ML20084N183
| ML20084N183 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20084N174 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8405160362 | |
| Download: ML20084N183 (2) | |
Text
.
/
'o, UNITED STATES S Y g/( )
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7,,
df 5 WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
\\,.O 5
p SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0. 96 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-32 AND AMENDMENT N0.95 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-37 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-280 AND 50-281 Introduction By letter dated October 28, 1980, as supplemented January 9,1984, Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) requested amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 for Surry Power Station, Unit Nos.
1 and 2.
The amendments would change the Technical Specifications related fire pumps.
Discussion and Evaluation By letter dated June 16, 1977, the NRC provided sample fire protection Technical Specifications for guidance.
In the NRC guidance letter, the specification for fire pump flow testing stated, "By verifying that each pump develops at least (2500) gpm at a system head of (250) feet." The amount for gpm and feet were to be provided by each licensee.
Due to error and oversight in a submittal of August 1, 1977, the licensee proposed the guidance specification verbatim instead of providing the gpm and feet to correspond.to Surry's pump design criteria.
Amendment Nos. 34 and 33 were issued on November 30, 1977 with the (250) feet value.
During periodic tests, the fire pumps failed to meet the acceptance criteria of 250 feet of head at 2500 gpm.
The NRC was notified of the failure in a letter dated April 22,1980 (Serial No. 370).
The pump was inspected at that time, and it was determined that the pump showed no' sign of significant or abnormal wear, nor did its performance deviate significantly from the original test data.
Subsequently, a representative of the pump manufacturer inspected Surry's fire pump and verified these conclusions.
Further review revealed that Specification 4.18.B.1.f.(2) exceeds both the original design criteria of 244.9 feet at 2500 gpm and the FSAR requirement of 100 psi discharge pressure at 2500 gpm.
Based on this review, a request to change the specification was submitted requirino that each pump develop a flow equal to or greater than 2500 ~gpm at a total dynamic head of 231 feet (100 psi).
We have reviewed the licensee's request and conclude that this change is acceptable and the 231 feet value would have been included in our previous amendments if it had been submitted.
_e405160362 840420 PDR ADOCK 05000200 P
/
2-Environmental Consideration We have determined that these 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 i
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 951.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: April 20, 1984 Principal Contributor:
Don Neighbors, ORB #1 t
s.
- =,,.
e re-.
, -. -.-