ML20245G236
| ML20245G236 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245G235 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906290063 | |
| Download: ML20245G236 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ - _ - -_ _ _ _ _ -.
- g UNITED STATES y
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
cAsWNGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR F<EGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.
25 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-39 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-352
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 14, 1988, Philadelphia Electric Company (the licensee) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-39 for the Limerick Generating Station, Unit 1.
The proposed amendment would change the Unit 1 Technical Specifications (TSs) to increase the minimum level :.f water that must be maintained in the spray pond to support operation of Unit 2.
2.0 DISCUSSION At the Limerick site, there is a large spray pond located just north of the two cooling towers on the hill above the plant. The spray pond is the ultimate heat sink (VHS) for the plant. The spray pond serves the safety-related functions of providing cooling water and acting as a heat sink for the Emergency (Service Water (ESW) system and the Residual Heat Removal Service Water RHRSW) system during accident conditions. The UHS is designed to provide sufficient cooling water to the ESW and RHRSW systems, permitting simultaneous safe shutdown and cooldown of both units, and maintaining them in a safe shutdown condition. Further system description, design and operation information can be found in the Limerick Generating Station Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Section 9.2.6.
Iortwo-unitoperalion,theminimumvolumeofwaterwhichmustbe 6
miintained in the spray pond is 28.92 x 10 gallons. Given the size and shepe of the spray pond, this volume of water will be available if the water level is maintained at 250'10" (above mean sea level).
The analysis supporting 250'10" is presented in FSAR Section 9.2.6 and demonstrates the alility of the spray pond to provide a 30-day cooling supply below the muimum pond temperature limit without make-up or blowdown, considering the design basis heat input and meteorological conditions.
The NRC approval of the spray pond is set forth in SER Section 9.2.5 (NUREG 0991) and Supplements 3 and 4 For one-unit operation, the TS limit was set to 250'0", a value lower than what is required for two-unit operation to avoid the unnecessary operating restrictions which may result from having to maintain an excess spray pond volume. Construction of Limerick Unit 2 is nearing completion. Once Unit 2 is operating, the 8906290063 890616
!?
PDR ADOCK 05000352i P
PNU p
. minimum water level that must be maintained in the spray pond has to be increased to the level approved for two-unit operation.
The change to the TSs proposed by the licensee is to increase the minimum water level in the TSs from the present 250'0" to 250'10". This change would not be required and, thus, would not go into effect until Limerick Unit 2 is issued an operating license.
3.0 EVALUATION Aspraypondlevelof250fl0"reflectstheminimumtwounitvolume requirement of 28.92 x 10 gallons.
The analysis supporting 250'10" is presented in FSAR Section 9.2.6 and demonstrates the ability of the spray pond to provide a 30-day cooling supply below the maximum pond temperature limit without make-up or blowdown, consideing the design basis heat input and meteorological conditions. The NRC previously reviewedandapprovedthisinSERsection9.2.5(NUREG0991)and Supplements 3 and 4 For one unit operation, the Technical Specification limit was set at a value lower than what is required for two unit operation to avoid the unnecessary operating restrictions which might result from having to maintain an excess spray pond volume.
The increase in pond level to meet the proposed TS minimum level will not affect the design flood calculation. The original spray pond maximum water elevation calculations were done modelling the spray pond full to its spillway elevation (251'0"), then hdding a probable maximum i
precipitation event, causing water to spill from the emergency spillway.
Therefore, this change will not adversely affect safety.
The minimum level of 250'10" was previously reviewed by the staff and determined to comply with all the design requirements of the Standard Review Plan. The proposed change to the TSs is to reflect what the staff has approved for two unit operation and is acceptable.
4.0 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 nas 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 l
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 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 nor environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
e O
~ ~
I 5.0. CONCLUSION The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards. consideration which was published in the Federal Recister (54 FR 7640) on February 22, 1989.and consulted with the state of Pennsylvania. No public comments were received and-the State of Pennsylvania did not have any comments.
The staff has 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' (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'the security nor to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Dick Clark Dated: June 16, 1989 e