ML20236B568
| ML20236B568 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 03/13/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236B557 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-37, NUDOCS 8903210163 | |
| Download: ML20236B568 (3) | |
Text
3-,
^
>s t
' : a us
[
.M
%j UNITED STATES,
-E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
i*'
,5 t E WASHINGTON D.C.20666 h
.p SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 137 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-66 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1 OHIO EDISDN COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA POWER COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-334 INTRODUCTION 1
We have completed review of the design of the inadequate core cooling l
instrumentation (ICCI) at Beaver Valley Unit 1, and have transmitted results of our review by letter dated fay 12, 1987.
In that letter we stated that the proposed design satisfies'the requirements of NUREG-0737, item II.F.2.
At the erd of the sixth refueling outage, the ICCI was completely installed and its -
operability was established (Duquesne Light Company letter dated March 4,1988).
In'our' safety evaluation, we stated that revised technical specifications to cover the ICCI, in accordance with the guidance of Generic Letter (GL) 83-37,-
would be needed.
In response, Duquesne Light Company (the licensee, acting as agent for the above utilities) submitted an amendment request on September 7, l
1988.
DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION a)
Table 3.3-11, Accident Monitoring Instrumentation The licensee proposed to include in this table the incore thermocouple (core-exit thermocouple), with two channels minimum per core quadrant required operable out of the total of four channels per core quadrant.
This fully complies with the guidance of GL 83-37 and is acceptable.
The licensee proposed the minimum channels operable for the reactor coolant subcooling margin monitor and the reactor vessel level indicating system (RVLIS) to be one, which is consistent with GL 83-37. Two reactor coolant system subcooling margin monitor channels and two RVLIS channels are installed and available to satisfy the requirements of this specification. However, Table 3.3-11 only specifies one for the total 8903210163 890313 DR ADOCK 050 4
l 1
number of channels. This deviates from the two specified in GL 83-37.
This is based on the facts that these instruments perform no automatic actions, any procedural actions keyed to specific values readable on these instruments have alternate means available for determining subcooling margin, and the emergency operating procedures instruct the operators on what actions to take either with or without RVLIS. Therefore, the licensee maintained that continued plant operation need not be limited when one channel of these instruments is inoperable. Though those instruments provide additional information, they are not critical to the operation of the plant. They have been added to the technical specifi-cations to ensure periodic calibration is perfomed and at least one channel is available.
The licensee's proposed requirement of one does not meet the guidance of GL 83 'i7.
However, in light of the fact that there is currently no technical specification on the RVLIS, and the licensee requested the amendment under 10 CFR 50.90, we have determined that it is prudent to issue the requirement as requested. Even though the proposed specification does not fully confom to the staff guidance, it does provide sufficient control of the RVLIS to assure safe plant operation.
The licensee also proposed to upgrade the current minimum channel reovirement for the RCS subcooling margin monitor from zero to one. This brings the requirement into conformance with the guidance of GL 83-37 and is acceptable.
l (b) Table 4.3-7, Accident Monitoring Instrumentation Surveillance Requirements The licensee proposed to incorporate surveillance requirements for the RVLIS, core-exit themocouples and subcooling margin monitor in accordance with the guidance of GL 83-37. These are acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment changes requirements with respect to the installation or use i
of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in i.
10 CFR Part 20. We have determined that the amendment involves no signif-icant 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. We have 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, l
t 1 CONCLUSION We have 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, (2) public such j
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations q
and, (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
March-13, 1989 Principal Contributor: Peter S. Tam I
-