ML20011D400

Application for Amend to License DPR-40,revising Tech Spec Section 3.16 Re RHR Sys to Assure That Allowed Leakage Rate Does Not Adversely Affect Control Room Habitability

ML20011D400
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	12/20/1989
From:	OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20011D399	List: ML20011D400 ML20011D401
References
NUDOCS 8912270122
Download: ML20011D400 (5)

Text

- . . _ _ . , . . _ . . -

.L

,7  :'=

r

~-).-

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

)

Omaha Public Power District ) Docket No. 50-285=

(Fort Calhoun Station )

Unit No. 1) )

APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF OPERATING LICENSE Pursuant to Section.50.90 of the regulations of the. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-("the Commission"), Omaha Public Power District, holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-40, herewith requests that Section 3.16 of.the Technical Specifications set forth in Appendix A.to that License be amended to tssure that allowed leakage rate does not adversely affect control

' room habitability.

The proposed changes in Technical Specifications are discussed in Attachment A to this Application. - A discussion,- Justification and no Significant Hazards Consideration Analysis, which demonstrates that the proposed changes do not involve significant hazards considerations, is appended in: Attachment B. The proposed changes in specifications would not authorize any change'in the types or any increase in the amounts of efflur,its or a change in the authorized power level of the facility.

WHEREFORE, Applicant respectfully requests that Sections 3.16 of Appendix A to Facility Operating License ho. DPR-40 be amended in the form attached hereto as Attachment A.

{

3 8912270122 891220

.PDR AC9CK 05000285 P . PDC _ .

r-*

. e ,;,

i, A copy'of this Application, including its attachments, has been submitted to the Director - Nebraska State Division of Radiological Health, as required by 10 CFR 50.91.

OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT By Dkision' Manager Nuclear Operations Subscribed and sworn to before me this Jorn day of December, 1989.

V h0 m Notary eubisc

(/ ,

e- . , ,, ,,a reduTa%

.v7..._.4

j. , , t .-(e ,5 c:e..,'

. y .c :

r -

M 4 ,

9 0

e

.m:

h a

/

e ATTACHMENT A 9

3 s

i i

1 1

1 i

- t t

I

-m=d*-m a m m. - - . - .. . . . . . . . -

.. $$?

3.0 - S_URVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 3.16. Recirculation Heat Removal System integrity Testing Applicability-('

Applies to determination cf-the integrity of the sht:tdown ecoling system and associated components.

Objective To verify that the leakage from the recirculation heat renioval system '

components is within acceptable limits, b

Specifications

=-

(1)-a. The portion of the shutdown cooling system that is outside the containment shall be tested at 250 psig or a refueling interval.

[.- b. piping from valves HCV-383-3 and-HCV-383-4 to the discharge isolation valves of the safety injection pumps and containment spray: pumps shall-be hydrostatically tested at no less than 100 psig at the testing frequency specified in (1)a. above.

c. Visual inspection of the system's comoonents shall be per-formed at the frequency s eny significant leakage. pecified.in The leakage (1)a. shall above to uncover be measured by collection and weighing or by any-other equivalent method.

(2) a. . .The maximum allowable leakage from the recirculation heat Lremoval system's components (which include valve stems, flanges, and pump seals) shall not exceed one gallon per m_

minute, under the normal hydrostatic head from the SIRW tank.

b. Repairs shall be made as required to maintain leakage within the acceptable limits.

I Basis The limiting leakage rates from the shutdown cooling system are

" judgment values based primarily on assuring that the components could operate without mechanical failure for a period on the order of 200 days after a design basis accident. The test pressure (250

.c psig) achieved either by normal systera operation or by hydrostatic testing tiie system gives after an adequate a design basismargin over thegghest pressure within accident. Similarly, the

. hydrostatic test pressure for the. return lines from the contain-ment to the shutdown cooling system (100 psig) gives an adequate margin over the highest pressure within the lines after a design basis accident.

3-64 Amendment No. 97,122

. l

. , , . . . - , - -nm ~~~-~*~e - ~ ~ ' ' * *'*** ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' " ~ ~ ~~

.L ." ,

f2E.5ELAT .

3.0 SURVEILLANCE P.EQUIREMENTS 3.16 : Recirculation Heat- Removal System Integrity Testina (Continued)

A' shutdown cooling system leakage of one gpm will limit off-site

' exposures due to leakare to insignificant levels relative to those calculated for direct leakage from the containment in the design

~

basis accident.. The esfety injection system pump rooms-are i equipped with individual charcoal filters which are placed into 9h operation by meansLof switches in the cont'rol room., The radiation detectors in the auxiliary building exhaust duct are used to detect-high-radiation level. The one'gpm leak rate is suffi-ciently high to permit prompt detection and to allow for reason-able. leakage through the pump seals and valvc packings,'and yet small enough to be readily handled by the pumps and radioactive weste system. Leakage to the safety injection system '

sumps will be returned to the spent regenerant tanks. (gpp - ' room Addi-tional makeup water to the containment sump inventory can be readily accommodated via the charging pumps from either the SIRW tank 1or-the concentrated boric acid storage' tanks.

i

, In casesof failure to meet the acceptance criteria for leakage from the shutdown cooling system or the associated components, it

^

may be possible to effect repairs within a short time. If so L l 1s considered unnecessary and unjustified to shutdown the reactor i The times allowed for repairs are consistent with the times developed for other engineered safeguards components.

References (1) USAR, Section 9.3 (2) ' USAR, Section 6.2 1

l-wmena I

3-85 Amendment No. 97 a.,~.-__-...-.--...--.--...-... . --

-