ML17146A949
| ML17146A949 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1987 |
| From: | Butler W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Butcher E, Hodges W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8709180299 | |
| Download: ML17146A949 (8) | |
Text
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
ptember 15I 1987 Wayne Hodges, Chief Reactor Systems Branch Division of Engineering and Systems Technology Edward Butcher, Chief f
Technical Specifications Branch Division of Operational Event Assessment Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II PENNSYLVANIA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY (PPAL)
REQUEST RE:
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME VENT AND DRAIN VALVE SURVEILLANCE The subject Technical Specifications change request for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES),
Units 1 and 2 was reviewed by the Region I technical staff.
Based on that review, Region I finds (see enclosure) that, although the licensee's request is acceptable, there is a wide variation in the Technical Specification requirements for Scram Discharge Volume (SDV) vent and drain valve surveillance at a large number of BWRs of designs similar to SSES.
Region I has therefore recommended that prior to issuing an amendment in response to the subject request, the Technical Specifications Branch (TSB) should review. the PP&L request and develop a common position for all BWRs.
The SSES amendment should reflect such a
common position.
The purpose of this memorandum is to request that the RSB and TSB develop a
common position for the surveillance of the SDV vent and drain valves.
The Reactor Systems Branch should re-examine the Generic Safety Evaluation Report requirements for BWR SDV systems, taking into account the underlying objectives of the surveillances, and confirm that the Region I interpretation of the requirements is acceptable.
We request that the Reactor Systems Branch review be completed by November,
- 1987, and the Technical Specifications Branch position be finalized for incorporation in the SSES Technical Specifications by December, 1987.
/s/
Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION NRC PDR/Local PDR PD2 Reading SVarga/BBoger WButler MThadani/DFischer MO'B 87OVZSOmw BVoeas
(
.PDR
- BOCK OBODO387 P
'PDRI r>en PDI-2/D R/AD t Thadani~>
WButler'Bogar 1~'//87 0 t~W87 4 iC<n7 The Technical Specifications Branch, in coordination with the Reactor Systems
- Branch, should develop generic Technical Specifications requirements which could be uniformly applied to the SSES request and to other impacted BWRs.
4 C
A 4
E
'k rtl "II 1
A U
ll IV
~ g
(
gps Rfoy (4
P
~4 0
Cy I
0 C
0 I
cA O~
Op x+n o~
Cy
+w*w+
F UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Septeaher 15< 1987 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Wayne Hodges, Chief Reactor Systems Branch Division of Engineering and Systems Technology Edward Butcher, Chief Technical Specifications Branch Division of Operational Event Assessment FROM:"
SUBJECT:
Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II PENNSYLVANIA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY (PP8IL)
REQUEST RE:
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME VENT AND DRAIN VALVE SURVEILLANCE The subject Technical Specifications change request for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES),
Units 1 and 2 was reviewed by the Region I technical staff.
Based on that review, Region I finds (see enclosure) that, although the licensee s request is acceptable, there is a wide variation in the Technical Specification requirements for Scram Discharge Volume (SDV) vent and drain valve surveillance at a large number of BWRs of designs similar to SSES.
Region I has therefore recommended that prior to issuing an amendment in response to the subject request, the Technical Specifications Branch (TSB) should review the PPSL request and develop a
common position for all BWRs.
The SSES amendment should reflect such a
common position.
The purpose of this memorandum is to request that the RSB and TSB develop a
common position for the surveillance of the SDV vent and drain valves.
The Reactor Systems Branch should re-examine the Generic Safety Evaluation Report requirements for BWR SDV systems, taking into account the underlying objectives of the surveillances, and confirm that the Region I interpretation of the requirements is acceptable.
The Technical Specifications Branch, in coordination with the Reactor Systems
- Branch, should develop generic Technical Specifications requirements which could be uniformly applied to the SSES request and to other impacted BWRs.
