ML20237H478
| ML20237H478 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237H469 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8709030287 | |
| Download: ML20237H478 (3) | |
Text
a goM8cg'o UNITED STATES l'
Ig g
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- %...../
SAFE'iY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 9 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-57 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION l
DOCKET NO. 50-354 l
l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
l l
By letter dated April 30, 1987, Public Service Electric & Gas Company l
(the licensee) requested an amerdment to Facility Operating License No.
l NPF-57 for the Hope Creek Generating Station. The proposed amondeent l
would modify the Technical Specifications (TSs) to increase the minimum l
critical power ratio (MCPR) limits provided in Figure 3.2.3-1 fer operable i
end-of-cycle (EOC) recirculation pump trip (RPT) and main turbine bypass systems. The change reflects a reanalysis of the MCPR limit using the measured recirculation flow coastdown.
During the power ascension test program, the recirculation flow coastdown was found to be slower than 4
l assumed in the original MCPR analysis.
Because the slower flow coastdown l
l provides less core voiding than the previously assumed flow coastdown, it j
l was determined that the current MCPR limits for operable E0C-RPT and main l
turbine bypass systems were nonconservative.
Continued operation of the i
reactor, at that time, was made possible 1) by issuance of a TS change on an emergency basis (Amendment No. I to the license) that provided MPCR limits for operation with an inoperable E0C-RPT system, and modified the TS Action Statemerts to allow operation of the reactor with an inoperable l
EOC-RPT system and 2) by declaring the E0C-RPT system inoperable.
l The licensee-proposed changes to increase the MCPR limits to reflect the measured recirculation flow coastdown will allow operation of the I
reactor without declaring the E0C-RPT system inoperable.
I 2.0 EVALUATION l
The effect of the E0C-RPT is a neoative reactivity insertion via rapid l
void fomation which results when the tripped recirculation pumps coast down. This negative reactivity tends to offset the positive reactivity l
resulting from void collapse during pressurization transients. The E0C-RPT function is particularly important at the end of cycle when Je-activity characteristics are least favorable. The operability of the EOC-9 T has no significant impact for non-pressurization events and does not affect LOCA analyses.
I 8709030287 070825 PDR ADOCK 05000354 l
P PDR
t..
6 I
2-1 I
The licensee indicated that the limiting pressurization transients (load rejection without bypass and feedwater controller failure) have been re-analyzed by General Electric Company assuming a recirculation pump flow coastdown that bounds (is slower than) the flow coastdown measured during the power ascension test program. The analysis was performed using the ODYN code which has been approved by the staff..The results show that the operating limit MCPR will vary from 1.20 to.1.23 depending upon
(
measured scram times.
The current MCPR limits, which are based on the I
originally assumed flow.coastdown (known.to be slightly nonconservative),
are constant limits of 1.20 for all values of tau (scram times). The TS change resulting from the use of a slower flow coastdown in the analysis-1 is an increase in the MCPR limit'for teu greater than zero, linearly with increasing tau, with a mcximum MCPR of 1.23 for tau equals-1. The i
licensee has also indicated that the analysis performed.is specific to i
Hope Creek, and except for the use of a longer RPT delay to bound the 1
slower flow coastdown... thy assumptions used are the same as those used in c
the previously approved Hope Creek FSAR Chapter 15 licensing analyses, thus they incorporate the results of plant specific transient analyses which have been performed using an approved model.
On the basis of the above discussion, the staff concludes that the proposed changes to the MCPR limits are acceptable.
1
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the..
installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the-amendnent 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 i
issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment 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.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission made a proposed detennination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in-the Federal Register (52 FR 24557) on July 1, 1987 and consulted with the State of New Jersey. No public coments were received and the State of New Jersey did not have any coments.
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussad 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, e
4 1
1! ' l 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 nor to the health and-safety of-the public.
Principal Contributor:
G. Rivenbark Dated:- August 25, 1987
,i k
i
%