ML17263A655

Application for Amend to License DPR-18,increasing Allowable Reactor Coolant Activity Levels to Improved TS (NUREG-1431)

ML17263A655
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	05/23/1994
From:	MECREDY R C ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML17263A656	List: ML17263A655 ML17263A658 ML17309A545
References
RTR-NUREG-1431 NUDOCS 9405310167
Download: ML17263A655 (13)

Text

UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORY COMMISSION IntheMatterof))Rochester GasandElectricCorporation

)(R.E.GinnaNuclearPowerPlant)))DocketNo.50-244APPLICATION FORAMENDMENT TOOPERATING LICENSEPursuanttoSection50.90oftheregulations oftheU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission (the"Commission"

),Rochester GasandElectricCorporation

("RG&E"),

holderofFacilityOperating LicenseNo.DPR-18,herebyrequeststhattheTechnical Specifications setforthinAppendixAtothatlicensebeamended.ThisrequestforchangeinTechnical Specifications istoincreaseallowable reactorcoolantactivitylevelstotheImprovedTechnical Specification values(NUREG-1431).

Adescription oftheamendment request,necessary background information, justification oftherequested change,safety'valuation andnosignificant hazardsandenvironmental considerations areprovidedinAttachment A.Amarkedupcopyofthecurrent.GinnaStationTechnical Specifications whichshowstherequested changeissetforthinAttachment B.TheproposedrevisedTechnical Specifications areprovidedinAttachment C.Thesechangesareconsistent withWestinghouse ImprovedTechnical Specifications (NUREG1431)3.4.16.a,b andfigure3.4.16-1.

94053iOih7 940523PDRADOCK05000244.P'.,PDR

WHEREFORE, Applicant respectfully requeststhatAppendixAtoFacilityOperating LicenseNo.DPR-18beamendedintheformattachedheretoasAttachment C.Rochester GasandElectricCorporation ByRobertC.MecredyVicePresident GinnaNuclearProduction Subscribed andsworntobeforemeonthis23rddayofMay,1994.

ATTACHMENT AR.E.GINNAPOWERPLANTLICENSEAMENDMENT REQUESTTECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 3.1.4,MAXIMUMCOOLANTACTIVITYThisattachment providesadescription oftheamendment requestandnecessary justification fortheproposedchanges.Theattachment isdividedintosevensectionsasfollows.SectionAidentifies allchangestothecurrentGinnaStationTechnical Specifications whileSectionBprovidesthebackground andhistoryassociated withthechangesbeingrequested.

SectionCprovidesdetailedjustification fortheproposedchangesincluding acomparison toImprovedTechnical Specifications asapplicable.

Asafetyevaluation, significant hazardsconsideration evaluation, andenvironmental consideration oftherequested changesareprovidedinSectionsD,E,andF,respectively.

SectionGlistsallreferences usedinthisattachment.

A.Description ofAmendment RequestThisLicenseAmendment Request(LAR)proposestoreviseGinnaStationTechnical Specifications 3.1.4.1.a, 3.1.4.1.b, figure3.1.4-1andassociated Basesasfollows:1.Technical Specification 3.1.4.1.a i.Therequirement ischangedto"Thetotalspecificactivityofthereactorcoolantshallnotexceed100/EpCi/gm,..."

ii.Thebasesarerevisedtochangethereferenced analysis(Reference 3)to"UFSARSection15.'6.3."

2.Technical Specification 3.1.4.1.b i.Therequirement isrevisedto"TheI-131doseequivalent oftheiodineactivityinthereactorcoolantshallnotexceed1.0pCi/gm."ii.Thebasesarerevisedtochangethereferenced analysis(Reference 3)to"UFSARSection15.6.3."3.Technical Specification Figure3.1.4-1i.Theallowable operation regionismodifiedconsistent withImprovedTechnical Specifications (seeAttachments BandCforrevisedfigure).ii.Thebasesarerevisedtochangethereferenced analysis(Reference 3)to"UFSARSection15.6.3."B~Background HistoryPriortotheJanuary25,1982,steamgenerator tuberuptureeventatGinnaStation,reactorcoolantactivitylimitswerebasedontheoriginal(1969)steamgenerator tuberuptureanalysisfortheGinnaStation.TheCommission's reviewofthe1982tuberuptureincident resulteintherequirement foraresedsteamgenerator tuberuptureanalysis.

Thestaffrequiredthatthisbecompleted withinsixmonthsoftheplantrestart(NUREG-0916,Section9.0),andimposedreducedallowable activitylevelsintheinterim(Amendment No.51toProvisional Operating LicenseNo.DPR-18,May22,1982).Aboundinganalysisusingthesereducedallowable activitylevelswasperformed inordertosatisfythesixmonthrequirement, whileamoredetailedanalysissupporting thestandardtechnical specification valueswouldfollow.'he methodology forthisnewanalysis(WCAP-10698-P-A) wassubmitted andapprovedbytheCommission for'useon'estinghouse PWRsprovidedfiveplantspecificinputswereverifiedtobeconsistent withtheassumptions inthemethodology (Reference a).RG&Ehascompleted thisverification, andtherefore intendstoupdateitsanalysisofrecordforthesteamgenerator tuberupturetoreflectuseofthisnewmethodology (UFSARSection15.6.3).ThisnewanalysissupportstheactivitylimitsproposedinthisAmendment.