We request that the Reactor Systems Branch review be completed by November,
- 1987, and the Technical Specifications Branch position be finalized for incorporation in the SSES Technical Specifications by December, 1987.
~
~
~
~
Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II
Enclosure:
As stated
~PR AEGIJ 0
C 0
I 0
/p +**++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ENCMSORE Docket Nos. 50-387 50-388 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Steven A. Varga, Director Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
SUBJECT:
William F.
Kane, Director Division of Reactor Projects Region I LICENSING ACTION REVIEW FOR SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNITS 1 AND 2, TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REGARDING SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME SYSTEM SURVEILLANCE RE(UIREMENTS (TAC NOS.
65169 AND 65170)
Region I has recently reviewed a request by Pennsylvania Power and Light
- Company, dated April 16, 1987, for a change to the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2 scram discharge volume (SDV) system Technical Specification
- 4. 1.3. 1.4(a).
The proposed change would allow the SDV vent and drain valves to be demonstrated
- operable, by verifying that they close within 30 seconds after receipt of a signal for control rods to scram and open when the scram signal is reset, during a scram from shutdown conditions instead of during a scram from less than or equal to 50K control rod density.
Monthly valve position verification and quarterly valve cycling would not be affected by this Technical Specification change.
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company justified this Technical Specification change on the basis that: (1) deletion of the 50'od density requirement will eliminate the possibility of subjecting Susquehanna SES Units 1 and 2 to additional plant scrams for the purpose of meeting this requirement and (2) operability of the SDV vent and drain valves can be adequately demonstrated during a scram initiated from shutdown conditions, as occurs during the 18 month reactor mode switch shutdown position functional check.
Region I discussed the proposed changes with T. Collins and D. Katze of the Reactor Systems Branch in a phone conversation on June 4, 1987.
Mssrs.
Collins and Katze stated that they had recently denied a similar request by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation for its Nine Mile Point Unit 2 facility.
The denial was based upon a Generic Safety Evaluation Report for BWR Scram Discharge
- System, dated December 1, 1980.
This report references surveillance criteria developed by a BWR owners subgroup which requires, in part, the operability of the entire system as an integrated whole shall be demonstrated.periodically and during each operating cycle, by demonstrating scram instrument response and valve function at pressure and temperature at approximately 50X control rod, density.
Therefore Mssrs. Collins and Katze stated that Pennsylvania Power and Light Company's request should be denied.
,blind 2 2 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY OL TAC 65169 - 0001.0.0 07/27/87
Steven A. Yargo Subsequent to the above phone conversation, Region I compiled information regarding SDY vent and drain valve surveillance requirements for all Region I BWR facilities.
Enclosure 1 is a table summarizing these requirements.
Review of this table shows that in Region 1, 5 facilities have surveillance requirements for testing the SDV vent and drain valves from less than or equal to 50K control rod density; 4 facilities require the test to be done from a shutdown condition; one facility requires the test to be done from both conditions; and 4 facilities have no requirement for this type of testing.
In addition, review of Technical Specification surveillance requirements for recently licensed facilities in other regions revealed that.River Bend 1, Perry 1, Clinton 1 and Fermi-2 each have requirements for conducting the testing from a shutdown condition.
For River Bend 1, Perry 1 and Clinton 1, the requirement was included in the original issue of the facilities'echnical Specifications.
For Fermi-2, the requirement was incorporated as a change to the facilities Technical Specification in Supplement No.
6 of the Fermi-2 Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0798).
Based upon the above evaluation, it is apparent that inconsistencies exist between various facility Technical Specifications regarding surveillance requirements for SDV vent and drain valves.
Region I is unable to determine a
technical basis for requiring the SDV vent and drain valve testing to be conducted at rated conditions, possibly subjecting facilities to unnecessary
- scrams, since the vent and drain valve closing times can adequately be deter-mined during a scram from shutdown conditions.
