ML20083G431
| ML20083G431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 12/28/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20083G426 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-49748, TAC-49749, NUDOCS 8401110332 | |
| Download: ML20083G431 (5) | |
Text
. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
[/
%k UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gr j.
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 I
\\,...../
SAFETYEVALUATIONBYTH50FFICEOFNUCLEARREACTORREGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0.79 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-24 AND AMENDMENT N0. 84 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 I.
Introduction A.
Description of the Proposed Action This Safety Evaluation (SE) evaluates Technical Specification (TS) change proposed by Wisconsin Electric Power Company (licensee) for the Point Beach facility in respcase to the NRC's Ceneric Letter (GL)
No. 82-16, "NUREG-0737 Technical Specifications".
B.
Background Information Following the accident at Three Mile Island, Unit 2, the staff developed an NRC Action Plan, NUREG-0660, to provide a comprehensive and integrated plan to improve safety at power reactors. Specific NUREG-0660 items, approved by the Commission for implementation at power reactors, were issued as NUREG-0737.
NUREG-0737 specified that new TSs would be required for several of the items. Accordingly, on September 20, 1982, the NRC issued GL 82-16, requesting all pres-surized water reactor licensees to (1) review their existing TSs against the guidance provided in GL 82-16, and (2) to submit pro-posed TSs for those items deviating from the NRC's guidance.
GL 82-16 requested information on the following NUREG-0737 items:
1.
STA Training (I. A.1.1.3).
2.
- Shift Manning - Overtime Limits (I.A.I.3.1).
3.
Short Term Auxiliary Feedwater System (AFWS) Evaluation (II.E.1.1).
4.
Safety Grade AFW Initiation and Flow Indication (II.E.1.2).
5.
Dedicated Hydrogen Penetrations (II.E.4.1).
6.
Containment Pressure Setpaint (II.E.4.2.5).
7.
Containment Purge Valves (II.E.4.2.6).
8.
- Radiation Signal on Purge Valves (II.E.4.2.7).
9.
Upgrade B&W AFWS (II.K.2.8).
10.
- B&W Safety-Grade Anticipatory Reactor Trip (II.K.2.10).
11.
B&W Thermal-Mechanical Report (II.K.2.13).
12.
- Reporting Safety and Relief Valve Failures and Challenges (II.K.3.3).
13.
- Anticipatory Trip on Turbine Trip (II.K.3.12).
- Model TS provided.
8401110332 831228 DR ADOCK 05000264 p
C.
Scope of Review The staff's review consisted of a verification of the status of each of the above items and an evaluation of the licensee's proposed TSs against the model TSs provided in Generic Letter 82-16 and other guidance related to NUREG-0737. For the Point Beach facility, only the above Item 12 is evaluated in this SE...The remaining items are not being evaluated in this SE because ei~ther (1) the item has not been completed at the facility, (2) the iten has been previously closed out by the staff for the facility, (3) the staff position has not been finalized for the item, (4) the item does not apply
~
to the Point Beach facility, cr (5) the licensee did not repond to the request in Generic Letter 82-16.
An explanation of each of the items which will not be evaluated in this SE is given below.
1.
STA Trainina (I.A.1.1.3)
In a previous submittal of December 23, 1980 (Ref. 1), the licensee committed to a training program for STAS.
Implementa-tion of the training was verified by onsite inspection (Inspec-tion Reports Nos. 50-266/81-13, 50-301/81-15 and 50-266/81-15, 50-301/81-17). Our July 2, 1980 letter provided model TSs for TMI lessons learned category "A" items.
Included were TSs that specified the gaalifications, training and on-duty requirements for the Shift Technical Advisors (STAS).
However, the STA training requirements are now under further consideration by the Commission, and no action will be taken to amend the TSs until further guidance is provided by the Commission.
2.
Shift Manning - Overtime Limits (I.A.1.3.1)
The licensee did not respond to the request in Generic Letter 82-16 and instead asserted that administrative procedures were in place to adequately address this item.
The licensee snould submit an amendment application to incorporate the overtime limits in the Technical Specifications for Point Beach Units 1 and 2.
l 3.
Short Term AFWS Evaluation (II.E.1.1) i The licensee made a submittal on April 27, 1982 (Ref. 2), later L
clarified by letter of May 27, 1982 (Ref. 3).
System modifica-l tions are in the process of being made, after which TSs will be l
issued.
Modifications are to be installed af ter the refueling for Unit 2, scheduled for June, 19R3 and the Fall, 1983 re-I fueling for Unit 1.
l 2
l i
i-i
d 4.
Safety Grade AFWS Initiation and Flow Indication (II.E.1.2)
Auxiliary feedwater system automatic initiation was a feature of the-original design for Point Beach. Safety grade flow
- indication was installed in the lines to each steam generator in response to this item. The licensee made a submittal on April 27, 1982 (Ref. 2), later clarified by letter of May 27, 1982 (Ref. 3).
