ML20126M508

FOIA Request for Encls to NRC to PASNY Re Redundant DHR Capability Tech Specs

ML20126M508
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	02/22/1985
From:	Graber L NUS CORP.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
FOIA-85-129 CD-LIS-85-152, NUDOCS 8506200361
Download: ML20126M508 (1)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I .

I NUS esse enumsos ecurvue a f M 4 "a ? # '"' ' * * "' " .

February 22, 1985 CD-LIS-85-152 Project 1816 I

Director Division of Rules and Records FREEDOM OF INFORMATM)N ACT RE ST U.S. N.R.C.

Washington, D.C. 20555 FO.TA - S -12.

Dear Sir:

%g 9 2-2 b '

This is a Freedom of Information Act request for the following document to be placed in the Public Document Room:

, Enclosures to NRC letter to New York Power Authority (50-286) concerning Redundant Decay Heat Removal Capability Technical Specifications dated October 15, 1984. (accession no. 8412120493)

If clarification is needed, please call me at (813) 796-2264. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely, Lyle Graber M

Licensing Engineer Licensing Information Service ks l

l l

l l

h AHallibunonCompany 62 1 850222 GRABER85-129 PDR J

O .

O Jd e.vLde

.s e

1. p u r ,,% UNITED STATES

! 4 .- [ i

$ I NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 3 ,g,-

October 15, 1984

% ....'. f Occket No. 50-286 Mr. J. P. Bayne, Executive Vice President - Nuclear Generation Power Authority of the State of New York 123 Main Street White Plains, New York 10601

SUBJECT:

REDUNDANT DECAY HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS By letter dated February 14, 1984, you requested revision to the Technical Specifications for the Indian Point Unit No. 3 with regard to the decay heat removal requirements. The NRC staff has reviewed your submital and concludes that additional infonnation is needed for the staff to complete the review. The request for the needed additional information is enclosed. Your response is requested within 45 days of receipt of this letter.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements of this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required Under P.L.96-511.

O l i '

_. (

( (\- \-

k teven . rga, CNef Operating Reactors &anch #1 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure:

See next page F/1 I I n101hl/Co h ty p .5. - is sJ k'

]ff J

...-[

O O

Mr. J. P. Bayne Indian Point Nuclear. Generating Unit 3 Power Authority of the State of New York cc: Mr. John C, Brons Resident Inspector Indian Point 3 Nuclear Power Plant Indian Point Nuclear Generating Post Office Box 215 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Buchanan, New York 10511 Post Office Box 66 Buchanan, New York 10511 Mr. Charles M. Pratt Assistant General Counsel Thomas J. Farrelly, Esquire Power Authority of the State Law Department of New York Consolidated Ed,ison Company 10 Columbus Circle of New York, Inc.

New York, NY 10019 4 Irving Place New York, New York 10003 Ms. Ellyn Weiss Sheldon, Harmon and Weiss Mr. A. Klausmann, Vice President 1725 I Street, N.W., Suite 506 Ouality Assurance Washington, DC 20006 Power Authority of the State of New York Dr. Lawrence R. Quarles 10 Columbus Circle Apartment 51 New York, New York 10019 Xendal at Longwood Xennett Square, PA 19348 Regional Radiation Representative EPA Region II Mr. George M. Wilverding, Manager 26 Federal Plaza Nuclear Safety Evaluation New York, New York 10007 Power Authority of the State of New York Mr. John Cirilli 123 Main Street Quality Assurance Superintendant White Plains, NY 10601 Indian Point 3 Nuclear Power Plant Post Office Box 215 Director, Technical Development Buchanan, New York 10511 Programs State of New York Energy Office S. S. Zulla, Vice President Agency Building 2 -Nuclear Support Empire State Plaza Power Authority of the State Albany, New York 12223 of New York 123 Main Street White Plains, New York 10601 Payor, Village of Buchanan 236 Tate Avenue Regional Administrator, Region I Buchanan, New York 10511 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comissicn 631 Park Avenue Mr. Leroy W. Sinclair King of Prussia, PA 19406 Power Authority of the. State of New York 123 Main Street White Plains, New York 10601 l

l J

,(' '

O e Indian Point Nuclear Generating 3 2-cc: Ezra I. Bialik Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Bureau New York State Department of Law l

2.World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 P. Kokolakis, Director Nuclear Licensing Power Authority'of the State of New York 123 Main Street White Plains, New York 10601

. Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Division of Policy Analysis and Planning New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2, Empire State Plaza ~

Albany, New York 12223 e

6

..[- o o .

