ML20237A794
| ML20237A794 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 12/07/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237A783 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712150263 | |
| Download: ML20237A794 (4) | |
Text
.
[pa aseg),
UNITED STATES
' g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
3 v.
l W ASHINGTON,0. C. 20555 o,,,
a
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AftENDMENT h0. 120 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-66 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY OHIO EDISON COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA POWER COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-334
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated February 24, 1987, Duquesne Light Company (the licensee) submitted change request No. 122 for our review. The proposed changes would either correct an error, clarify certain formats, riake the Technical Specifications (TS) consistent with the Commission's regulations, or make the TS requirements consistent with each other.
]
2.0 DISCUSS 10fi AND EVALUATION 1.
Section_3.2.2 The BV-1 core contains fuel assembles with three different fuel rod end plugs. The variation in end plug size acts to change the location of the fuel assembly grids in relation to the bottom of the core.
Thus the second grid is located at the following elevation in percent of core height for the various fuel regions:
Region 1,2,3,4 Region 5,6 Region 7,8 17.8%
17.9%
18.0%
The proposed change revises surveillance requirement 4.2.2.2.f to specify a generic grid location in lieu of a specific grid location to allow a more accurate application of the grid plane regions in accordance with the applicable fuel rod end plug used. This would affect the current grid elevatinn by up to 0.?.% (18.0% - 17.8%) but this difference is well within the allowed tolerance of 2%. As a result, the fuel assembly descriptions in the updated FSAR will not be affected. The revision will also make the Technical Specifications of Unit 1 and Unit 2 consistent with each other. The proposed change is acceptable.
2.
Table 3.3-1 The licensee proposed to revise entries under "ACTIOh" for three-loop operation from "2" to "7".
This change adds consistency to the TS and follows the guidance of the Westinghouse Standard Technical Specifications (NUREG-0452, Revision 4), and is acceptable.
h[k Ook $b 4
P
s.
3.
Table 3.3-5 On page 3/4 3-27 under Functional Unit 6.b under " RESPONSE TIME IN SECOND5" revise entry from " <
78.0 (1)" to "$13.0 (2)." On page 3/4 3-28 under
- TABLE NOTATION" add a new note 2, "The 13.0 second response time includes 3 seconds for signal processing and 10 seconds for feedwater flow epntrol valve stroke / closing time (see Table 3.6-1 FCV-1-FW-A78, 488 and 498),.
Table 3.6-1 shows the feedwater flow control valve stroke / closing time as 13 seconds or less; that is the correct limit. Page 3/4 3-27 has erroneously shown the limit to be less than or equal to 78 seconds and is therefore in conflict with Table 3.6-1. The licensee's proposed change would correct the error, eliminate an internal inconsistency, add clarity and is therefore acceptable.
4.
Table 3.3-6 The reporting requirements of Action 36 have been changed from a special report submitted within 14 days to inclusion in the next Semi-Annual Effluent Release Report. In addition, the new action statement requires repair of the inoperable channel, and, if the channel l
cannot be repaired within 30 days, to describe in detail why it was not repaired in a timely manner. This is consistent with the reporting requirements of Action statement b in specification 3.3.3.9 and 3.3.3.10 and does not affect the UFSAR accident analysis of Section 14 The requested change is acceptable. The licensee should consider submitting en amendment request for Unit 2 to make the TS consistent with Unit l's new TS on this issue.
5.
Section 4.3.3.3.2 An additional 1-hour reporting requirement is added regarding seismic events greater than or equal to 0.01 g.
This change is consistent with requirements of the current 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73, and is acceptable.
6.
Table 4.3-6 Under Functional Units 3 and 4 under " INSTRUMENT", add a reference to a new footnote 1 which says " Operability required in accordance with Specification 3.3.1.1."
Under Functional Unit 11 under
" INSTRUMENT", add a reference to a new footnote 3, which says " Operability required in accordance with Specification 3.4.1.3."
Under Functional Units 3 and 4 under " CHANNEL CHECK" add a reference to a new footnote 4 which says 'Below P-6."
Under Functional Unit 11 under " CHANNEL CHECK" add a reference to a new footnote 5 which says " Channel check to be performed in conjunction with Surveillance Requirement 4.4.1.3.1."
The changes add clarity and consistency to the TS and are acceptable.
7.
Section 3.5.2 Action statement b. is revised to require submittal of a special report within 30 days in accordance with 10 CFR 50.73. A footnote is deleted since its applicability date has passed. This editorial change and the change in accordance with 10 CFR 50.73 are acceptable.
W.
i E
4 i 1
8.
Section 3.5.3 Action statement b is revised to require submittal of a special report within 30 days in accordance with 10 CFP 50.73. This change is Pcceptable, j
9.
Section 6.7.1 This is changed to state that safety limit violations will be reported to the Comission within one hour, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.72. This is acceptable.
10.
Section 6.7.1.d This is changed to state that safety limit violation reports will be submitted to the Comission within 30 days, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFP 50.73. This is acceptable.
11.
Sections 6.9.1.14 and 6.9.2 These changes revise the sections to reflect the current NRC organization, and are acceptable.
- 12. Section 6.10.2 ftem 1 has been deleted since it referenced Section 6.13, which was deleted by Amendment No. 95. Remaining items m and n are
(
renumbered as 1 and m.
These changes are editorial and are acceptable.
- 13. Table 4.4-2 This table is revised to reflect the NPC notification and reporting requirements issued under Amendment No. 84 This is an editorial change and is acceptable.
14.
Section 4.6.1.1.a A footnote is added, consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications, to provide clarification of the containment 1
integrity verification requirements for penetrations inside containment.
This is acceptable.
In addition to the above changes, the licensee also proposed to delete surveillance requirement 4.5.1.1.d which requires verification, every 18
_ months, that the ECCS accumulator isolation valves open on a safety injection signal and a specific reactor coolant pressure signal.
In light of Branch Technical Positions ICSB 4 and 8, which include functional requirements associated with the accumulator interlock signals and isolation valves, it is our position that these surveillance requirements should be retained in the Technical Specifications to assure that the functional operability of the interlocks and valves is maintained.
Therefore, the staff will not act on this part of the amendment request until the licensee determines an apprrspriate course of action.
I 4
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment changes requirements with respect to installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as de'ined in 10 CFR Part 20, and involves changes in surveillance and reporting 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 comnent on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.??(c)(9) and (10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), nn 4
environmental impact statement or environmental P.ssessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have 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 (?) such
(
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the l
common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
4 Dated:
December 7, 1987 Principal Contributors:
L. Crocker, Reviewer F. Burrows, Reviewer P. Tam, Project Manager i
l
_