ML20196B678
| ML20196B678 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 12/05/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196B669 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8812060339 | |
| Download: ML20196B678 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
/pa tteuq'o G
UNITED *TATES
~g
["
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
a WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655
- %...../
l SAFETY CVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATl0 TO AMENDMENT NO. 40 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-30 UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY
_CALLAWAY PLANT, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 5TN 50-483
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 12, 1988, Union Electric Company submitted a t'equest for changes to Technical Specification 3.5.1, Accumulators.
The amen 0 ment would allow the plant to remain in Hot Standby with reactor coolant system pressure less than or equal to 1000 psig with one accumulator inaperable, and it would allew closing one accumulator isolation valve for up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> to perform leakage testing of system check valves.
2.0 DISCUSSION i
l The accumulators function as part of the Emergency Core Cooling System.
The main function is to provide emergency core cooling in the event of a loss of coolant accident and to provide cooling water and boration in the event of a steam line break or a feedwater line break. All accumulators feed into the cold legs.
3.0 EVALUATION
[
i l
3.1 Clarification of Arplicability Technical Specification 3.5-1 is applicable in ocdes 1, 2 and 3 and when the reactor coolant system (RCS)(The accumulator nitrogen cover-pressure at pressure is above 1,000 psig, i.e., when all accumulators are operable.
Callaway Plant h between 602 and 648 psig.) Normal operation procedures l
I require the control room operators to close the accumulator discharge valves whenever 'he RCS pressure is reduced below 1,000 psig.
The present Technical Specification 3.5-1 ACTION statements require the t
plant to be in Hot Standby (mode 3) within 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> from the moment an accumulator has been declared inoperable and in Hot Shutdown (mode 4) within i
the following 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. Also,thepresent(andproposed)specificationlimiting condition for operation is applicable in modes 1 and 2, and in mode 3 with I
f i
i i
l Lb h
ed3
~
2-RCS pressure at,ove 1,000 psig. The proposed amendment would revise the ACTION statements to requirc the plant to be in mode 3 within 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> and require a reduction of the RCS pressure to less than or equal to 1,000 psig within the following 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.
Since the accumulators are not required to be operable with the RCS pressure below 1,000 psig and the plant in mode 3 (or modes 4, 5 and 6), the proposed requirement brings into consistency the technical specification limiting condition of operation and the corresponding ACTION statement.
The proposed requirement also avoids mode 4 which would impose thermal cycling on the reactor coolant system containment and reactor internals, and it does not affect the scope of the technical specification.
Based on the above evaluation, the staff agrees that this part of the pro-posed change is acceptable. The staff did, however, suggest and the licensee agreed to slight changes in wording for further consistency and clarification of the technical specification. The staff noted that RCS pressure and pres-surizer pressure in the licensee's present and proposed technical specifica-tion are used interchangeably (the pressuri m is part of the RCS). The staff suggested that the licensee select the more appropriate wording and use it throughout the technical specification. The licensee selected RCS pressure since the pressurizer pressure indicator has only narrow range i
indication (1700-2500 psig) while the RCS pressure indicator has wide range indication (0-3000 psig). The staff agrees with the licensee's selection of RCS pressure.
3.2 Clarification of Surveillance Testing The second proposed change would allow an accumulator isolation valve to be closed for a specified period of up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />, with the reactor in mode 3 and reactor coolant system pressure greater than 1,000 psig, for testing of system check valves. This would reouire a deliberate action to close the valve for testing and not imply that imediate action should be taken to reopen the valve as currently stated in Technical Specification 3.5.1 ACTION l
statement b.
i Justification for this change is that it is an administrative change to clarify the ACTION statement associated with a closed isolation valve. The
)
rarrent ACTION statement requires a r.losed isolation valve to be opened imediately or to be in mode 3 within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.
This proposed change is to allow the isolation valve to be closed for up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> in l
mode 3 for surveillance testing per specification 4.0.5 or 4.4.6.2.2.
Since
]
this 2-hour period is a reasonable amount of time to perform serveillance testing and it is less than the 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> allowed by the ACTION statement, the l
proposed change is simply an added note to clarify the ACTION statement and it does not affect the scope of the technical specification. Therefore, this part of the amendment request is also acceptable.
4.0 ENVIR0hMENTAL CONSIDERATION i
This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the instal-lation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or a change to a surveillance requirement. Tne i
staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in
i o the enounts, 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 c, l
such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility crite a for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 'O CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assess tnt need be prepared in connection with the issuonce of this amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner; and (2) public such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Conmission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and serdrity or to the health and safety of the oublic.
i 6.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT t
Principal Contributors:
T. Alexion, PDIII-3 Dated: December 5, 1988 I
I L
l u
t i
i i
{
i l
l 4
.w - +---~
,,,w--,r
,w
---we, w--,--e_.'.
a n-w,,-
-e-~
~ --
n