ML20141J567

Proposed Tech Specs Surveillance Requirement 4.7.1.3.c Re Ultimate Heat Sink by Deletion of Sediment Deposition Insp in Lake Screen House

ML20141J567
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	08/12/1997
From:	COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20141J558	List: ML20141J552 ML20141J567
References
NUDOCS 9708200100
Download: ML20141J567 (7)

Text

,u . . . . * .A,A_._A4 -____m..x.mM _.A_> -,s.Aa,4.e__4, ,wsmrA,.A_A2__m_ s _24hMa _. 4 _22.. e a.--,a A m- 4_ws. -sufa%.a_4.h.e-.sA# ad d u- _ ,_A A%LAh44m ATTACHMENT B PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 1

LICENSEffECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS NPF-11 NPF-18 3/4 7-3 3/4 7 3 i

l N

i 4

j 1

4 B-1 9708200100 970812 PDR ADOCK 05000373 P PDR

P1NfT SYSTEMS ',' .

ULTIMATE HEAT SINK -

LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.7.1.3 The CSCS pond shall be OPERABLE.

APPLICABILITY: OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and *.

. With the CSC5 pond inoperable, restore the pond to OPERABLE status n 90 days or:

< a. -

In OPERATIONAL CONDITION 1 2 or 3.-be in at least HOT SHUTDOWN withinthenext12hoursan,dInCOLDSHUTDOWNwithinthefollowing 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. '

b. In OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4, 5 or 8, declare the RHRSW system.and _. _,

the diesel generator cooling w,ater system inoperable and take the. -

ACTION requtred by Specifications 3.7.1.1 and 3.7.1.2.

~ ~

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.7.1.3 The CSCS pond shall be determined OPERABLE at least once per

• 18 months by determining that:

a. No* sediment deposition in excess of 1.5-foot has occurred in the .

intake fiume or in the CSCS pond as determined by a. series of sounding cross-sections compared to as-built soundings.

b. The pond bottom elevation is less than or equal to 686.5 feet, c.Sedimentdepositionanywherewithinthelakescreenhousebehindthe bargrill is not greater than one foot in thickness.

"When handling irradiated fuel in the secondary containment, t

G e

4 -

e'

^

LA 5ALLE - UNIT 1 3/4 7-3

. .. .. e,0.; .i. * * . '

1 W SYSTEM -

ULTimTE MAT IM . . . .

LDUI1!lBJlDlBIIl0N POR OPERATION

~~

' ~' ~~ " ~~

3.7.L3 The CSCS pond shall be OPERABLL APPLICABIMTY: OPERAT10mL Comm051, 2, 3, 4, 5, and *.

With the CSCS pond insperehle, restore the pond to OPERABLE status

• n 90 days or:

a. In OPERATIC E L (3 5 m 0N 1, 2 or 3, be in at least NOT SWTDOW withinthenext12hoursandInCOLDSHUTDOWNwithinthefollowing 34 hours3.935185e-4 days <br />0.00944 hours <br />5.621693e-5 weeks <br />1.2937e-5 months <br />. .

h. In OPERATIomL Comm0N 4, 5, or 8, declare the RHRSW systas and the diesel genesster coeltag water system insperable and take the 4

ACTION regt red.by Specificettens 3.7.1.1 and 3.7.L1. . .

SUNYtILIANCE REDuitserfs 4.7.L3 The CSCS pond shal1 he detenrined OPERABLE at least once per la months by deterstains that:

a. No eediaant deposition in excess of L5 foot has accurred in the "

intaka fluss er in the CSCE pont as estermined by a series of eeunding cross-sections campared to as-butit soundings.

b. The pond bottaa elevation is less than er equal to 886.5 feet.

. c. Sediment deposition anywhere within the laka screenhouse behind the '

hergr111 te not grooter then one feet in thickness.

4 LA SALLE - UNIT 2 3/4 7-3 l

l i -

4 ATTACHMENT C j .

SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION l Summarv of the Proposed Technical Specification Channesl -

, Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed), LaSalle County Station (LaSalle) Unit i

1 and Unit 2 Technical Specification (TS) Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.7.1.3.c requires that every 18 months all areas within the lake screenhouse behind the bargrill be inspected to ensure that sediment has not been deposited to a depth

greater than 12 inches. LaSalle proposes to delete SR 4.7.1.3.c from LaSalle

Unit i ard Unit 2 Technical Specifications and control the accumulation of i- sediment in the lake screenhouse under the Service Water Performance i- Monitoring Program. The surveillance requirement is not a part of Standard TS l- and the Service Water Performance Monitoring Program is more suited for this l type of inspectiontwork. This program is in accordance with Generic Letter l 89 13.

