ML20035A172
| ML20035A172 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/19/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035A171 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9303240221 | |
| Download: ML20035A172 (2) | |
Text
_
paney g
jo UNITED STATES g
{
v p,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,E WASHINGT ON. D. C. 20555 8
o\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR 9EGULATION REL ATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 60 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-42 WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPER& TING CORPORATION WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION EOCKET NO. 50-412
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated December 22, 1992, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-42) for the Wolf Creek i
Generating Station. The proposed amendment deletes the surveillance requirement of Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.2(1)(2), which involves performing a pressure test of portions of the emergency diesel fuel oil system. Alternative testing for the tanks and piping would include leak testing at hydrostatic head pressure with the tanks filled to design capacity and would be governed by Technical Specification 4.0.5.
2.0 EVALUATION
)
The existing Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.2(i)(2) requires a pressure test of those portions of the diesel fuel oil system designed to Section III, subsection ND of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. This pressure test is required to be performed at 110 percent of the system design pressure.
This test is consistent with the acceptable method which is presented in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.137, " Fuel-011 Systems for Standby Diesel Generators".
l Regulatory Guide 1.137 adopts Section 7.3 of ANSI N195-1976, " Fuel Oil Systems for Standby Diesel-Generators" which specifies testing in accordance with Section XI, " Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components", of the ASME Code.Section XI Article IWD-5000 in turn requires testing of components at 1.10 times the system pressure for systems with design temperatures less than 200*F or in the case of atmospheric storage i
tanks, the hydrostatic head, developed with the tank filled to its design capacity, is considered to be an acceptable test pressure.
The licensee has requested the proposed change due to the diesel fuel oil system's incompatibility with the requirements of the performance of a pressure test at 110 percent of system pressure. The diesel fuel oil tank is vented to atmosphere without an existing ability to isolate and pressurize the tank in order to perform the pressure test. The fulfillment of ASME Code requirements is achieved by the performance of the alternate testing consisting of leak testing with the associated atmospheric tanks filled to design capacity. The alternate test is considered to provide equivalent i
assurance of the tank and piping integrity in that filling the tank to design 9303240221 930319 i
PDR ADOCK 05000482 i
P PDR
l
< capacity and verifying that no loss of inventory occurs is comparable to pressurizing the system and monitoring for any decrease in pressure. The diesel fuel oil system is classified as ASME Code Class 3 in accordance with the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.26, " Quality Group Classifications and Standards for Water, Steam, and Radioactive-Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants." Technical Specification 4.0.5 requires testing of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Code.
The existing Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.2(i)(2) is therefore seen as redundant to the requirements of Technical Specification 4.0.5 in that ASME Section XI testing is required, but the specific testing methodology of Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.2(1)(2) is not practical for the current design of the diesel fuel oil system.
Upon review of the licensee's submittal, the staff concludes that the 6
alternative testing allowed by Section XI of the ASME Code is an adequate inservice testing methodology and that the performance of the inservice testing is required by Technical Specification 4.0.5.
Therefore, the deletion of Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.2(i)(2) is deemed acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Kansas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no coments.
4.0 ENVIPONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendment changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards con-sideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (58 FR 7009).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no i
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
j The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the
)
public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, i
and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: William D. Reckley Date:
March 19, 1993 i
I