ML20081J234

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 197 to License NPF-3

ML20081J234
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	03/22/1995
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20081J217	List: ML20081J216 ML20081J234
References
NUDOCS 9503270162
Download: ML20081J234 (3)

Text

-

e nte g

t UNITED STATES

}

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'e WASHINGTON, o.C. 20065 c001 l

i SAFETY' EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 197 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 TOLEDO EDIS0N COMPANY t

CENTERIOR SERVICE COMPANY

{

MD THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-346

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS) 4.0.5,

" Applicability" and its associated Bases; TS 3/4.1.2.3, " Reactivity Control Systems - Makeup Pump - Shutdown; TS 3/4.1.2.4, " Reactivity Control Systems -

1 Makeup Pumps - Operating; TS 3/4.1.2.6, Reactivity Control Systems - Boric Acid Pump - Shutdown; and TS 3/4.1.2.7, " Reactivity Control System - Boric Acid Pumps - Operating." The proposed changes would replace the specific monthly surveillance requirements associated with the Makeup Pumps and Boric Acid Pumps with a surveillance requirement referencing TS 4.0.5, which referencesSection XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (the Code) for quarterly pump testing requirements.

The proposed change to TS 4.0.5 and its associated Bases is consistent with the revised Standard Technical Specifications and simply refers to the regulation for the application of industry codes and standards. Additionally, TS 4.0.5.a.1 which describes inservice inspection and testing during the period from issuance of the Facility Operating License until start of facility commercial operation is deleted, since the requirement is historical, and TS 4.0.5.a.2 is renumbered as TS 4.0.5.a.

2.0 EVALUATION The proposed changes will replace the current monthly surveillance requirements for the Makeup Pumps and the Boric Acid Pumps with a reference to i

TS 4.0.5, which requires quarterly testing of all ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 i

pumps in accordance with the requirements of ASME Code,Section XI.

Currently, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS) performs the quarterly surveillance requirements in accordance with 4.0.5.

Additionally, both the Makeup Pumps and Boric Acid Pumps have the following surveillance tests i

9503270162 950322 PDR ADOCK 05000346 i

P PDR J

i

[

.c

' monthly:

1) Starting (unless already operating) the pump from the control room;

2) Verifying specific pump performance (discharge pressure 2 2400 psig for the Makeup Pumps and development of 93% of the discharge pressure for the applicable flow rate at a discharge pressure 2 65 psig for the Boric Acid Pumps);

3) Verifying pump operation for at least 15 minutes; and

4) Verifying that the pump is aligned to receive electrical power from an OPERABLE essential bus.

During the quarterly tests, the pumps are started from the control room (unless they are already running), are generally run for longer than 15 minutes, and are evaluated for acceptable readings of differential pressure, inlet pressure, flow, and vibration.

The monthly verification of electrical power alignment is not considered significant, since each pump can only be aligned to a single essential power supply.

If the niectrical alignment is not correct, the qua'terly surveillance test could not be performed.

Relaxation of the pump testing requirements from monthly to quarterly will reduce the potential for pump degradation. Additionally, per discussion with l

the licensee, a review of the DBNPS reliability data for the Makeup and Boric Acid Pumps supports extending the surveillance frequency. The staff, therefore, concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable.

The proposed change to delete TS 4.0.5.a.1 which describes inservice inspection and testing during the period from issuance of the facility i

Operating License until start of facility commercial operation, and TS i

renumbering 4.0.5.a.2 to TS 4.0.5.a are administrative changes and dc not affect safety. The staff, therefore, concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable.

The proposed change to TS 4.0.5, " Applicability," and its basis will remove the text regarding the granting by NRC of relief requests. Maintaining the earlier requirement that compliance with the requirements of the ASME Code is i

rNuired for inservice inspection and inservice testing "except where relief ho hac1 granted" is more restrictive than the regulation in that tM i

regu%ons (10 CFR 50.55a, " Codes and Standards") allow a licensee up to 12

)

months after the beginning of updated inspection and testing intervals of 120 months to inform the NRC of those new Code reqairements which cannot be met and to request relief.

Sinca the current TS 4.0.5 and its Bases reflect adherence to 10 CFR 50.55a, tne proposed change will not affect safety and I

will delete an apparent conflict between TS and the regulations.

The staff, therefore, concMas that the proposed change is acceptable.

Based on the review of each proposed change and determination that the proposed changes not have an adverse effect On safety, the staff concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable and should be approved.

- - a

4

3.0 STATE CONSULTATION

i In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Ohio State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no commen?.s.

4.0 [KVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amandment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR t

Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the 2 mounts, 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

[

consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (60 FR 8758).

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 environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendmen*

5.0 CONCLUSION

I The staff 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 Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributors:

Patricia L. Campbell Linda. L. Gundrum Date: March 22, 1995 i

h t

i a

E