ML17341B342

Tech Specs for Redundant Decay Heat Removal Capability, Turkey Point,Units 3 & 4, Technical Evaluation Rept

ML17341B342
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	03/31/1982
From:	Stoffel J EG&G, INC.
To:	Donohew J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17341B340	List: ML17341B341 ML17341B342 ML17341B343
References
EGG-EA-5761, NUDOCS 8208170145
Download: ML17341B342 (9)

Text

~~ &&@&i.:e.i.e FORM EG&GO88 (Rev.03-82)

Accession No.

Report No EGG-EA-5761 Contract Program or Project

Title:

Selected Operating Reactors Issues Program

( III)

Subject of this Document:

Technical Specifications for Redundant Decay Heat Removal Capability, Turkey Point, Unit Nos.

3 and 4

Type of Document:

Technical Evaluation Report Author(s):

J.

W. Stoffel Date of Document:

March 1982 Responsible NRC Individual and NRC Office or Division:

J.

H. Donohew, Division of Licensing This document was prepared primarily for preliminary or internal use.

It has not received fullreview and approval. Since there may be substantive changes, this document should not be considered final.

EG8G Idaho, Inc.

Idaho Falls. Idaho 834)5 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

Under DOE Contract No.

QE-AGOG-76 I 001 5TO NRC FIN No.

Ab429 8208i70145 820730 PDR ADOCK 05000250 P

PDR

0021 j TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR REDUNDANT DECAY HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY TURKEY POINT, UNIT NOS.

3 AND 4 Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251 March 1982 J.

W. Stoffel Reliability and Statistics Branch Engineering Analysis Division EG&G Idaho, Inc.

TAC No. 42103 and 42104

ABSTRACT This report reviews the Turkey Point, Unit Hos.

3 and 4 technical specification requirements for redundancy in decay heat removal capability in all modes of operation.

FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the "Selected Operating Reactor Issues Program (III)" being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Oivision of Licensing, by EGEG Idaho, Inc., Reliability and Statistics Branch.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization, BER 20 19 Ol 06, FIN No. A6429.

(

'I 0

P

~

CONTENTS 1.0 INTROD CTION UCTION

~

~

~ ~

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~ I ~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~

~

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~

~

~ ~ ~

~

~

~

~

1 2.0 REVIEW CRITERIA.................................................

1 3.0 DISCUSSIONS AND EVALUATION......................................

1 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Power Operations and Startup.....................

Hot Standby......................................

Hot Shutdown and Cold Shutdown...................

Refueling........................................

~

~

~

2

~

~ ~

2

~

~

~

2

~ ~

~

2 4 ~ 0 CONCLUSIONS

~

~ ~

~ o

~

~ ~

~ ~

~

~

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~

~ ~ ~

~

~

~

~ ~

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~

~

~ ~

3

.0 REFERENCES......................................................

3 5

APPENDIX A--NRC MODEL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR REDUNDANT DECAY HEAT REMOVAL FOR WESTINGHOUSE PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS (PWR'S)................................................

5

TECHNICAL E'VALUATION REPORT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR REDUNDANT DECAY HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY TURKEY POINT, UNIT NOS.

3 AND 4

1.0 INTRODUCTION

A number of events have occurred at operating PWR facilities where decay heat removal capability has been seriously degraded due to inadequate administrative controls during shutdown modes of ~peration.

One of these

events, described in IE Information Notice 80-20, occurred at the Davis-

Besse, Unit No.

1 plant on April 19, 1980.

In IE Bulletin 80-122 dated Nay 9,

1980, licensees were requested to immediately implement administra-tive controls which would ensure that proper means are available to provide redundant methods of decay heat removal.

While the function of the bulle-

,tin was to effect immediate action with regard to this problem, the NRC considered it necessary that an amendment of each license be made to pro-vide for permanent long term assurance that redundancy in decay heat removal capability will be maintained.

By letter dated June 11,

1980, all PWR licensees were requested to propose technical specification (TS) changes that provide for redundancy in decay heat removal capability in all modes of operation; use the NRC model TS which provide an acceptable solu-tion of the concern and include an appropriate safety analysis as a basis; and submit the proposed TS with the basis by October ll, 1980.

Florida Power and Light Company submitted proposed revisions for decay heat removal to their technical specifications (TS) for Turkey Point, Unit Nos.

3 and 44 on December 30, 1980.

2.0 REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria for this task are contained in the June ll, 1980 letter from the NRC to all PWR licensees.

The NRC provided the model tech-nical specifications (Y>TS) which identify the normal redundant coolant sys-tems and the actions when redundant systems are not available for a typical Westinghouse plant.

This review will determine if the licensees existing and/or proposed plant TS are in agreement with the HTS.

3.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION Turkey Point, Unit Nos.

