ML17219A386

Proposed Tech Spec 4.6.1.7.4 Requiring That Continuous Containment Purge Supply & Exhaust Isolation Valves Be Determined Operable Every 92 Days

ML17219A386
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	02/24/1987
From:	FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17219A383	List: ML17219A382 ML17219A386
References
NUDOCS 8703030277
Download: ML17219A386 (7)

Text

ATTACHMENT I MARKED-VPTECHNICALSPECIFICATION PAGE 3/4 6-I4 7 S7O22+

'703O~

~

O5OOOSS+

PDR

~

I DR P

EJ W3/02 I /3

4 l"

II U

Il,g/

I I I II II

~

III R

~il J

CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS CONTAINMENT VENTILATION SYSTEM LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.6.1.7 Each containment purge supply and exhaust isolation va]vq shall be OPERABLE and:

a.

Each 48-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve shall be sealed closed.

b.

The 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valves may be open for purging and/or venting as required for safety related purposes such as:

1.

Maintaining containment pressure within the limits of Specification 3.6.1.4.

2.

Reducing containment atmosphere airborne radioactivity and/or improv-ing air quality to an acceptable level for containment access.

APPLICABILITY:

MODES 1, 2, 3 and 4.

ACTION:

a.

Nith a 48-inch containment purge supply and/or exhaust isolation valve(s) open or not sealed

closed, close and/or seal close the open valve(s) or isolate the penetration(s) within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, otherwise be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

b.

With an 8-inch containment purge supply and/or exhaust isolation valve(s) open for reasons other than those stated in Specification 3.6.1.7.b, close the open 8-inch valve(s) or isolate the penetration(s) within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, otherwise be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

c.

With a containment purge supply and/or exhaust isolation valve(s) having a measured leakage rate exceeding the limits of Surveillance Requirements.

4.6.1.7.3 and/or 4.6.1.7.4, restore the inoperable valve(s) to OPERABLE status within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, otherwise be in at least HOT STANDY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

SURVEILLANCE RE UIREMENTS 4.6.1.7.1 Each 48-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve shall be verified to be sealed-closed at least once per 31 days.

4.6.1.7.2 Documentation shall be reviewed every 18 months to confirm that purging and venting were performed in accordance with Specification 3.6.1.7.b.

4.6.1.7.3.

At least once per 6 months on a STAGGERED TEST BASIS each sealed closed 48-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolation valve with zesilient material seals shall be demonstrated OPERABLE by verifying that the measured leak-age rate is less than or equal to 0.05 La when pressurized to Pa.

.6.1.7.4 gach 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust isolatfon valve with I

resilient material seals shall be demonstrated OPERABLE by verifying that the meas-ured leakage rate is less than or equal to 0.05 La when pressurized to P.~~9-W u~3ays ST.

LUCIE - UNIT 2 3/4 6-14 Amendment No. ~

ATTACHMENT2 SAFETY EVALUATION INTRODUCTION The existing Surveillance Requirement for Technical Specification 4.6.I.7.4, Containment Ventilation System, requires that each 8-inch containment purge supply and exhaust valve with resilient material seals be demonstrated OPERABLE by verifying that the measured leak rate is less than or equal to 0.05 La when pressurized to Pa prior to entering HOT SHUTDOWN (MODE 4) from COLD SHUTDOWN (MODE 5).

The test is not required if the valves have been tested within the previous thirty-one days.

The proposed Surveillance Requirement for Technical Specification 4.6.I.7.4, Containment Ventilation System, will require that each containment purge supply and exhaust valve with resilient material seals be demonstrated OPERABLE at least once per 92 days by verifying that the measured leak rate is less than or equal to 0.05 La when pressurized to Pa.

This test will be required for MODEs I

through 4.

The NRC required in License Condition 2.C.8 of the St. Lucie Unit 2 Operating

License, NPF-I6, that the Continuous Containment Purge Supply and Exhaust Penetrations be modified to allow local leak rate testing (LLRT) during normal operation from outside containment instead of each time the unit returns to power after COLD SHUTDOWN.

These modifications were completed per the License Condition and reported as such to the NRC in FPL letter L-84-433, dated November 20, I 984.

