ML18227C693

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Letter Proposed Technical Specifications Concerning Operability and Surveillance of Hydraulic Shock Suppressors (Snubbers)
ML18227C693
Person / Time
Site: Turkey Point  
Issue date: 08/21/1975
From: Robert E. Uhrig
Florida Power & Light Co
To: Lear G
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML18227C693 (6)


Text

P P

~

~

P

~

g P

~ ~

P g

~

I

~ ~

~

P

'I I

~

~

~

~ ~

~

J

~

~

~

P

~

~

} '

~ ~

~ '

I 4

~

~ } P

~

g

~ }

P

~

P ~

~

} ~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

II

~llg+QI}it

>..J

~"

~

~

I rl

~

I

~

~

P 0

~

~

P P

P 1

J

~

~ ~

~

P

~

~

~

0 ~

~

~

~ t

~

~

P

~

~

P1

~

~ ~ P

~

"~ ~

~

I a

~

}

P

> ~

P

~

P

~

~ ~

P P

~ ~

~

~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

~

0

~ ~

~ ~ ~

~

~

~

~ ~

~

}

~ ~ ~

~ ~

g

~

P P

~ ~

}

~

P

~

~

~ ~

\\

~

4

~

a

~ ~ ~

P g

}

P P

0 0

4

}

I

~

I

~ ~

P P

~ ~

S 0

~

~

P

lilt '3 Wy g IJ ~

~

~

~

~

~

k

Regulatory Docket File Q P. O. BOX 013100'IAMI, FLORIDA 33101 Ch

~o

~~zgg~o

~i i, I u(g>

4 Mr. George Lear, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.

3 Division of Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.

C.

20555

Dear Mx. Lear:

FLORIDA POWER 5 LIGHT COMPANY August 21, 1975 L-75-399 Re:

Proposed Snubber Tech Spec Turkey Poin't'- Pl'ant- Do'cket'o's'.25

& 50-'2'51 Florida Power 6 Light Company has reviewed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's model Technical Spec'ifications concerning the operability and surveillance of hydraulic shock suppressors (snubbers).

We wish to thank you for the opportunity of commenting on this, We would like to present changes whi:ch 'we. feel would improve this Technical Specification.

The suggested changes're as follows:

1.

Section 3.6.I.3 states:

"From and after the time that a hydraulic snubber is determined to be inoperable, continued reactor operations is permissible only during the succeeding 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> unless the snubber is sooner made operable."

For the case of only one inoperable

snubber, we suggest that the Plant Nuclear Safety Committee be given 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to determine whether safe reactor operation can or cannot continue.

Reactor shutdown should be required only if safe operation cannot be assured.

2.

Section 4.6.I.1 states in part:

"The required inspection interval shall not be lengthened more than one step at a time."

We suggest that the return to longer inspection intervals be dependent on the cause of snubber inoperability.

For example, if the cause was improper installation, the interval between inspections should be increased more quickly than if the cause was some time dependent function directly related to the snubber and/or its environment.

8'yo HELPING BUILD FLORIDA

~ ~

l f

~ y W

lit I

'l I

l f

lt E I E

I I

~ '

t~

I

~ EW,,E)I I'

I I

E f

E

~

~ w k

~ I I'

a I

II E

'f

George Lear August 21, 1975 3.

Section 4.,6.X.2 states:

"All hydraulic snubbers whose "seal materials

'ave not been demonstrated to be c'ompatible

'ith the 'oper'ating environment shall be visually inspected for operability ever'y. 31 days."

Me. sugges't that the inspection inter'val for such snubbexs,not

'e

'restricted to 31 days bu't -that it may be lengthened according to the schedule in Section 4,,6;T.,;1; 4,

Section',4,.'6;I;4'states in part:

"For. each "unit and subsequent unit found inoperable,'n additional 10% or 10 snubber's 'shall be 'so tesdted until no more 'failuresare found or dali units have been, tested,"

Ve dsuggeat thi's 'sentence

'be revised to rea'd:

"Ford each:'unit and subsequent. unit found-inoper'able,'n"additional 10% or 10 'snubbers, wHicKev'e'ris I'.I";

I 'I.II .

d

'i.

-age found or all units.have.,been tes'ted.,"'.,

Tabl'e.'3,',6,T. lists non-safety.related snubber's which are

'xempt,'from ithe 'snubber'pecifications,'We suggest;that such 'a list 'be 'eliminated, otherwise, a formal technical specification'ha'nge wi.'ll be 'needed whenever a non-safet'y reXated snubber's added or remov'ed fr'om thelist.

i Vours. ver'y truly, Roberdt "E,. Uhr'ig fice Pres'i.dent REU: JAD;nch

'c; Jack 'R.'ewman, Esdq'.

4

~

~

I

~

4I P

4 4