REACTOR SYSTEMS BRANCH.

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION INDIAN POINT UNIT NO. 3 J DOCKET NO. 50-286

1. During startup and power operations, the Standard Technical i

Specifications (STS) require all reactor coolant loops to be operating, otherwise the plant must be brought to at least the hot standby mode within one hour. The STS also require verification of reactor coolant loop operation on a 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> basis. The intent of the STS requirement is to ensure the RC pumps and other associated i

equipment are monitored to detect degrading performance and safe i plant operation. In your response to this item, you indicated that i

< the reactor should not be operated at power above 10% rated power J

with less than 4 reactor coolant loops in operation, and when the l , reactor is, critical and above 2% rated power, at least two RC pumps i

I shall be in operation, which is supported by.the analyses provided I .

in Indian Point 3 FSAR that reactor h' eat equivalent to 10% of rated i

powercanbehremovedwithnaturalcirculation. Thus the Indian Point 3 Technical Specifications requirements meets part of the STS intent, i.e., heat removal capability. However, the Indian Point 3's Technical Specifications (TS) do not have the above surveil-i lance requirement and action item or their equivalent. Provide justification to demonstrate why the action item and the surveil-l 1

l- lance requirement are not necessary. For example, cite other ,

I surveillance procedures that would meet the STS's intent, otherwise

! propose suitable technical specifications meeting the STS intent.

l l

i

l

../ o 2

o.

2. For hot standby operation the STS require that at least two reactor coolant loops shall be operable, including their associated RC pump and SGs and at least one of the RC loops to be operating. If these conditions are not met and corrective actions cannot restore the required loops to operable status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, the reactor is to be in the hot shutdown mode within the next 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. Baron i

dilution operations. are to be stopped if a RC loop is not operat-ing. In your responta you indicate that only or,e RC pump is equired to be operating for hot standby mode operation. Your TS do not specify that two RC loops must also be operable. Discuss how Indian Point 3 decay heat removal capability can meet the single failure criteria for the hot standby mode operation. We also point out that if your safety analyses (particularly rod withdrawal) assume 2 pumps are operational, your tech spec is also inconsistent with the safety analyses ano should be corrected.

The STS also require periodic verification of the RC pump's oper-ability once every 7 days; verification of the steam generator's

. I operability once every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />; and verification that at least one RC loop is operating once every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. The Indian Point 3 TS do )

l not have these surveillarce requirements. Provide justification as l to why surveillance requirements are not necessary or propose suitable modifications to your Technical Specifications to meet the l STS intent.

e S

V 3

g'

/

3.

The STS for the hot shutdown mode require at least two loops that are capable of removing decay heat to be operable. Either two reactor coolant loops (including their associated SGs and at least one associated RC pump) or the two RHR loops or one of each loop must be operable, and one of the above loops must be operating.

The STS further require that if the above conditions are not met and imediate corrective actions cannot restore the required loops to operable status, the reactor is to be in the cold shutdown mode within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and no boron dilution operations should take place if a reactor coolant loop is not operating. The Indian Point 3 TS meet all these requirements.

The STS also require periodic verification of the RC pump's oper-ability on,ce per 7 days; verification of the steam generator

- operability once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />; and verification that at least one RC loop or RHR loop is operating once every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. The Indian Point 3 TS do not have these surveillance requirements.

Provide justification as to why these surveillance requirements are not needed, or propose suitable modifications to your Technical Specification.

I d.

Forthecoldshutdownmode(T,yg200'F),theSTSrequirethat either two RHR loops be operable and one of the loops to be operat-ing.

Otherwise, irmediate corrective action mast be initiated to 1

_ ___ _______ .--------------________________D

r

. ^

O O .

restore the require loops to operable status. The STS also require that any boron dilution operation be suspended if no RHR loop is operating. The STS further require that RHR operation be verified once every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. The Indian Point 3 TS do not explicitly I require one RHR loop to be operating for cold shutdown mode opera-tion. The TS also do not have the surveillance requirement to verify RHR operation. Provide justification as to why limiting condition for cold shutdown mode operation and the surveillance requirements are not included in the Indian Point TS, or propose suitable modifications to your Technical Specification.

O S

W e

0 0

_