ML20094L134
| ML20094L134 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1992 |
| From: | DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20094L114 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9203240343 | |
| Download: ML20094L134 (8) | |
Text
_ _ ___ - __ _ _-____. _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _
4 i
ATTACilMENT 1 PROPOSED CATAWilA UNIT 1 AND 2 TECilNICAl, SPECIFICNilON CliANGES t
9 9203240343-920311 PDR ADDCK 05000413 P
PDR-I
4 LANTSYSTEMS.
3/4.7.13 STANDBY SHUTDOWN SY5 TEM LlHITING CONDITION TOR OPERATION 3.7.13 The Standby Shutdown System (555) shall be OPERABLE.
APPL 10 ABILITY:
H0 DES 1, 2, and 3.
ACTION:
(Units 1 and 2) a.
With the Standby Shutdown System inoperable, restore the inoperable equipment to OPERABLE status within 7 days or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in at least HOT SHUTDOWN within the following 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />, b.
With the total leakage from UNIDENTIFIED LEAKAGE. 10ENTIFIED LEAKACl.
and reactor coolant pump seal leakage greater than 26 gpm, declare the Standby Makeup Pump inoperable and take ACTION a.,
- above, c.
The provisions of Specifications 3.0.3 and 3.0.4 are not applicable.
SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.7.13.1 The Standby Shutdown System diesel generator shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:
a.
At least once per 31 days by verifying:
1)
The fuel level in the fuel storage tank is greater than or equal to 67 inches, and 2)
The diesel starts from ambient conditions and operates for at least 30 minutes at greater than or equal to 700 kW.
b.
At least once per 92 days by verifying that a sample of diesel fool from the fuel storage tank, ootained in accordance with ASTM-D270-1975, is within the acceptable limits specified in Table 1 of ASTM-0975-1977 when checked for vis;osity and water and sediment; and c.
At least once per-18 months, during shutdown, by subjecting the diesel to an inspection in accordance with procedures prepared in conjunction with its manufacturer's recommendations for the class of service.
4.7.13.2 The Standby Shutdown System dies; starting 24-volt battery bank _and charger shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:
j,g4 j 79 h
a.
At-least once per 7 days by verifying that:
1)
The electrolyte level of each battery is abe": the p': tee; and 2)
The overall battery voltage is greater than or equal to 24 volts.
hiedc cyc-CATAWBA - UN1151 & 2 3/4 7-40
(
ndMI.'elcc1\\vsl% n[fgc; 9 ae 'r ik or 4
ej v.( to l.36 n l{r on
~,
PLANT SYSTEMS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS (Continued) i
~
b.
At least once per 92 days by verifying that the epcci" c-gr W t;
-eppreptf ate-for-contimted-seN44e-of-Ahe-battery, and c.
At least once per 18 months by verifying that:
1)
The batteries, cell plates, and battery racks show no visual indication of physical damage or abnormal deterioration, and 2)
The battery-to-battery and terminal connections are clean, tight, and free of corrosion.
4.7.13.7 The Standby Makeup Pump water supply shall be demonstrated OH fab t by:
a.
Verifying at least once per 7 days:
1)
That the requirements of Specification 3.9.10 are met and the boron concentration in the storage pool is greater than or equal to 2000 ppm, or 2)
That a contained horated water volume of at least 112,320 m c,
with minimum boren concentration of 2,000 ppm is availabh 4
capable of being aligned to the Standby Makeup Pump.
(..
b.
Verifying at least once per 92 days that the Standby Makeup Pump develops a flow of greater than or equal to 26 gpm at a pressure greater than or equal to 2488 psig.
i 4.7.13.4 The Standby Shutdown System 250/125-volt Battery Bank and its associated charger shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:
a.
At least once per 31 days by verifying:
1)
That the electrolytt level of each battery is above the plates, and 1
2)
The total battery terminal voltage is greater than or equal to 258/1I9 volts on float charge, b,
At least once per 92 days by verifying that the specific gravity is appropriate for continued service of the' battery, and c.
At least once per 18 months by verifying that:
1)
The batteries, cell piktes, and battery racks show +o visual indications of physical damage or abnormal deterioration, and 2)
The battery-to-battery and terminal connections are clean, tight, free of corrosion and coated with anti-corrosion material.
1 Y
CATAWBA - UNITS 1 & 2 3/4 7-41
I A'lTACllMiiNT 2 JUSTillCATION AND SAltliTY ANAL,YSIS
f JJackground and Descriplion of Chat 1gti ANSI /Ililill Standard 1106-1987 (Ilill!! Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Nickel Cadmium Storage llatteries for Generating Stations and Substations) provides maintenance, test schedules, and testing procedures that can be used to optimize the life and performance of nickel cadmium batteries designed for continuous Doat applications. A nickel-cadmium 24 volt battery bank is utilized for starting the Standby Shutdown Facility (SSF) diesel generator at Catawba.
