ML17056A105
| ML17056A105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/29/1989 |
| From: | Slosson M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Burkhardt L NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| References | |
| TAC-71393, NUDOCS 8907140023 | |
| Download: ML17056A105 (6) | |
Text
June 29, 1989 Docket No. 50-220 DISTRIBUTION..
NRC 8
LOCAL PDRs PDI-1 Rdg Mr. Lawrence Burkhardt III SVarga Executive Vice President, Nuclear Operation BBoger Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation CVogan 301 Plainfield Road JJohnson
- Syracuse, New York 13212 THeek (4)
JCalvo
Dear Hr. Burkhardt:
.'RH/LFHB
SUBJECT:
BASES CHANGE FOR SECTIONS 3.3.7 AND,4.3.7 CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM'(TAC NO. 71393)
HSlosson RCapra OGC EJordan BGrimes ACRS (10)
DHagan WJones GPA/PA JKudrick By letter dated November 21, 1988, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation proposed a
change to the Bases for Sections 3.3.7 and 4.3.7, Containment Spray System, of the Nine Mile Point, Unit No.
1 Technical Specifications.
The change updates the method used to verify that, the drywell'and torus nozzles in the containment spray system are free from obstructions.
The current Bases states that air tests to determine flows to spray headers will be performed each operating cycle and compared with initial pre-operational air testing, verifying that piping and/or nozzles conditions hav'e not changed significantly.
The proposed Bases states that air tests to verify that drywell and torus spray nozzles and associated piping are free from obstr uctions will be performed each operating cycle.
This wording is consistent with the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
The licensee has indicated that this change was made in 1982 when the FSAR was originally updated.
The staff has reviewed your request and finds it appropriate to make the Bases consistent with current practices.
Based on the above, we find your request acceptable.
We have enclosed a copy of the revised Bases page 163.
This concludes the staff's action regarding TAC No. 71393.
S incerely, Original signed by Robert A. Capra for
Enclosure:
Bases page 163 Marylee H. Slosson, Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II cc w/enclosure:
See next page 8907i40023 890629
'P~
ADOCK 05000220 P
)CONTAINMENT SYSTEM 71393]
,p(~~<
Pu(
l~
WW
~
NAME :CVogan 0
W W<<W
~
DATE :6/ o/89 0
<<0
- HSlosson/bah ~fHele
>>8 WWWWWW
- 6/
///
- RCapra
~
WW W
- 6/<)/89
- $ 28 HO
&%W&
W OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Ik W
wh F
I, 'I If f
t I=
'F
~ R Jiff04 f
4' ll
)
'4
- fIF, I ~ f "I'fA,V$ 'F I WR k'4
'g V 'f ffgg'
'I V
A f vlf,t PWV f glt\\fhkl kvfkf~ Vh ~ ~
- If f
k I
I, )
W
'I k I FT tt\\
~ F F
IAVh F
ih fh 4 *fv R
hr J
Ih I
v tf R
'F ll Vt I v
I I
y F v' v
I, F'v I
~
~
' Ft, \\ f I
~ I I
(V
'J v
v I
fh 11
'I T
~ p
~
I I
= I,,
Mf I IV4V I'fv V
4 I
V Vg
~
~
h WF v
F F
k
Mr. L. Burkhardt III
.,Niagara Mohawk Power Coloration Nine Pofnt Nuclear Statfon, Unit No.
1 CC:
Mr. Troy 8. Conner, Jr., Esquire Conner 4 Wetterhahn Suite 1050
'.747 Pennsylvanfa
- Avenue, N. W.
k'ashfngton, 0.
C.
20006 Mr. Frank R. Church, Supervfsor Town of Scriba R.
D. g2
- Oswego, New York 13126 Mr. James L. Willis General Supt.-Nuclear Generation Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Post Office Box 32
- Lycomfng, New York 13093 resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Offfce Box 126
- Lycomfno, New York 13093 Mr. Gary 0. Wilson, Esgufre Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard Vest
- Syracuse, New York 13202 Regional Admfnfstrator, Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ceanission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Ms.
Donna Ross New York State Energy Office 2 Empire State Plaza 16th Floor
- Albany, New York 12223 Hr. Kfm Dahlberg Unit l Station Superintendent Nine Mfle Pofnt Nuclear Station Post Office Box 32
- Lycomfng, New York 13093 Mr. Peter E. Francisco, Lfcensfng Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 301 Plainfield Road
- Syracuse, New York 13212 Charlie Donaldson, Esoufre Assistant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, New York 10271 Mr. Paul D. Eddy State of New York Department of Public Service Power Dfvfsfon, System Operations 3 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223
J'
BASES. FOR 3.3.7 AND 4.3.7 CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM suppression chamber pool.
Taking into account the reduced steam condensation capability and increased suppression chamber vapor pressure, the raw water cooling would not be required for more than 20 minutes for initial suppression chamber temperatures up to llOF.
This assumes that all core spray systems fail.
Therefore, manual initiation of -the raw water system is acceptable.
Nearly all maintenance can be completed within a few days.
Infrequently, however, major maintenance might be required.
Replacement of principal system components could necessitate outages of more than 15 days.
In spite of the best efforts of the operator to. return equipment to service, some maintenance could require up to 6 months.
In conjunction with containment spray pump operation during each operating cycle, the raw water pumps and associated cooling system performance wi 11 be observed.
The containment spray system shall be capable of automatic initiation from simultaneous low-low reactor water level and high containment pressure.
The associated raw water cooling system shall be capable of manual actuation.
Operation of the containment spray system involves spraying water into the atmosphere of the containment.
Therefore, periodic system tests are not practical.
Instead separate testing of automatic containment spray pump startup wi 11 be performed during each operating cycle.
During pump operation, water will be recycled to the suppression chamber.
Also; air tests to verify that the drywell and torus spray nozzles and associated piping are free from obstructions will be performed each operating cycle.
Design features are discussed in Volume I, Section VII-B.2.0 (page VII-19*).
The valves in the containment spray system are normally open and are not required to operate when the system is called upon to operate.
The test interval between operating cycle results in a system failure probability of 1. 1 x 10-6 (Fifth Supplement, page 115*) and is consistent with practical considerations.
Pump operability wi 11 be demonstrated on a more frequent basis and will provide,a"more reliable system.
The intent of Specification 3.3.7f.is to allow control rod drive maintenance and instrument replacement at the time that the. suppression chamber is unwatered and to perform normal fuel movement activities in the refuel mode with an unwatered suppression chamber.
- FSAR Amendment No.
83 (0119S)
Revised by NRC letter dated 6/29/89 163
9'