DISCUSSION Details of the modifications were submitted to NRC in FPL letter L-84-266, dated September 28, l984 and L-84-280, dated October l9, l984.

The NRC approved these modifications in Amendment No.

IO to the Unit 2 Operating License.

Because modifications have been completed which will allow LLRT during normal operation, a Technical Specification change is proposed which will require testing the valve every 92 days instead of after every time the unit returns to HOT SHUTDOWN from COLD SHUTDOWN.

The proposed Technical Specification requirement will be more restrictive in that a leak test surveillance is required at a greater frequency during MODEs I through 4.

In addition, the proposed change will make this Surveillance Requirement the same as the Standard Technical Specifications for Combustion Engineering Pressurized Water Reactors, NUREG-02 I 2.

EJW3/02 I /6

~

I 1

~ 1

~

lv I

~

~ ~

~

I 4

'1 1 lI

'I 'l

~

I Nfl II I

l 4

tv 1

1 ~

4

~

~

I y

l I

I ll II 4

II I II

ATTACHMENT3 DETERMINATIONOF NO SIGNIFICANTHAZARDS CONSIDERATION The standards used to arrive at a determination that a request for amendment involves no significant hazards consideration are included in the Commission's regulation, 10 CFR 50.92, which states that no significant hazards considerations are involved if the operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (I) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Each standard is discussed as follows:

(I)

Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

This amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated as the increased frequency of testing provides additional assurance that these valves will function as designed.

(2)

Use of the modified specification would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

This amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously analyzed because the proposed increased testing frequency does not affect the original design functions or operation of these containment penetrations.

(3)

Use of the modified specification would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

This amendment will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety as the increased frequency of testing provides greater assurance that containment isolation can be accomplished and the leakage from these containment penetrations will not exceed the required leakage criteria.

Based on the above, we have determined that the amendment request does not (I) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (2) create the probability of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety; and therefore does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

EJW3/02 I /7

~'h 4

I V 4

I w

I I U 'LAW 4

~

4 L

"4 IU 4

4

~ 4 h ~

I WI wv MI,>> r I "I ~

It I W

I WUII ~

WM I

Ill It ULW I

I 4

4 "t.

I it I L. I Ut A

Mff ~ 4 4

~

~ r>>ill lit v

4

~

tl4 4 ~4 4

V I 4

U I

tll'Mr I

II IIII II 4

L I

H I

4 Lrl

~

II I I'l I

AII'iti

-II Iii lt It I

~ '

'I ti 4 ~

I

<<II 4

I W

~

ir ~

U 4

WW II II A

Iw t ti LI

,I, 4<<>>

I I

4 r,,

it<< li lit<<<<t

'ti I

4 LU L

~

I lt4 t-III~ r I

~ 4 V ILL

~ M UI 4

I 4LH I

W' III W

I I'

tt' ttl<<

I II I

III I

UU A'I

$ 4 hll, '4 Ut IU Uw 4.

W VU'IIII lIU<<ll ti U

A W

~

~

iii

~

~ (

~

I I

h A

Litt r.II

~ IIIIIII 4

r~,

~ -I I Illlli II II "

4 h

IL 4 r

4 I

4 4ltLW 4 ~

4 w,i

~

4

'I (4 4<<f 4

44 i<<U 4

II 4

4 tlrt tflLW I

<< II W'I J<<I*WILWMI UUI 4

A I

I 4

~

4 4

~

~

~

>> i.

' Mr 4~4, I ii<< rtl,,

4II tlL II II 4

~

M W

4 I

4

'O'I Ill 4

It II I

I L-LI lt<<t r

~ '>h,rI,

~

lf<<4 I

I Itl I UI It 4

4 I

ill 2 4

~ -

I-'I

'I

tll

~

h II I I 4I I I I I w

IL

~ wl r<<

IL I

4 II

~ 'I-I I

44 UUII I

4 I

4 4

~ <<.r A

4 4

tl II

~

4 II il

~

UI 4 Jw I II I 4

tl

~

II<<"

'.MMI, 4

I ~

I I I

rV'Lvl Lt

'I I'

II U

A A

'4

~

A U

U 4

It Wit A

~

II I <<

ti I

I g

~

I 4

I M I I'=

~

,'I w I

'W<<

~ I