ML17254B004
| ML17254B004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 10/30/1984 |
| From: | Kober R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| To: | Zwolinski J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8411050270 | |
| Download: ML17254B004 (6) | |
Text
REGULATORl NFORMATION DISTRIBUTION S f'EM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:8411050270 DOC ~ DATE: 84/10/30 NOTARIZED:
NO DOCKET FACIL;50-244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear Plantp Unit 1i Rochester G
05000244 AUTH BYNAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION K0 8 E R i R ~ l'I e Rochester Gas 8, Electric Corp'ECIP
~ NAME-RECIPIENT AFFILIATION ZHOLINSKI J, Operating Reactors Branch 5
SUBJECT:
Advises that addi Tech Spec re leak test of containment purge/vent valves unnecessary<based on previous operating experience No existing purge valve will serve as containment isolation valve following Spring
- 1986, DISTRIBUTION CODE:
A034D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR "ENCL SIZE:
TITLE:
OR Submittal:
Containment Pur ging NOTES:NRR/DL/SEP
- 1cy, OL $ 09/19/69 05000244 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME NRR ORB5 BC 01 INTERNAL: ADM/LFMB NRR REEVESiE NRR/DS I/AEB RGN1 COPIES LTTR ENCL, RECIPIENT
'D CODE/NAME NRR FIELDS' 12 NRR/DE/EQB 09 04 COPIES LTTR ENCL EXTERNAL: ACRS NRC PDR NTIS NOTES:
13-02 LPDR NSIC 03 05 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 25 ENCL
Il Wr I 4
4
~
s
\\
I
<<1 1
il
',tt k
It
~
I ll<<'
4 I
W Itf
~ I r
fxf IW fk' ll l xk
~ hx
<<W k
fW 4 il
4 t
j/ IIIIIIIIIIt IIIIIIIIII st va ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION o 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14649-0001 ROGER W. KOBER VICE PRESIDENT ELECTRIC R STEAM PRODUCTION TELEPIIONE AREA coDE Tls 546-2700 October 30T 1984 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Mr. John Zwolinski~ Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.
5 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Containment Purge and Vent R." E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244
Dear Mr. Zwolinski:
This letter is in response to a letter dated June,21, 1984 from Dennis M. Crutchfield<
USNRCT which transmitted a Safety Evaluation regarding the Generic Issue on Containmc~nt Purge and<
Vent Operation.
The letter requested that we pro ose a 'Zdchnical Specification requiring leak testing of the containment purge/vent valves at intervals not to exceed six months or~to propose an alternative.
As discussed below>
we do not believe that any additional Technical Specifications are ne
~essary at this time.
\\
Leak test data for the containmeng,purge valves for the last 2 1/2 years were reviewed to determine"causes for any previous excessive leakage and to predict'lone]-term performance of'he epurge valves.
It has been conclude I'hat the only occurrences of xcessive leakage were after the va ves had been opened for purging following readtor whutdggn nd cooldown to cold shutdown.
It has been postulated that leakag was,'due to 'the cool4owq of the containment atmosphere as a resu'lt of preparations for the annua'1 refueling outage.
On the other han i once thy.purge valves were closed prior to startup from the outage<'he test data demonstrate that successful operation with accep bly p/ow leakage is main-tained throughout the annual operating cycle with no repairs or adjustments being necessary.
For examp ez following startup in 1982, acceptable results were obtained n testing performed on selected valves in August and October, 982 and in January 1983.
Following closure of the valves with acceptable leak tightness prior to startup from the 1983 outage>
testing was next performed in April 1984~
thus demonstrating theqacceptable performance throughout that operating cycle.
Thus~
there is no evidence that the Ginna purge valves will not meet th leakage requirements throughout the annual operating cycle.
(
PDR ADOCKo 84i030
<<i i0SOi rO p
05000g4y PDR
C t
~E h
'I I
,F
- %V
~~a a wt<~
4 Ok
'Y p
)Pl
~ p f
s ~ '
H L
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORP.
oATE October 30<
1984 TO Mr. John Zwolinski SHEET NO.
An additional factor which supports our conclusion to not submit a proposed Technical Specification at this time relates to our current plans for upgrading the containment purge/vent system.
Since our original submittals< in which we anticipated a replace-ment with upgraded and qualified purge valves<
we have concluded that a minipurge system<
employing 6" valves>
would provide a more cost effective approach.
We have also tentatively decided to replace the purge supply and exhaust valves which are inside containment with blank flanges.
Since it is our intention to provide these flanges with a double seal> it would no longer be necessary to rely on the outer valves for containment isolation.
During cold or refueling shutdown>
the flanges could be removed and the outer valves would be relied upon for refueling integrity.
We currently expect to complete the design in order to support modifications during the 1986 refueling outage.
The proposed change in the current purge configuration would involve a change in Technical Specification Table 3.6-1.
Consistent with other penetrations<
we anticipate proposing an annual test cycle for the minipurge penetrations and the flange double seals.
In summary<
based on previous operating experience and based on the fact that the existing purge valves will not serve as containment isolation valves following the Spring 1985 outage>
prior to which only one test would be performed as a result of the requested Technical Specification>
we do not believe that a
proposed Technical Specification is necessary at this time.
Very truly yours<
A'J~
Roger W. Kober
hy N
W
'I k
k l'
r