System modifications are in the process of being made, after which TSs will be issued. Modifications are to be installed after the refueling for Unit 2 scheduled for June, 1983 and the Fall, 1983 refueling for Unit 1.
5.
Dedicated Hydrogen Penetrations (II.E.4.1)
Our letter of April 9, 1980 (Ref. 4) acknowledged that the licensing basis for Point Beach (original design) consists of a hydrogen purge system that is single failure proof and sized to meet the flow requireinents of the system during an accident.
It also noted that the plant does not have a recombiner system.
By letter of September 14, 1981 the staff documented the accep-tance of this system. The existence of the dedicated penetra-tions was verified by onsite inspection (Inspection Reports Nos. 50-266/81-13, 50-301/81-15, and 50-266/82-01, 50-301/82-01).
The valves in the penetration lines are tested under the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix J.
6.
Containment Pressure Setpoint (II.E.4.2.97 By letters dated December 23, 1980 (Ref. 1), and May 7, 1981 (Ref. 5), the licensee responded to this item. The NRC staff, by letter of August 4, 1981, indicated that the existing pres-sure setpoint specified in the plant TS is satisfactory. This was verified by onsite inspection (Inspection Report Nos.
50-266/81-15, 50-301/81-17).
7.
Containment Purge Valves (II.E.4.2.6)
The licensee's previous submittals of August 28, 1981 (Ref. 6) and January 28, 1982 (Ref. 7) addressed the operation and surveillance testing requiremtnts for the containment purge supply and exhaust system isolation valves. The staff reviewed the proposed TSs, and indicated that they were acceptable by letter of October 4, 1982 (License Amendment Nos. 64/69).
8.
Radiation Signal on Purge Valves (II.E.4.2.7)
The licensee's previous submittal of December 23, 1980 (Ref. 1),
indicated that the automatic closure of the containment purge and vent isolation valves upon receipt of a high radiation signal was a part of the original plant dasign for the large containment purge supply and exhaust valves, and no modifica-tions were necessary. The licensee indicated that small 1-inch 3
1
ventilation isolation gate valves do not close on high
-radiation signals, but *do close on receipt of a containment isolation signal..This position was found acceptable by NRC letter of October 4',
1982.
9.
Upgrade'B&W AFWS (II.K.2.8)
This item pertains to_B&W facilities only, and is not appli-cable.to this facility.
10.
B&W-Safety-Grade Anticipatory Reactor Trip (II.K.2.10)
This item pertains to B&W facilities only, and is not appli-cable to this facility.
11.
B&W Thermal-Mechanical Report (II.K.2.13)
This item pertains to B&W facilities only, and is not appli-cable to this facility.
13.
Anticipatory Trip on Turbine Trip (II.K.3.12)
An anticipatory reactor trip on turbine trip is a part of the
-licensing basis (original plant design) for Point Beach, and is described in TS Section 15.3.5.
II..Evgluation By letter dated December 15, 1982 the licensee submitted proposed Change Request No. 86 (Ref. 8) to the Point Beach Unit Nos. I and 2 TS.
The staff's evaluation of the proposed TS for GL 82-16 Item 12 (II.K.3.3)
Reporting of Safety Valve and Relief Valve Failures and Challenges, is as follows:
A.
GL 82-16, Item 12 The licensee, in response to this item, has proposed a TS change, which will add reporting requirements to TS Section 15.6.9.1.B.2.d, requiring the licensee to include challenges to the pressurizer power operated relief valves or pressurizer safety valves to a previously required annual report. Reports of failures of pressurizer power operated relief valves were already required by TS Section 15.6.9.A.1.
While not following the format of the suggested model TS, the proposed change meets the intent. We find that the licensee has fulfilled our request in formalizing this reporting requirement, and therefore this change is acceptable.
III. 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.
Ilaving made this 4
determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which-is insignificant froh the standpoint of environmental impact, and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an. environmental impact statement or negative declaration and'envir'amental impact appraisal need not be c
prepared.in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
IV.
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'a 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.
Dated: December 28, 1983 Principal Contributers:
T. N. Tambling J.-E.
Foster T. G..Colburn i
References 1.
Licensee submittal of December 23, 1980, C. Fay (WEPC) to H. Denton (NRR).
2.
Licensee submittal of April 27, 1982, C. Fay (WEPC) to H. Denton (NRR).
3.
Licensee submittal of May 27, 1982, C, Fay (WEPC) to H. Denton (NRR).
4.
NRC letter of - April 9,1980, Schwencer (NRR) to B.rstein (WEPC).
s.-
5.
Licensee submittal of May 7,1981, C. Fay (WEPC) to 11. Denton (NRR).
6.
Licensee submittal of August 28, 1980, Burstein (WEPC) to 11. Denton (NRR).
7.
Licensee submittal of January 28, 1982, C. Fay (WEPC) to H. Denton (NRR).
8.
Licensee submittal of December 15, 1982, C. Fay (WEPC) to H. Denton (NRR).
5
__ __.. _ _.