3 and 4 are three loop Westinghouse PWR plants.

The TS for these units are of the older variety and are not in the same format as the NRC HTS.

The NRC Standard Technical Specifications (STS) define six operational

modes, which are based on conditions of reactivity, percent rated thermal

power, and average coolant temperature.

These modes do not,correspond with the Turkey Point TS defined operating modes.

Because the licensee's defined operating modes differ from the NRC NTS, this review will compare the proposed Turkey Point TS against the NRC NTS during equivalent reactor operating conditions.

3. 1 Power Operation and Startup--MODES 1 and 2.

The Turkey Point TS define POWER OPERATION as:

Reactor critical and power greater than 2X.

STARTUP is not defined separately.

The Turkey Point proposed TS are in agreement with the NRC MTS, except that they do not use HOT STANDBY as one of their operating modes.

With less than three Reactor Coolant Loops in operation, the Turkey Point requirement is to be in HQT SHUTDOWN within one hour.

HOT SHUTDOWN is subcritical with average coolant temperature above 540'F.

3.2 Hot Standb

--MODE 3.

The Turkey Point TS do not use HOT STANDBY as one of their operating modest 3.3 Hot and Cold Shutdown--Mode 4 and 5.

The Turkey Point TS define HOT SHUTDOWN as subcritical with Tave above 540'F.

COLD SHUTDOWN is defined as subcritical by at least lX ak/k and Tave less than 200'F.

The NRC MTS state that at least two Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Loops shall be OPERABLE and at least one of these loops shall be in operation.

With less than the above loops OPERABLE, immediately initiate corrective action to return the loops to OPERABLE status as soon as possible; be in COLD SHUTDOWN within 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br />.

Page 3.4.2a, Paragraph I and I. 1, of the Turkey Point proposed TS cover the RHR loop requirements;

however, nothing is stated that takes the plant to COLD SHUTDOWN within 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> with less than the required loops OPERABLE.

The Turkey Point proposed TS state that with less than two Reactor Coolant Loops OPERABLE, restore the required Coolant Loops to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or reduce Tave to less than 350'F within the next 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.

Table 4.1.2 of the Turkey Point proposed TS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS is the same as the NRC MTS, except they do not require checking the steam generator(s)

OPERABLE by verifying secondary side level to be adequate at least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.

3.4 Refuelin

--MODE 6.

The Turkey Point TS define REFUELING SHUTDOWN as subcritical by at least lOX hk/k and Tave below 160'F.

Page 3.4-3, Paragraph f and g, of the Turkey Point. proposed TS covers the points of the NRC MTS with the three following exceptions.

( 1) Turkey Point defines REFUELING SHUTDOWN as being below a T>>e of 160'F.

The NRC STS defines REFUELING SHUTDOWN as T ve at or below 140'F.

(2) The Turkey Point proposed TS allows the remova) of the RHR loop from operation during the performance of core alterations as long as the core outlet temperature is maintained below 160'F.

The NRC MTS restricts the stopping of the RHR loop to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> out of an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> period.

(3) The Turkey Point proposed TS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT is to check every four hours to ensure that the outlet temperature is below 160'F.

The NRC MTS requires checking every four hours that the RHR flow rate is greater than or equal to 2800 gpm.

4.0 CONCLUSION

A comparison of the proposed TS for Turkey Point, Unit Nos.

3 and 4

indicate that, for MODES 1, 2, and 3, the only difference is in terminology, due to the fact that Turkey Point does not use STARTUP and HOT STANDBY as defined operating modes.

For MODES 4

and 5 the Turkey Point TS define what to do if less than the required RHR loops are operating.

This description is different from that described in the NRC MTS.

In addition, the Turkey Point TS Surveillance Table 4. 1-2 does not say to determine the required steam generator(s)

OPERABLE by checking the secondary side level at least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.

For MODE 6 there is a difference in the maximum temper-ature for REFUELING SHUTDOWN.

The Turkey Point TS puts no time restriction on removing the single RHR loop from operation for core alteration.

The SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT to ensure proper operation of the RHR loop every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> is done by checking the core outlet temperature in tne Turkey Point TS and by checking the flow rate in the NRC MTS

5.0 REFERENCES

1.

NRC IE Information Notice 80-20, May 8, 1980.

2.

NRC IE Bulletin 80-12, May 9, 1980.

3.

NRC Letter, D. G. Eisenhut, To All Operating Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR's),

dated June ll, 1980.

4.

Florida Power and Light Company Letter, Robert E. Uhrig to NRC, Darrell G. Eisenhut, December 30, 1980.

5.

Standard Technical Specifications for Westinghouse Pressurized Water

Reactors, NUREG-0452, Rev. 3, Fall 1980.

6.

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Technical Specifications Docket 50250-85, July 1972.