ML19327B842
| ML19327B842 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19327B840 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8911140045 | |
| Download: ML19327B842 (3) | |
Text
. _ - -. - -
..sk L%TE D ST ATEs
-[
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION se r
\\,.....,)
hAsmwatow. o. c. mss
$AFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.146 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-66 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY UNIO EDI50N CwrANT PENN5TLVANIA rowtR cerANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-334 INTRODUCTION By letter dated September 22, 1989 Duquesne Light Company (the licensee actingasagentfortheaboveuti1Ities)submittedare hith ou! EeNw ISINIeb1ks N$ kNen{eh h& quest to amend Table "I*
D15CUS$10N AND EVALUATION The licensee proposed to revise Table 3.01, " Containment Penetrations" to remove containment isolation valve 51-91 listed for penetration 1131-A.
51 g1 is installed in a 1-inch line that bypasses the Doron Injection Tank (BIT). Prior to Amendment 71, the BIT was maintained at a boron concentration of 20 valves,000 ppm. The safety injection piping downstream of the BIT isolation is not heat traced or insulated, therefore, the l" BIT bypass piping was used to flush this downstream piping after a safety injection actuation or a functional test. The flushing was needed to ensure the residual boron concentration downstream of the BIT was sufficiently diluted to preclude boron precipitation and clogging of the pipe.
Amendment No. 71 reduced the required BIT boron concentration to 2,000 ppm so that flushing the downstream piping is no longer required. Hence the bypass line is no longed needeo as a result of Amendment No. 71.
Removal of this valve from Table 3.6 1 would allow cutting the piping and welding caps on the ends of the pipe stubs that will remain attached to the safety injection piping.
This will remove the major portion of the PIT bypass piping and eliminate $1-91 as a containment isolation valve. The licensee stated that the pipe caps l
l installed on the pipe stubs attached to the safety injection piping will be welded in place, and will be subject to periodic examination and test. We ag.ree that the caps will provide the required isolation capability.
Furthermore, we conclude that elimination of the bypass line and associated valve 51-91 has no affect on previous accident analyses. There are actually i
j additional benefits to be gained:
(1) the piping configuration that can lead l
b 34 E
P PDC J
- i to the thermal stress incidence as described in Bulletin 88-08 can be eliminated, (2) the costs associated with Type C testing cf valve $1-91 can be avoided, and (3) the occupational exposure associated with Type C testing of the valve can be avoided.
The licensee committed to revise Updated FSAR Section 5.3.3.1 to reflect the removal of valve $1 91.
We find the proposed design change, and Technicel Specification change (Table 3.6-1) acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment changes 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. We have determined that the amendment involves no signif-icant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluerts that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
We have 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 categoricalexclusionsetIorthin10CFR51.22(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.
CONCLUSION We have concluded based en the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonabie 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 (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defen,se and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: November 2,1939 Principal Contributor: Peter S. Tam i
_ ~
g
<h.
F-DATED: November 2, 1989 f.
AMENDMENT NO. 146 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-66 y
hhhh"*
RC & Local PDR Plant File S.Yarga(14E4)
B.Boger(14A2)
J. Stolz S. Norris l
P. Tam OGC D.Hagan(MNBB3302)
E. Jordan (MNBB3302)
B. Grimes (9A2) f T. Meek (4 P-130A))
l (P1-137 i
W. Jones J. Calvo 11F23)
ACRS(10)
GPA/PA ARM /LFMB cc: Licensee / Applicant Service List i
I t
P