ML20141F451
| ML20141F451 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/14/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20141F440 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8604230027 | |
| Download: ML20141F451 (3) | |
Text
.
[J
%o UNITED STATES e
",'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
j WAsmNGTON, D. C 20555
)
%,.....f 1
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 73 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-61 CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY l
HADDAM NECK PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-213
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated January 30, 1986, the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPC0) submitted a request for an amendment to the Haddam Neck Plant technical specifications. The amendment would modify the Haddam Neck Plant technical specifications by 1) reducing the allowable leakage rate of reactor coolant outside containment (technical specification 3.14.A.3) from six (6) liters /hr. to three (3) liters /hr.; 2) identifying additional potential sources of reactor coolant leakage outside of containment such as normal makeup, seal injection, and loop fill lines (technical specification 3.14.A.3);
and 3) changing the valve tag number designations for two check valves in the emergency core cooling system (technical specification 3.14.A.6).
l A Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to License and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination and Opportunity for Hearing related to the requested action was published in the Federal Register on March 12, 1986 (51 FR 8589).
2.0 EVALUATION On August 14, 1985, Conr.ecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCo) submitted Licensee Event Report 85-017 which described potential post-LOCA release paths outside containment.
In particular, CYAPCo identi-fied that the current technical specifications limiting primary coolant leakage outside containment did not specifically include outleakage from the charging system. As a solution, CYAPCo is revising the technical specifications to identify additional sources of potential leakage from the reactor coolant system outside containment and to limit the combined leakage from the residual heat removal (RHR) and charging systems to less than three liters per hour.
g[2ko P
. In support of SEP Topic XV-19, Loss-of-Coolant Accidents, CYAPCo submitted a safety assessment report dated September 30, 1981.
Based upon the information contained in that report and information provided by letter dated March 21, 1978, the staff forwarded its safety evaluation dated August 27, 1982, that concluded that the potential offsite radiological consequences from a postulated design basis loss-of-coolant accident were within the guidelines of 10 CFR 100.11.
In its review, the staff included an evaluation of the potential offsite radiological consequences associated with primary 4
coolant system leakage at a rate of 1.6 gallons per hour (6 liters perhour).
CYAPCo's proposed changes to the technical specifications describing additional leakage pathways imposes more restrictive limitations on the potential leakage from the identified systems than previously provided by the technical specifications. The combined system leakage limit is less than the primary system leakage assumptions contained in the LOCA safety evaluation dated August 27, 1982.
We therefore conclude that the licensee proposed changes in this area are acceptable.
The licensee also proposed to change the valve designations for two check valves in the emergency core cooling system to properly identify the subject valves as components of the safety injection system. We have reviewed the proposed change and conclude that the proposed change is administrative in nature and is, therefore, acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the installation or use of facility components located'within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to the surveillance requirements. 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 issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment 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 this amendment.
t
~-
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
5.0 Principal Contributor:
This Safety Evaluation has been prepared by F. Akstulewicz.
Dated: April 14,1986 F