2.HardwareModifications ThisLARinvolvesnohardwarechangestoGinnaStation.Justification ThisproposedAmendment imposesreactorcoolantactivitylimitsconsistent withNUREG-1431, "Westinghouse StandardTechnical Specifications."

Theapplicability oftheselimitsforGinnaStationareestablished byaplantspecificsteamgenerator tuberuptureandradiological consequences

analysis, WCAP-11668, whichisconsistent withtheapprovedmethodology ofWCAP-10698-P-A foranalysisofsteamgenerator tuberupturetransients.

Allcontingencies forusageofWCAP-10698-P-A methodology (Reference a)havebeensatisfied forGinnaStationasdescribed insectionDbelow.SafetyEvaluation Potential environmental consequences ofasteamgenerator tuberuptureeventattheR.E.Ginnanuclearpowerplanthavebeenevaluated toverifythattheImprovedTechnical Specification limitonprimarycoolantactivityisadequateforGinna.'Thisanalysis, WCAP-11668 (attached) isconsistent withthemethodology described inWCAP-10698-P-A.

TheCommission requiresthatfivecontingencies bemetinordertousethismethodology, specifically:

1~Demonstration thatcriticaloperatoractiontimesusedintheanalysisarerealistic andconsistent withthoseobservedduringsimulator exercises.

2~3~AsitespecificSteamGenerator TubeRuptureradiological offsiteconsequence analysis.

Astructural analysisofthemainsteamlinesdemonstrating adequacyunderwater-filled conitions.4~Alistofsystems,components, andinstrumentation creditedforaccidentmitigation andthespecified safetygradeforeach.5.Acomparison oftheplanttothe"bounding plant"usedinWCAP-10698.

Compliance withthosecontingencies forGinnaStationhasbeensatisfied andisdescribed below.1~Demonstration thatcriticaloperatoractiontimesusedintheanalysisarerealistic andconsistent withthoseobservedduringsimulator exercises.

DuringtheweekofAugust19through23,1991,simulator exercises wereperformed attheGinnaStationsimulator toverifytheassumptions usedforbothanalysescasespresented inWCAP-11668.

Theresultsaretabulated below.CASE1,INTACTSGPORVFAILSCLOSEDOPERATORACTION1.Recognize andIsolateRupturedSG2.Recognize andlocallyopenintactSGPORVopen3.Terminate SI4.Terminate breakflowWCAP11668TIME(SEC)600180427983428SIMULATOR TIME(SEC)4231460*19162541*Thesimulator exerciseimposeda15min.delayfromwhentheoperatoridentified thefailedPORVtowhenthePORVwaslocallyopenedtoaccountforoperatoractionsoutsidethecontrolroomwhichcouldnotbeverifiedonthesimulator.

Thisdelayisconsistent withtheassumptions inWCAP-11668.

Simulation oftheseactionsintheactualplanthavedemonstrated thatthesetimesareconservative.

.<5.%e)J CASE2RUPTUREDSGPORVFAILSOPENOPERATORACTION1.RupturedSGIsolated2.Recognize andLocallyIsolateFailedPORV3.Terminate SI4.Terminate BreakFlowWCAP-11668 TIME(SEC)652155830663438SIMULATOR TIME(SEC)2141116*20732424*Thesimulator exerciseimposeda15min.delayfromwhentheoperatoridentified thefailedPORVtowhenthePORVwaslocallyisolatedtoaccountforoperatoractionsoutsidethecontrolroomwhichcouldnotbeverifiedonthesimulator.

Thisdelayisconsistent withtheassumptions inWCAP-11668.

Simulation oftheseactionsintheactualplanthavedemonstrated thatthesetimesareconservative.

Thesesimulator exercises demonstrate thatthecriticaloperatoractiontimesassumedinWCAP-11668 arerealistic andconservative andtherefore thiscontingency issatisfied.

ProvideasitespecificSteamGenerator TubeRuptureradiological offsiteconsequences analysis.

WCAP-11668, providedwiththisLARprovidesaGinnasitespecificSteamGenerator TubeRuptureradiation offsiteconsequences

analysis, andtherefore, thiscontingency issatisfied.

Provideastructural analysisofthemainsteamlinesdemonstrating adequacyunderwater-filled conditions.

PriortorestartofGinnaStationfollowing theJanuary25,1982,tuberuptureincident, amainsteamlinestructural analysisunderwater-filled conditions wasperformed andprovidedtotheCommission.

Theacceptability ofthisanalysisisdocumented inthere@tartSER(NUREG-0916(

section6.0.Therefore, thiscontingency ismet.Alistofsystems,components, andinstrumentation creditedforaccidentmitigation andthespecified safetygradeforeach.InresponsetoNUREG-0737, Supplement 1Item6.2,RG&Ehasprovidedpostaccidentinstrumentation qualification information.