4 l

l Evaluation of for a Significant Hazards Co0_ sideration 1

Comed has evaluated the proposed TS Amendment and determined that it does

not represent a significant hazards consideration. Based on the criteria for

defining a signlficant hazards consideration established in 10 CFR 50.92,

[ operation of LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 in accordance with the i proposed amendment will not:

i i 1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an j accident previously evaluated because:-

• i I Surveillance's to fully verify the Ultimate Heat Sink contains enough water to perform its design function will continue. All cleanliness issues -

associated with ensuring operability.of Core Standby Cooling System - ,

Equipment Cooling Water System (CSCS ECWS) equipment will be '

[_ performed under the Service Water Performance Monitoring Program, i which meets GL 89-13 recommended actions. By performing these

!- inspections per GL 8913, LaSalle will ensure that there is no build up of

sediment, which could hinder or Impede the design operation of any

safety or non safety related equipment which takes a suction from the 4

service water tunnel. Based on the nature of sediment, where it collects, and system design, the CSCS ECWS will be available if called upon or _

started to respond in case of an accident for equipment cooling and long l term coolirsg.

4

) C-1 i

i i

.n -a ,n n ,,,,, n .- - ,,,--.,.~.-,n., ....,--,,+,,,n en,,,---- . . , - , , ,_. ,.- - - - _~v,+.,, ,=.n ,.,-

1- .

l . .

i ATTACHMENT C SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION I i

At no time, during approximately fourteen years of LaSalle operation, has

} sediment built up or accumulated either in front of the inlet to the CSCS i cooling water screen bypass supply line or the six 36-inch normal tunnel  !

! supply lines in such a manner that the flow of water through these lines

! could have been reduced or blocked. Instead, loose sediment collects in j quiescent areas near the traveling screens, the north end of the Service j Water Tunnel, under the outlets of the 36-inch normal tunnel supply lines

[ In the service water tunnel, and downstream of the butterfly isolation i - valve in the 54 inch CSCS cooling water screen bypass supply line. The

! sediment that collects in the service water tunnel does not build up in a j manner such that CSCS-ECWS, non essential station service water, or fire pump suctions from the tunnel are affected, based on inspections since ,

l 1992.

i l The CSCS equipment cooling bppass valve,0E12-F300, is the manual

butterfly valve in the CSCS cooling water screen bypass supply line. The i bypass valve is being added to the ASME Section XI inservice Testing l Program to cycle the valve quarterly. This valve cycling will help maintain i sediment level in the bypass line at a low level due to flow through the l line while the valve is not fully closed and thus assure the bypass line i remains available. The flow is created due to the differential pressure

!. across the circulating water traveling screens with circulating water j pumps in operation.

l Therefore, neither essential nor non-essential service water will be lost i due to sediment. Neither the probability nor the consequences cf an j accident are increased by the deletion of SR 4.7.1.3.c.

2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any

. accident previously evaluated because:

i L Inspections for sedimentation will continue to be required by LaSalle's l l Service Water System Performance Monitoring Program per GL 89-13, to l  : ensure continued operability of Core Standby Cooling System-Equipment "

l Cooling Water System (CSCS-ECWS). The Ultimate Heat Sink operability L requires assurance of a specific volume of water to provide cooling for at

[ least 30 days for long term cooling following an accident. The public will be protected by the safety analysis in place by the fact that the safety and j non-safety related equipment which take a suction from the service water i

C-2 i

l .

ATTACHMENT C SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION tunnel will not be impaired by sediment. Therefore, there will be no possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3) Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety because:

l The Ultimate Heat Sink continues to be demonstrated Operable by verifying a sufficient volume of water per TS SR 4.7.1.3.a and 4.7.1.3.b.

Equipment operability will still be required per Technical Specifications 314.7.1.1 and 3/4.7.1.2 for the CSCS-ECWS systems. Sedimentation in the lake screenhouse is a maintenance / cleanliness issue addressed by the LaSalle Service Water Performance Monitoring Program. The program ensures equipment operability by both inspection for and removal of sedimentation and chemical control with a blocide to limit the growth of biological material and silt dispersant to help keep silt in the flow stream from coagulating. Therefore, there is minimal or no reduction in the margin of safety due to the deletion of this surveillance requirement.

Guidance has been provided in " Final Procedures and Standards on No Significant Hazards Considerations," Final Rule,51 FR 7744, for the application of standards to license change requests for determination of the existence of significant hazards considerations. This document provides examples of

, amendments which are and are not considered likely to involve significant hazards considerations. These proposed amendments most closely fit the example of a change which may either result in some increase to the probability or consequences of a previously analyzed accident or may reduce in some way a safety margin, but where the results of the change are clearly within all acceptable criteria with respect to the system or component specified in the Standard Review Plan.

This proposed amendment does not involve a significant relaxation of the

riteria used to establish safety limits, a significant relaxation of the bases for the limiting safety system settings or a significant relaxation of the bases for the limiting conditions for operations. Therefore, based on the guidance provided in the Federal Register and the criteria established in 10 CFR 50.92(c), the proposed change does not constitute a significant hazards consideration.

C-3

ATTACHMENT D ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT Commonwealth Edison has evaluated the proposed amendment against the criteria for identification of licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessment in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51.21. It has been determined that the proposed changes meet the criteria for categorical exclusion as provided for under 10 CFR Part 51.22(c)(9). This conclusion has been determined because the changes requested do not pose significant hazards considerations or da r.ot involve a significant increase in the amounts, and no significant changes in the types of any effluents that may be released off-site. Additionally, this request does not involve a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

.