ML20083B934
| ML20083B934 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 12/12/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20083B928 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-52421, NUDOCS 8312210351 | |
| Download: ML20083B934 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
p' f. %,)o UNITED STATES f
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
l, E
WASHINGTON, D C 20$%
\\.....}
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 83 TO FACILITY D 7 RATING LICENSE N0. OPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET N0. 50-301 INTRODUCTION The component cooling water system (CCWS) at Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 and 2 contains three heat exchangers, one dedicated to each unit, and one shared between units. By letter dated September 8, 1983, the licensee provided a proposed temporary technical specification (TS) change concerning component cooling water system (CCWS) heat exchanger operability and avail-ability. This change is a result of the inability to meet the current re-quired TS for CCWS operability while the shared heat exchanger undergoes inspection and maintenance during the period of time when Unit 1 is shut down for refueling. During this plant condition, the Unit 2 Technical Specifications allow one CCW heat exchanger to be out of service, provided repairs can be completed within 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />.
The licensee stated in the September 8,1983 letter that, because of general corrosion that is occurring in the shared heat exchanger, fourteen days may be required to complete an extensive inspection and maintenance program during the current Unit I refueling outage. This program will consist of hydro-lance and cleaning, eddy current inspection, sandblasting of channels, application of epoxy coating and curing of epoxy. Therefore, the licensee proposed an amendment to temporarily revise the Point Beach Unit 2 Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Operation for CCWS to permit performance of the special ten-year inspection and maintenance program.
Durinq normal full power operation, one component cooling pump and one com-ponent cooling heat exchanger operate to provide cooling water for various components located in the auxiliary and containment buildings.
The standby pump and the shared heat exchanger provide 100% backup during normal operation.
Two pumps and two heat exchangers are utilized to remove the residual and sensible heat during plant shutdown.
If one of the pumps or one of the heat i
exchangers is not operative, safe shutdown of the plant is not affected; how-ever, the time -for cooldown is extended.
The licensee has committed at all times to maintain the capability to suspend the inspection or maintenance and return the shared heat exchanger to service within a twelve-hour period.
Further, since this extensive inspection and maintenance program was already completed for the dedicated Unit 2 component cooling water heat exchanger, it is extremely unlikely that any problems would develop with this heat exchanger while maintenance is being performed on the backup heat exchanger.
8312210351 031212 PDH ADOCK 05000301 P
PDR a
Based on our review of the proposed changes to TS 15.3.3.c.2.b and the licensee's commitment to restore the shared CCW heat exchanger within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> if needed, we conclude that during the Unit 1 Fall 1983 refueling outage scheduled for October 1983 through May 1984, the "B" component cooling water heat exchanger, which is shared between Unit 1 and Unit 2, may be out service for up to four-teen days while performing extended inspections and maintenance of this com-ponent. We, therefore, find that the proposed temporary change to the Point Beach Unit 2 TS is a:ceptable.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does 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 amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 651.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
Conclusion We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
December 12, 1983 Principal Contributor:
R. Anand J. Wermiel T. Colburn
!