ML20128P486
| ML20128P486 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20128P476 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9302240351 | |
| Download: ML20128P486 (3) | |
Text
[
o,,
UNITED SI'ATES e
[
3 g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20S55 p \\ v;,...../
SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS.104 AND 97 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. OPR-42 AND QPH- @
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-282 AND 50-30E 1.0 JNTRODUCTION By letter dated January 21, 1992, Northern States Power Company (NSP or the licensee) requested amendments to the Technical S ecifications (TSs) appended to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60 for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Nos. 3 and 2.
The proposed amendments would extend the surveillance test intervals for selected pumps and valves.
2.0 DISCVSSION AND EVALUATION 2.1 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER PUMP The proposed amendment would change the test frequency for full-flow testing of the steam turbine-driven AFW pumps from yearly to once each refueling shutdown.
This would make the test frequency for the turbine-driven AFW Pumps consistent with that of the motor-driven AFW Pumps.
The Staff Positien (Ref:
NUREG-1431, " Standard Technical Specifications - Westinghouse Plants")
regarding AFW system flow path testing is that a full-flow flow path test from the AFW storage tank to the steam generator be conducted prior to startup following periods of shutdown operation in excess of 30 days.
Since such occasion occurs typically during refueling, the licensee's proposed schedule-of every refueling outage is essentially consisient with this position.
- Thus, the proposed change is acceptable.
Prairie Island full-flow AFW system (pump and flow path) testing cannot be done during plant operation due to thermal shock to the auxiliary feedwater lines (Ref: Prairie Island Inservice Testing Program, Requests for Relief, Section 1.5.9, AF-16-1, 2 and AF-IS-1, 2, 3, 4). Therefore, full-flow testing is performed only during refueling when a full-flow test path to a steam generator is available.
The tests which are performed at Prairie Island during power operation, while not full-flow, will verify capability of an AFW pump to develop a specified head at a s cified flow and thus provide a high degree of assurance that AFW pumps are capable of meeting operability 9302240351 930205 PDR ADOCK 05000282 p
2 I
h requirements.
pump operability and will fully test the flow paths.The tests to be perfor will meet the objectises of the Standard Technical Specifications and ASMET Section XI.
2.2 DTHER PUMPS AND VALVES The proposed amendment would revise the surveillanc the Inservice Testing Program:
1.
The safety injecti ment spray pumps, on pumps, residual heat removal pumps and contain-'
2.
The boric acid tank valves, 3.
The spray chemical additive tank valves, 4.
The actuation circuits for the Cooling Water System valves, and 5.
The auxiliary feedwater valves.
The equipment listed in (1) to (5) above is currently required by the T:
tested once each month.
o be specifies quarterly testing for the above equipment.The ASME Code Section X Specifications require-this equipment to be tested in accnrdance with theThe St requirements of the Inservice Testing Program.
It is the position of the staff, as reflected in the Standard Technical Specifications, that a single common surveillance test incorporating both the Section XI requirements and the TS :urveillance testing requirements satisfies the surveillance testing requirements of 10 CFR 50.36, and the ASME Code Inservice Testing requirem of 10 CFR 50.55a(g). k common test would minimize safety systems out-of-service time due to testin to stopping and starting. g activities, and reduce component degradation due by the TS must be consistent with that prescribed by the CodeTo utilize a co The licen:ee's submittal included comparisons, for each affected pump and valve, between the current TS requirements for test intervals and allowed outage-times (A0Ts), and the corresponding requirements of the Standard Technical-Specifications.
reliability is affected by both the test interval and the A0T.This comparison found that the existing A0Ts are consistent with the STS, and thus need not b The comparison shortened to assure acceptable equipme1t reliability in view of the lenathen
.e test interval.
The staff verified that there are no ;.aique design features or equipment failure histories that indicate a need for less than standard test intervals.
Since the proposed surveillance frequencies and A0Ts conform to the staff criteria of Section 16 of the Stane'ard Review Plan, and are consistent with ASME Section XI requirements, they are acceptable.
O o
[
2.3 BASES CHANGES The TS Bases dpscriptions would be updated to reflect the changes described above.
The proposes changes reflect the findings of this evaluation : 4 are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Minnesota State Official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State Official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amandment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involver no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (FR cite). Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental :n ct statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection witn the issuance of this amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSI0ti The Commission has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
W. Long Date: February 5, 1993 i
l