Acomprehensive tablelistingthecreditedequipment, itsqualification, andallotherattributes listedinRegulatory Guide1.97,revision3,wasprovidedtotheNRCbyletterR.MecredytoA.Johnson"Emergency cn ResponseCapability",

datedOctober4,1992.AnSERfor~uthissubmittal wasprovidedtoRGGEbyletterA.JohnsontoR.Mecredy,"Emergency ResponseCapability,"

datedFebruary24,1993.Therefore, thiscontingency hasbeensatisfied.

Acomparison oftheplanttothe"bounding plant"usedinWCAP-10698.

/Plantparameters forthereference plantusedinWCAP-10698-P-A areprovidedinTable4.3-3oftheWCAP.WCAP-11668,theGinnaspecificanalysis, utilizesGinnaspecificparameters.

AllGinnaspecificparameters fallwithintheboundsoftheparameters listedinWCAP-10698-P-Aasdetailedbelow:PLANTPARAMETER RCSPressure, siaPressurizer WaterVolume,ft~SGSecondary Mass,ibmReactorTripDelay,secTurbineTripDelay,secPressurizer PressureforSI,siaPressurizer PressureforReactorTrip,psiaSGRelievePressure, psiaSISPumpDelay,secAFWDelay,secAFWFlowRate,gpmAFWTemerature,4FfDecayHeatWCAP-10698 BASECASE22507501077592.00.31864196011001260183940100'tANS,WCAP-10698 CONSERVATIVE 22208681185350.00.01889198510500.00.01839120120%ANSWCAP-11668 GINNA22208001032562.00.31750190210600.00.0800120120%ANSItshouldbenotedthatthemethodology ofWCAP-10698-P-A providesabenchmark againstthe1982Ginnatuberuptureincident, and,therefore, itsapplicability toGinnaisexplicit.

Therefore, thiscontingency issatisfied.

Basedontheabove,themethodology described inWCAP-10698-P-A canbeappliedtoGinna.WCAP-11668 (enclosed) providestheresultsofthisapplication, anddemonstrates theacceptability ofImprovedTechnical Specification coolantactivitylimitsforGinna.Therefore, theproposedamendment doesnotinvolveanunreviewed safetyquestionandwillnotadversely affectorendangerthehealthandsafetyofthegeneralpublic.

E.Significant zardsConsideration EvaluaionTheproposedchanges~totheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications donotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdiscussed below:Operation ofGinnaStationinaccordance withtheproposedchangesdoesnotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Theproposedchangesdonotaffectanyaccidentinitiators andtherefore theprobability ofanyaccidentisnotincreased.

Consequences ofthechangesareanalyzedandshownacceptable intheenclosedanalysis, WCAP-11668, SectionIII.2~Operation ofGinnaStationinaccordance withtheproposedchangesdoesnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Theproposedchangesinvolvenophysicalmodifications totheplant;therefore, nonewaccidentcanbepostulated.

3~Operation ofGinnaStationinaccordance withtheproposedchangesdoesnotinvolveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety,asnomarginofsafetyisreducedbytheproposedchanges,asshowninWCAP-11668.

Basedupontheaboveinformation, ithasbeendetermined thattheproposedchangestotheGinnaStationTechnical Specifications donotinvolveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated, doesnotcreatethepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentpreviously evaluated, anddoesnotinvolveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Therefore, itisconcluded thattheproposedchangesmeettherequirements of10CFR50.92(c)anddonotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration.

F.Environmental Consideration RGGEhasevaluated theproposedchangesanddetermined that:1.Thechangesdonotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdocumented inSectionEabove;2~Thechangesdonotinvolveasignificant changeinthetypesorsignificant increaseintheamountsofanyeffluents thatmaybereleasedoffsiteasdemonstrated intheenclosedanalysis, WCAP11668.3.Thechangesdonotinvolveasignificant increaseinindividual orcumulative occupational radiation exposuresincethechangedoesnotaffectallowable limits.Accordingly, theproposedchangesmeettheeligibility criteriaforcategorical exclusion setforthin10CFR

.00<<4l 51.22(c)(9).Therefore, pursuantto10CFR51.22(h),

anenvironmental assessment oftheproposedchangesisnotrequired.

References (a):NRCLetter,C.RossitoA.Ladieu(WOG),"Acceptance forReferencing ofLicensing TopicalReportWCAP-10698...",

March30,1987.(b):NUREG-0916, "SafetyEvaluation ReportRelatedtotheRestartofR.E.GinnaNuclearPowerPlant",May1982.4(c):RG&ELetter,R.MecredytoA.Johnson(NRC),"Emergency ResponseCapability...",

October14,1992.(d):NRCLetter,A.JohnsontoR.Mecredy(RGGE),Emergency ResponseCapability

-Conformance toRegulatory Guide1.97,revision3",February24,1993.