This proposed technical specification amendment would change Surveillance Requirements 4.7.13.2a. and 4,7.13.2b. such that they will agree with the recommendations contained in the above standard. -In particular, SR 4.7.13.2a.1 is modined to require verification that the battery electrolyte level is at or between the low and high marks instead of above the battery plates. SR 4.7.13.2a.2 is modined to clarify that the overall battery voltage should be verined to be greater than or equal to 24 volts while the battery is on float charge. Finally, SR 4.7.13.2b. is modified to delete the speelne gravity check for the battery and replace it with a requirement to verify acceptable individual battery cell voltage while the battery is on float charge.
.lustificaliciand Safety Ana]Sils 13y modifying SR 4.7.13.2a.1 to specify verifying electrolyte level at or between the low and high marks instead of above the plates, additional conservatism is introduced into the surveillance requirement (i.e., the allowed range is more restrictive than a minimum level).
Ily changing SR 4.7.13.2a.2 to require verifying overall battery voltage with the battery on float charge, this' surveillance requirement is made consistent with ANSI /lfilill Standard 1106 1987. Regarding SR 4.7.13.2b., specinc gravity is not a meaningful parameter to measure in nickel cadmium cells. Nickel; cadmium battery electrolyte is an aqueous solution of potassium hydroxide (KOH). Lithium hydroxide is sometimes added. The alkaline electrolyte does not enter into the electrochemical charge / discharge reactions; it merely acts as an ionic conductor of uniform low resistance. Consequently, the specific gravity does not change with the state of charge of the cell. Therefore, individual cell voltage is a more appropriate parameter for nickel-cadmium batteries and is in agreement with the recommendations of the standard and is an acceptable method for checking the state of charge of the battery. Hence, this surveillance requirement will be revised to delete the speci0e gravity check and replace it with a requirement to verify individual battery cell voltage while the battery is on Goat charge.
Regarding these proposed changes, Duke Power Company has concluded that they will not be inimical to the health and safety of company personnel or to the public.
l L
4 A'ITACilMiiNT 3 NO SIGNil:lCANT 11AZARDS CONSIDliRATION ANAL.YSIS
g - - - -.
..-- - -.....~
t
.Q _ -
w
'y
" Duke Power Ccmpany has made the determination that the proposed technical specification L
emndment does not involve a significant hazards consideration. A no significant hanids ms4deration is indicated if operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed umsdment would not l.
Invoin inVicant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident psmioum cluated,or 7.
Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident hem any accident pre; e i(-
'uated, or t
reduction in a margin of safety.
3.
Im k
k.
m.
-.the Comtnission hn provided guidance pertaining to the
~
app n, o nree standards by listmg example's of amendments ihat are donse _Juo' "
. involve significant hazards considerations. Example (ii) describes a change that'co..
.. m additionallimitation, restriction,' or control not presently included in the technical spn
..ons: for example, a more rifingent surveillance requirement.
.In this case. til proposed change is similar to example (ii) in that more stringent or more pertinent vaillance requirements would be substituted for existing surveillance 0
.. requirements. The following analysis demonstrates that a no significant hazards 4
consideration is involved for this amendment request:
EksLStandad :
~ The proposed amendment does oc' Mvolva any increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The Wmges will make the technical specifications rocre conservative with' respect to.the req,.nements placed on the '5F nickel-cadmium batteries.
ETherefore, there willle no effect on the probability or cons.;quences of any accident.
m
- S1cond Standud ;
<The proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of -
accideot irom any accident'previously evaluated. The design and allowed modes of operation of the station will,not be changed as a result of this proposed amendment.
Third Standard
- The proposed amendment does not involve any reduction in a margin of safety. Prescribing L
more accurate and conservative surveillance requirements will actually increase the margin of L-safety currently contained within the design and operating restrictions of the facility.
Based upon the aSove analysis, Duke Power Cempany concludes that no significant hazards
~
. coasiderations tre associated with this amendment request. -
n l'
l o-T-
T 3
r-'
y ty' am 1
9 v7
'T w-"P'w gryi-
'-Wg-
-s-
'"w
'F
'Y
. ~.. _......
k, Y
r y
i
~ llinyimnaiental Imtw1-q m
The proposSd tecia icaf specification cha9ges h31ve been reviewed against the criteria of 10
- CFR 51.22 for environmental considerations. As shown above, the proposed changes do not
- inyt,1ve significant hazards considerations, nor do they increase the types and anvents of effluents that may be released offsite, nor do they increase individual n cumulative lecupational radiation exposures. Based updn this, ths proposed tech'1ical specification -
chantes neet the criteria given in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) for a categorical exc'usion from the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement.
s li 4j 4
h ls L.
n :-
r p
F
^
i l.'
[ -
e 1.
?-
ll r,
L V
3 V f-., y e
x
e