ML20074A332
| ML20074A332 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20074A330 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-51040, TAC-51041, NUDOCS 8305120502 | |
| Download: ML20074A332 (2) | |
Text
._
-
- gm d
UNITED STATES
[ ; ef p,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- . g l
wAsHmorow, p. c. 20ssa hl p....
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 73 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-24 AND AMENDMENT NO. 78 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINTBEACHNUCLEARPLANT,'UNITNOS.1ANDJ DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 Introduction By letter dated March 24, 1983, the licensee provided a proposed technical specification change concerning auxiliary feedwater system (AFWS) operability l
and availability. This change is a result of the inability to meet the current required technical specification for AFWS operability for the period of time when one unit is in power operation and the other unit is undergoing startup, shutdown or AFWS surveillance testing.
Discussion and Evaluation During the abov'e plant conditions,-the two shared motor oriven AFW pumps, each of which supplies one steam generator in each unit, must be. isolated from the operating unit by closing the motor operated discharge valves remote manually from the control room. This practice is in violation of the current technical specification which does not allow both motor driven auxiliary feedwater pumps to be inoperable for any period of time. Although both pumps remain functional, in order to meet the requirements of another Technical Specification concerning operability, the pumps must be capable of performing their intended function, which is to. automatically deliver flow to the intended steam generator upon receipt of a start. signal. The automatic feature is temporarily lost when the discharge valves of the motor driven auxiliary j
l feedwater pumps are closed for the operating unit.
We recognize that the above condition will occur at times during the plant lifetime as a normal part of operation. We further recognize that the plant operators can take. action from the control room t,o open the motor driven pump. discharge valves to the operating unit in'the event of an AFWS demand.
However, in order to assure maximum AFWS availability in the event of an accident or transient in the operating unit during those times when the motor driven pumps are isolated from it, we believe that the operating-unit's turbine driven AFW pump should be operable. Therefore, as discussed with and agreed to by the licensee, we have modified their proposed Technical Speci-fication change to read:
l 8305120502 830504 PDR ADOCK 05000266 P
pop l
+
~
, "c.
When necessary to provide feedwater to a unit for purposes of unit startup, shutdown or surveillance testing, the motor driven auxiliary feedwater pump discharge valves to the other unit may be temporarily shut, provided that the operating unit's turbine. driven pump is operable and capable of auto-matically delivering flow."
It should be noted that technical specifications do not govern system opera-bility during accident and unanticipated transient conditions, and therefore, these conditions are not included in the above change.
Based upon the considerations discussed above we conclude that the licensee's proposed Technical Specification change as modified is acceptable.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental 1,mpact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisel need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed aoove, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, do not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, and do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the I
proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
May 4, 1983 Prinicpal Contributor:.
T. G. Colburn J. Wermiel l
l
.