ML20135D264
| ML20135D264 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 12/03/1996 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20135D247 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9612090312 | |
| Download: ML20135D264 (3) | |
Text
_
eMuc y
UNITED STATES g
,j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a'
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20566-0001 o
49.....,o SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.134TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-10 AND AMENDMENT NO.123 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-15 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FDISON COMPANY SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA SAN ON0FRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNITS 2 AN_Q_1 DOCKET NOS. 50-361 AND 50-362
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated October 11, 1996, Southern California Edison Company (SCE or the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-10 and NPF-15) for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), Unit Nos. 2 and 3.
The proposed changes would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.9.6, " Refueling Water Level," for SONGS Units 2 and 3.
The proposed change is required to restore certain provisions of the SONGS Units 2 and 3 operating practice that were not incorporated during the conversion to the improved TS (Amendment Nos. 127 and 116, dated February 9, 1996). The restored provisions will allow the refueling water level to be lowered during movement of four finger control element assemblies (CEAs), coupling and uncoupling of CEA extension shafts, and verification of the coupling and uncoupling process.
2.0 DISCUSSION NRC Amendment Nos. 127 and 116 approved a license amendment request that adopted the recommendations of NUREG-1432, " Standard Technical Specifications Combustion Engineering Plants." During preparation of the procedure changes necessary to implement the improved TS, the licensee identified certain provisions of the previous TS that were not properly incorporated into the improved TS.
Improved TS 3.9.6, " Refueling Water Level," requires a minimum refueling water level of 23 feet above the reactor vessel flange, thus ensuring that the radiological consequences of a postulated fuel handling accident inside the containment are within acceptable limits.
9612090312 961203 PDR ADOCK 05000361 P
pga
t i
o
" The previous specification, TS 3/4.9.10, " Water Level--Reactor Vessel,"
similarly required that at least 23 feet of water be maintained over the top of the reactor pressure vessel flange. A footnote to this TS clarified that the water level may be lowered to a minimum of 23 feet above the top of the fuel for movement of four finger CEAs, coupling and uncoupling of CEA extension shafts, or for verifying the coupling and uncoupling of CEAs. This r
footnote was not included in improved TS 3.9.6 because the licensee incorrectly believed it to be adequately addressed by the new words in the Applicability Statement.
The proposed change would restore the footnote because the licensee has determined that it is not clearly addressed by improved TS 3.9.6.
Specifically, a note would be added to modify Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.9.6 to clearly allow that the refueling water level may be lowered to a minimum of 23 feet above the top of the fuel for movement of four finger CEAs, coupling and uncoupling of CEA extension shafts, or for verifying the coupling and uncoupling of CEAs. The proposed change would also revise the applicability of TS 3.9.6 to be consistent with this change. The change would replace the portion of the applicability related to core alterations with the phrase "During movement of fuel assemblies or CEAs within the reactor pressure vessel when either the fuel assemblies being moved or the fuel assesiolies seated within the reactor pressure vessel are irradiated."
3.0 EVALUATION During core alterations and during movement of irradiated fuel assemblies, the water level over the top of the fuel is an initial condition design parameter in the analysis of the fuel handling accident in containment postulated by Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.25, " Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Fuel Handling Accident in the Fuel Handling and Storage Facility for Boiling and Pressurized Water Reactors (Safety Guide 25)." RG 1.25 specifies a minimum water depth of 23 feet between the top of the damaged fuel rods and the fuel pool surface as one of the regulatory position assumptions.
The requirement to maintain the water level 23 feet above the reactor vessel flange assures that there will be a minimum of 23 feet of water over a postulated dropped fuel assembly. Since the fuel assemblies would be seated in the reactor vessel during movement of four finger CEAs, coupling and uncoupling of CEA extension shafts, or for verifying the coupling and uncoupling of CEAs, the proposed reduction in water level to 23 feet above the top of the fuel during these activities continues to satisfy the RG 1.25 regulatory position assumption of 23 feet of water above the fuel.
The proposed TS change-is acceptable, since it does not change the water depth regulatory position assumption of RG 1.25, and does not result in any changes in the assumptions previously used by both the licensee and the staff in analyzing the potential radiological consequences of a fuel handling accident.
(
r i
s e j
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Comission's regulations, the California State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to the 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 Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (61 FR 56251). 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.
6.0 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 Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Mel Fields Date:
December 3, 1996