ML19329D653
| ML19329D653 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 02/18/1976 |
| From: | Long F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Sniezek J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003160276 | |
| Download: ML19329D653 (2) | |
Text
-
+ = =
2+
v ud4 +
?b
~
UNITED STATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3.gWZ E
REcloN H
~t%'E
- ?.:[Q f
ATi.ANTA. CEORGI A 30303 230 PEACHTR EE STREET. N. W.
SulTE 813 FEB 181976 J. H. Sniezek, Chief, Light Water Reactor Programs Branch, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Headquarters
~
THRU:
3 N. C. Moseley, Director, Region II, Office of Inspection and g k' '
i Enforcement 0
FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, CRYSTAL RIVER 3, DOCKET NO. 50-302 - RETESTING FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS OF RT. ACTOR BUILDING SPRAY SYSTEM B&W infor:ed the Director of IE oy letter of May 8, 1975, of a possible deficienc-/ in the performance of the sodium thiosulfate reactor building spray system. The concern was that the sedium thiosulfate cnd sodium hydroxide tanks vould empty at a rate faster than designed, i.e., would not inject their contents at a rate cemensurate. with the draining rate of the borated watec storage tank (FSAR 6.2.2.1).
In Septe:bar 1975, a draw down test was perfor=ed of the system by filling the EWST, the sodiu hydronide and sodium thiosulfate tanks with water, then using the safeguards pu=ps to transfer the water free all three of the tanko simultaneously to the refu211ng canal.
Anal'/ sis of the results revaals that when the draw down test was ter=inated after 37 minutes of pumping, the I ST was 912; e=pty, the sodium hydrcxide tank was still 66.3*. full and the sodium thiosulfate tank was 71.3*: full.
FPC's consultant, Gilbert Associates, developed a computer progran (Pcdel) to analyze the flou characteristie of the chenical tanks and associated piping in relation to the flow characteristics of the borated water storage tank.
The analysis performed by the consultant, using tha.
model, agreed closely with the test results.
Based on the analysis, the consultant reco= mended that a stop check valve in each of four discharge lines from the chemical tanks (2 lines per tank) be replaced with swing check valves to reduce the pressure drop across the valves; thereby increasing the flow. The licensee has informed Region II that the valves will be cut out and replaced.
Also, that the codel indicates that the system will perform as designed after the modification; therefore, recesting will not be performed.
Our position is that the specific discrepancy relating to the safeguards systems chemical tanks and piping arrangement was identified and con-firmed by. testing and retesting should be perfor:ed to verify the 1
l 8003160 A 7g g
. _ _..,. ~. _....
E3 Cp
^
J. H. Sniczek,
adequacy of the modification. This position has been pursued with licensee corporate manage =ent personnel without results.
We would not be in a position to reco= mend issuance of the license without retest of this system. You are requested to review the condition and if you concur in our position, discuss the matter with Licensing.
_w N
F. J. Long, Chief Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch cc:
G. Roy, IE:EQ S. Bryan, IE:HQ R. C. Lewis, IE:II 4
4 4
i 4
sig.-w,r.-+m
=
-