ML17306A451

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re 910607 Application for Amends Concerning Generic Ltr 90-06 Improvements to LTOP Requirements.Requests Response within 30 Days of Ltr Receipt

ML17306A451
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	02/07/1992
From:	Catherine Thompson Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Conway W ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR
References
GL-90-06, GL-90-6, TAC-M77439, TAC-M77440, TAC-M77441, NUDOCS 9202130134
Download: ML17306A451 (9)

Text

Docket Nos.

50-528, 50-529 and 50-530 February 7,

1992 Hr. William F.

Conway Executive Vice President, Nuclear Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.

Box 53999 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AMENDMENT APPLICATION UNDER GENERIC LETTER 90-06 FOR PALO VERDE UNIT 1

(TAC NO. H77439),

UNIT 2 (TAC NO. M77440),

AND UNIT 3 (TAC NO. H77441)

In reviewing your Technical Specification Amendment request dated June 7,

1991, regarding Generic Letter 90-06 improvements to low temperature overpressure protection requirements and your response to our request for additional information dated November 20,

1991, we find that the additional information identified in the enclosure will be needed to complete 'our review.

In order for us to maintain our review schedule, we request that you respond within 30 days of your receipt of this request.

This request for information affects fewer than 10 respondents.

Therefore, it is not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Pub.

L.96-511.

Please contact us should you have any questions regarding this request.

S10qerel y, Qrginal signed by Catherine M. Thompson, Project Manager Project Directorate V

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:

See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket Files NRC 8

LPDRs PDV r/f TQuay CThompson PDV p/f ACRS (10)

RZimmerman, RV DFoster BBoger DCoe HVirgilio OGC OFC:

NAME LA:PDV:DR W DFoster PH'PDV'DRPW DCoe:pm P:P QDRPW mmell ay DRPW

, g/F DATE:

/

/92

/92

/

/92

/

/92 9202130134 920207 PDR ADOCK 05000528 P

PDR Z)P~

~

'UJ8H>

3 i)i=.~< w '.i~)1l=~~I t v~vQ

Ut>>

ii WW

<<,O'Wt 9V ff <</fan',, "I',

,Wff

'f I.

W 'fl <<1,'

t ft W 'f Itv

/

,'<<g ',l Wl W ~

W&lf <<P,

>> 1'W, m I, 1 L~ 3 1.

i/if Cf v>>

I

<<F I C

4 t I ~ '>>

Wll II.><<<<~ 1 t 1 t,ft, ft

<<1 F I ~ II" t

r,

~

'tlt 0>I W

0>>WW

<<C

\\

tt tl il

~'

~

~

I

~ t

~tt fL t<<F i il V

w

<<W'Wf,)

F<<W W

~ <<,f(

I I'

f<<

= I',

wtl"-

~ '>>

lWW~I 'I' I

IF' I>>

~ W It>>,i

>><< It'<<

I I

lIL

>>,i,, ','i

'W>>F I

~

W

<<FL )- JI

')

W 'l.

I<<) 'O'AR W

I 1

W,W I

I Wf 1,

'Wtf. m II Fl t

'v

• tP F<<Ff P>>W

>> ~

/ffg Wf P

I'W bq i Il W

WNW"'Ll IJL I

I I '* IN',

~

tf<<(<<<< fi V

>><<t y

Ij I

I, II I

"<<If WI

~p,fl 4Ecy

~o Cy I

O IP

~O

+a*<<+

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 February 7,

1992 Docket Nos.

50-528, 50-529 and 50-530 Mr. William F.

Conway Executive Vice President, Nuclear Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.

Box 53999

Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORHATION AMENDMENT APPLICATION UNDER GENERIC LETTER 90-06 FOR PALO VERDE UNIT 1

(TAC NO. H77439),

UNIT 2 (TAC NO. H77440),

AND UNIT 3 (TAC NO. M77441)

In reviewing your Technical Specification Amendment request dated June 7,

1991, regarding Generic Letter 90-06 improvements to low temperature overpressure protection requirements and your response to our request for additional information dated November 20,

1991, we find that the additional information identified in the enclosure will be needed to complete our review.

In order for us to maintain our review schedule, we request that you respond within 60 days of your receipt of this request.

This request for information affects fewer than 10 respondents.

Therefore, it is not subject to Office of Hanagement and Budget review under Pub.

L.96-511.

Please contact us should you have any questions regarding this request.

Sincerely, Catherine M. Thompson, Project Hanager Project Directorate V

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:

See next page

Mr. William F.

Conway Arizona Public Service Company Palo Verde CC:

Nancy C. Loftin, Esq.

