals. Entry into this area has a radiation field of 10 H
4 roentgens per hour and would result in excessive radiation exposure.
Prior to fully draining the RCS, the required sampling of chlorides and t
fluorides will be conducted in accordance with the specified sampling procedures. Also, since the RCS and the residual heat removal (RHR) system will be drained, the inventory of chlorides and fluorides will not change and no makeup is planned for the RCS.
The licensee will resume sampling the RCS for chlorides and fluorides when the RCS is refilled so that the chlorides and fluorides inventory will be known and Surveillance Requirement 4.4.7 (Table 4.4-3) will then be followed as presently specified.
1 l
8508300 N [ M 39 PDR ADOCK PDR P
Et8Fc h.JW. *Er N 19eRm 4 pc-[ g Z
gw w g gag g g.L=gF r
- f'..
y--
- W"'"
c q
i J
2-Evaluation:
We find the licensee's request for relief to be acceptable based on:
(1)the chloride and fluoride inventory cannot change during the period that the RCS and RHR systems are drained, and (2) personnel exposure resulting from following the specified present surveillance is not in keeping with ALARA considerations.
Therefore, relief is hereby granted from Surveillance Requirement 4.4.7 (Table 4.4-3) when the RCS is drained below the reactor pressure nozzle and the internals ar.f/or head are in place.
In addition, as ncted above, the NRC has reviewed and approved a similar amendment request for NA-1 as stated in Amendment No. 41 to Facility Operating License NPF-4, dated August 4, 1982.
1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 published a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 551.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 651.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
^
CONCLUSION Wehaveconcluded,basedontheconsiderationsdiscussedabove,that(1)there
[
is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and the issuance i
of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public, i
Date: August 21, 1985 3
Principal Contributor:
L. Engle sa g
4 a
L'^
i.:. _ w.; y m
J LF ' _- -
_4 g m.-
r
-M IP99. f?TfF 91_Q U_'_15 v W# ]*p. 9 *4'M,*f"F'***f*"**W@eppe
- -twegy..
{