In addition, upon review of the Generic Safety Evaluation Report for BWR Scram Discharge
- System, used as the basis for denial of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation's
- request, we noted that no technical basis for requiring the testing to be done at less than or equal to 50K rod density is stated.
RECOMMENDATIONS Therefore, Region I recommends that Pennsylvania Power and Light Company's request to allow this SDV system testing to be conducted at shutdown conditions be approved.
- However, due to the inconsistencies noted above, Region I recommends that the Technical Specification Improvement Branch should review Pennsylvania Power and Light -Company's request prior to approval and develop a
common position for all reactors.
We also recommend the Technical Specifica-tions be revised to include a requirement to evaluate SDV system response after each scram to verify no abnormalities exist prior to plant restart.
This requirement along with system testing during a scram from shutdown conditions and periodic valve operability checks fully meets the intent of the Generic Safety Evaluation Report for BWR Scram Discharge System.
Region I requests assistance from your office at this time as to which direc-tion to proceed regarding this issue.
Expeditious resolution of this situation would be greatly appreciated.
Should you have any questions or require further information please contact M.
G.
Evans of the Division of Reactor Safety at 488-1184.
Enclosures:
As stated William F.
Kane, Director Division of Reactor Projects, Region I
Steven A. Vargo Enclosure 1
I SDV VENT AND DRAIN VALVES I
I ISE-NRR, 8/26 83 I
I
<50 Rod Density and Shutdown 75 No Fitz-Patrick SURVEILLANCE RE UIREMENTS I
I'ALVE ORIGINAL
(
TECHNICAL POSITION
(*VALVE (
INTEGRATED
(
TECHNICAL (SPECIFICATION
(
FACILITY(VERIFICATION(CYCLINGSYSTEM TEST SPECIFICATIONS AMMENDMENT NO.
(
COMMENTS Hope Creek 1
Shutdown Yes N/A Limerick(
1
<50
-Rod Density Yes N/A Mi 1 l-stone 1
Nsne Mile Point 1 None Shutdown None No No 86 43 SE-NRR, (11/12/82 (TER-Franklin (Research Center
( 8/31/82 SE"NRR, 5 13 81 Nsne Mile Point 2
Oyster Creek Peach Bottom 2(
I Q
I
(
<50 Rod Density Shutdown None Yes No No N/A 63 88 Licensee (Requested a
(change from
(<50X Rod (Density to (shutdown prior (to OL issuance; (Request denied (by NRR.
I(TER-Franklin (Research Center
( 1/27/82 (SE-NRR, (10/15/82 (TER-Franklin (Research Center
( 12/22/81 (SE-NRR, 3/1/83 I
Steven A. Vargo SDV VENT AND DRAIN VALVES I
I SURVEILLANCE RE UIREMENTS I
I I
VALVE ORIGINAL i
TECHNICAL POSITION I "VALVE I INTEGRATED I
TECHNICAL I SPECIFICATION I
FACILITY VERIFICATION CYCLING SYSTEM TEST SPECIFICATIONS)AMMENDMENT NO. I
'COMMENTS I
Peach
)
M Bottom 3)
Pilgrim Shorehaml M.
None Shutdown
<50 Rod Density No No Yes 88 65 N/A ITER-Franklin
!Research Center i12/22/81 i SE-NRR, 3/1/83
[TER-Franklin (Research Center i9/22/82 ISE-NRR, I11/10/82 Susque-hanna 1
Susque-hanna 2
Vermont Yankee
- D = Daily M = monthly Q = quarterly Q
I I
I
<50K Rod Density
<50K Rod Density None Yes Yes No N/A N/A 73 TS change from l<SOX Rod (density to
[shutdown
)presently under
]review.
I ITS change from
(<50K Rod
)density to
)shutdown (presently under
[review.
(TER-Franklin
[Research Center l6/12/82 ISE-NRR, I11/29/82 I
,blind 2 2 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY OL TAC 65169 " 0005.0.0 07/27/87