Corporate Secretary

& Counsel Arizona Public Service Company PE O.

Box 53999, Mail Station 9068

Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999 Jack R.

Newman, Esq.

Newman 8 Holtzinger, P.C.

1615 L Street, N.W., Suite 1000 Washington, D.C.

20036 James A. Beoletto, Esq.

Southern California Edison Company P. 0.

Box 800

Rosemead, California 91770 Senior Resident'nspector UPS. Nuclear Regulatory Commission HC-03 Box 293-NR

Buckeye, Arizona 85326 Regional Administrator, Region V

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Ignacio R. Troncoso Senior Vice President El Paso Electric Company Post Office Box 982 El Paso, Texas 79960 Roy P.

Lessey, Jr.,

Esq.

Bradley W. Jones, Esq.

Arkin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer and Feld El Paso Electric Company 1333 New Hampshire Ave., Suite 400 Washington, D.C.

20036 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Manager Washington Nuclear Operations ABB Combustion Engineering Nuclear Power 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 Rockvi lie, Maryland 20852 Mr. William A. Wright,'cting Director Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency 4814 South 40 Street Phoenix, Arizona 85040 Chairman Maricopa County Board of Supervisors 111 South Third Avenue

Phoenix, Arizona 85003

4

ENCLOSURE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION In proposed ACTION a. the phrase "From Mode 4..." is used.

Your response of November 20,

1991, 1ndicated that this phraseology was employed such that a change in Mode from Hode 4 to Mode 3 would not allow relief from the applicable Mode 4 ACTION statement.

Please discuss the anticipated conditions during which Mode 3 operat1ons would require LCO 3.4.8.3 ACTION statement compliance.

2.

If the proposed ACTION a. phraseology is also applied to a mode change from Mode 4 to Mode 5 such that Mode 4 requirements cont1nue to apply in Ho5e 5, then a conflict appears to ex1st between the Hode 4 requirements and the more conservative Hode 5 requirements (i.e., if one SCS relief valve 1s inoperable in Hode 4 and at day f1ve of the seven day ACTION requirement a mode change occurs to Mode 5 to depressurize and vent the RCS, are two more days allowed to restore operability [proposed ACTION a.

cont1nues to apply], or are 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> requ1red to restore operab111ty

[proposed ACTION b.

now applies]?).

Please discuss how your proposed ACTION requirements would be applied in this case.

3 ~

Please discuss why ACTION a. differs from ACTIONs b.

and c. in not spec1fying a reduct1on 1n Tz~< to less than 200 F pr1or to vent1ng the RCS.

Although this language exists equally among applicable ACTION requirements in the current Lim1ting Condit1on for Operation, it has been applied unequally among the proposed ACTION requirements.

4, Your November 20,

1991, response noted that proposed Surveillance Requirement 4.4.8. 3. 1 exceeds Gener1c Letter 90-06 recommendation and is an additional operating restrict1on.

We note that although the proposed surveillance requirements go beyond the direct Generic Letter guidance for applicat1on of Spec1fication 4.0.5. to LTOP rel1ef valves, Generic Letter, Attachment B-i ACTION d. requires periodic vent path alignment verifications during periods of stable plant cond1tions.

The underly1ng intent would apply to relief path alignment verificat1ons as well.

However, the proposed requirement to verify relief valve alignment, either every 31 days or every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />, would apply only dur1ng actual heatup or cooldown while below the specified RCS temperatures.

That is, parts a.

and b. apply to the entire requirement as it 1s proposed.

Please clarify your November 20,

1991, response that these proposed requirements conform to or exceed the Generic Letter guidance.

5.

l The current Surveillance Requirement 4.4.8.3.1 prov1des for an 8-hour verification check for SCS suction line rel1ef valve alignment.

Your proposed change to 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> was not noted in the safety evaluation of either your initial submittal or your response of November 20, 1991.

Please discuss the need for th1s change and the safety bas1s for the less conservat1ve requ1rement.

f

os'

~ '

~

~

~

6.

The current Surveillance Requirement 4.4.8.3.2 provides for an 18-month setpoint verification test.

The proposed requirement is to apply Specification 4.0.5 which will allow setpoint verification tests at intervals longer than 18 months.

Although this proposal conforms to Generic Letter 90-06, the stated intent of this letter is in part to "improve the availability of the low-temperature over pressure protection (LTOP) system..."

and thus, no basis was given in the letter to relax existing surveillance requirements.

Your proposed change to a longer time interval was not justified in the safety evaluation of either your initial submittal or in your response of November 20, 1991.

Please discuss the safety basis for the less conservative requirement.

I

~

~