ML20207H603
| ML20207H603 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 12/23/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207H563 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8701070571 | |
| Download: ML20207H603 (4) | |
Text
-_
i' f "",,
UNITED STATES
'e y-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'(
3 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
.g w./
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULA,Q0N SUPPORTING AMENDNENT NO. 9 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. HP[-38_
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-382 1.0 INTA000CT10N Fy applications dated September 10 and October 1, 1986, as supplemented by letterdatedOctober6,1986,LouisianaPowerandLightCompany(thelicensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-38) for the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3.
The proposed changes would:
(1) redefine the responsibility of senior reactor operators during core alterations and (2) revise the boron dilution requirements while in Modes 5 and 6.
2.0 DISCUSSION The proposed changes to the technical specifications requested by the licensee are in two areas as described below.
2.1 Senior Reactor Operator duties The proposed change would modify Technical Specification 6.2.2.d to redefine the duties of the Senior Peactor Operators (SR0s) during any core alteratio:is.
The present specification states:
ALL CORE ALTEPATIONS shall be observed or perfonned by a licensed Operator or licensed Senior Operator and supervised by either a licensed Senior Operator or licensed Senior Operator Limited to Fuel Handling who has no other concurrent responsibilities durint; this period.
The licensee has proposed that Technical Specification 6.2.2.d be rewritten as follows:
ALL CORE ALTERATIONS shall be observed and directly supervised by either a licensed Senior Reactor Operator or Senior Reactor Operator Limited to Fuel Handling who has no other concurrent responsibilities during this operation.
P
3
{.
of i k, r
d_
l The proposed change makes it clear that an SR0 must be present during all core alterations to observe and directly supervise, regardless of s
I
~
whether the individual doing the actual manipulations has an operator's license or not and that this observation and supervision must be direct.
The proposed specification does not allow for supervision from the control room, even with direct consunication.
2.2 Boron dilution reouirements in Modes 5 and 6 i
The proposed changes would revise Technical Specification 3.1.2.9 " Reactivity Control Systems Boron Dilution," Surveillance Requirement 4.1.2.9.4 and the i
associatedBasessection(3/4.1.2.9). The reasons for these changes are:
(1) the Cycle 2 core will have higher enriched fuel and is therefore more reactive i
than the Cycle 1 core; (2) the Shutdown Margin for Cycle 2 is lower than it was for Cycle 1 (when all Control Element Assemblies are inserted); and (3) it is desirable to have more than one charging pump operable when the reactor is i
in Mode 5 and the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) is partially drained. Specifically, the proposed changes will allow the use of two charging pumps when filling the RCS 6s long as the k-eff is maintained at a value less than 0.96.
2 7
j Specification 3.1.2.9b currently requires removing power to two charging pumps when the reactor is in Mode 5 and the RCS is partially drained. The proposed changes would replace this Specification with statements that allow more than one charging pump to be operable depending on the multiplication factor in the core. That is, if the k-eff is between 0.94 and 0.96 it is permissible to have two charging pumps operable or, if the k-eff is less than 0.94, it is permissible to have all three chart! ng pumps operable.
In addition, 1
d Table 3.1-1 will be replaced with a series of ables (Tables 3.1-1 through 3.1-5) that provide the required boron sam) ling frequency as a function of the j
core multiplication factor that trust be adwred to whenever the boron dilution alarm (s)isr.ctoperable. By monitoring the boron concentration at these frequencies, the operators will have sufficient time to mitigate a boron dilution event prior to the loss of shutdown margin.
3.0 EVALUATION The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications requested by the licensee b
and described in two areas above, are evaluated below.
3.1 Senior reactor operator duties The proposed change removes the ambiguity involved in interpretation of the existing specification and provides the necessary level of supervision and
' '[
control during core alterations. Additionally, the proposed change contains the same wording presently in the Standard Technical Specifications. The i:
staff, therefore, finds the proposed change to Technical Specification 6.2.2.d acceptable.
I i
l
t 3.2 Boron dilution requirements in Modes 5 and 6 I
Currently, Technical Specification 3.1.2.9b requires removing power to two charging pumps (leaving only one operable) when the reactor is in Mode 5.
and the RCS is partially drained. The proposed changes would allow more than one charging pump to be operable depending on the multiplication factor 4
(k-eff) in the core. Specifically, in Mode 5 with the RCS partially drained for system maintenance, operation of only one charging pump at a i
maximum rate of 44 gpm would be allowed when k-eff is between 0.96 and 1
0.98.
Power to the other two charging pumps would beyemoved with their breakers locked out.
In Mods 5 with the RCS partially drained, operation l
of two charging pumps would be alloned when k-eff is between 0.94 and 0.96.
x In Mode 5 with the RCS partially drained, operation of all three charging s
pumps would be allowed when k-eff is less than 0.94 In addition, Table 3.1-1 would be replaced with a series of tables (Table 3.1-1 through 3.1-5) that provide the required boron sampling frequency as a function of,
k-eff whenever the boron dilution alarm (s) is(are) not operable.
Nomally, two redundant alams that actuate when the neutron flux doubles are provided fcr protection in the event of an inadvertent boren dilution.
With one or both of these alams inoperable, the Cycle 2 safety analyses have shown that by monitoring the RCS boron cencentration at the frequencies shown in lables 3.1-1 through 3.1-5, the operators have sufficient time to take the actions necessary to mitigate the esent. These tables show that more frequent checks of the RCS boron concentration are required when more charging pumps are operable or when there is a higher k-eff since there is less time available for the operators to take corrective action.
The Cycle 2 boron dilution event analyses have shown that the frequencies specified in Table 3.1-1 through 3.1-5 ensure that an indication of a boron s
dilution event is provided to the operator at least 15 minutes before criticality would occur (30 minutes for Mode 6) even in the absence of a boron dilution alarm. These are the acceptable time intervals required by Standard Review Plan Section 15.4.6 governing boron dilution events. The parameters used as input to the analyses were reviewed and found to be suitably conservative.
In addition, the calculational model used has been previously reviewed and found acceptable by the staff. The proposed changes, therefore, are acceptable.
4.0 CONTACT WITH STATE OFFICIAL The NRC staff has advised the Administrator, Ruclear Energy Division, Department of Environmental Quality, State of Louisiana of the proposed detemination of-no significant hazards consideration. No coments were received.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves changes in the installation or use of facility components 4
-,~, - _---
-v
_4 located within the restricted area. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts 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 proposed findings that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such findings. Accordingly, the 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 anendment.
C.0 CONCLUSION Based upon our evaluation of the proposed changes to the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications, we have concluded that: there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
We, therefore, conclude that the proposed changes are acceptable, and are hereby incorpurated into the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications.
Dated:
December 23, 1986 Principal Contributors:
F. Allenspach and L. Kopp
-