ML20129H408
| ML20129H408 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 11/01/1996 |
| From: | Hannon J NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Link R WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-M96166, TAC-M96167, TAC-M96571, TAC-M96572, NUDOCS 9611050219 | |
| Download: ML20129H408 (4) | |
Text
_. _ _. _
~
i Distribution 1
November 1, 1996 Docket File CJackson l
PUBLIC JHannon Mr. Robert E. Link, Vice President PD3-1 Reading ACRS Nuclear Power Department JRoe JCaldwell, RIII Wisconsin Electric Power Company OGC EAdensam (E) l 231 West Michigan Street, Room P379 BElliot TCollins Milwaukee, WI 53201 KWichman BJorgensen, RIII l
l
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST 194, " LOW-TEMPERATURE OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION SYSTEM" AND l
REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50.60 - POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M96571, M96572, M96166
& M96167)
Dear Mr. Link:
l We have received your July 1, 1996, request for exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.60 and your September 19, 1996 exigent Technical l
Specification (TS) change request 194 which proposes changing the TS for the i
low-temperature, overpressure protection system (LTOP).
During the review, 1
the staff determined that additional information was required.
Enclosed is l
the request for additional information (RAI).
Please provide your response to i
these questions by November 11, 1996, if you desire to use the proposed TS during restart from your current outage scheduled for early December.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1380.
Sincerely, Original signed by:
John N. Hannon, Project Director Project Directorate III-1 l
Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j
Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301
)
Enclosure:
RAI d
cc w/ encl:
See next page DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\WPDOCS\\PTBEACH\\PTB96571.RAI To receive e copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without enclos
- E" = Copy with enclosures
- N" = No copy
(
i 0FFICE PD31:PM lG:
PDM :L3 I,
lC PD31:PD f /
l NAME LGundrum n'fjj CJaMerid W JHannon / /
t
(
DATE 18/01/96 ft/)/$6i W /96 ' u/t OFFICIAL RECORD COPY V
96'1'1050219 961101 Sk hf
~~
PDR ADOCK 05000266 P
PDR l
(
1 Mr. Robert E. Link, Vice President Point Beach Nuclear Plant Wisconsin Electric Power Company Unit Nos. I and 2 cc:
Ernest L. Blake, Jr.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1
a ig b 5 b37 l
Mr. Scott A. Patulski, General Manager Point Beach Nuclear Plant Wisconsin Electric Power Company 6610 Nuclear Road Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241 Mr. Ken Duveneck Town Chairman Town of Two Creeks l
13017 State Highway 42 l
Mishicot, Wisconsin 54228 Chairman Public Service Comission of Wisconsin P.O. Box 7854 Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7854 l
Regional Administrator, Region III l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission l
801 Warrenville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 Resident Inspector's Office U.S. Nuclen Regulatory Comission 6612 Nuclaer Road l
Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241 Ms. Sarah Jenkins Electric Division Public Service Comission of Wisconsin P.O. Box 7854
[
Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7854 l
._m REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
?.
POINT BEACH EXIGENT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST 194 i
LOW TEMPERATURE OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION SYSTEM o
AND REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50.60 1
1.
Why does operation with administrative controls on one reactor coolant pump (RCP) increase the likelihood of spurious actuation of a power-operated relief valve (PORV)? Is one RCP sufficient to provide adequate pressure to the RCP seals? Why does operation with administrative controls on two RCPs increase the likehood of spurious actuation of a PORV7 Are pressure surges associated with RCP start included in the evaluation of the expected pressure at the core midplane of 63 pisg higher than the pressure at the pressure sensing points.
l 2.
No instrument uncertainty (pressure or temperature) is accounted for in the low-temperature overpressure (LTOP) setpoints or limits. Be sure to include a discussion of the effects of temperature uncertainty on the enable temperature, bolt-up temperature, and RCP lockout temperature.
3.
Does the instrument bias discussed on sheet 2 of the calculation include the static elevation pressure bias in addition to the dynamic effects of the RCPs running? Additionally, there is some effect of having one or more residual heat removal (RHR) pumps running, please provide your evaluation of the effects of running RHR pumps. There is no discussion justifying that the pressure bias values chosen for Point Beach are conservative.
Please provide the basis for choosing the values used.
For example, are the values generic or plant specific and what assumptions were madG 4.
The Westinghouse methodology that is being used to verify the setpoints is not provided. Has the methodology been used in a topical report? If so, please provide the report number and date of the safety evaluation.
If not, please provide the methodology used to calculate the pressure overshoot for both the mass and energy addition transients.
Additior. ally, for these calculations please provide the basis for the selection of inputs (i.e., initial reactor coolant system temperature, pressure, steam generator surface area, injection flow rate, PORV flow area, inlet and outlet piping geometries, flow resistances, time delays in valve response and actuation logic) to assure the results will be conservative or limiting.
For the energy addition transient please provide greater detail why the two cases analyzed (100*F at 300 psi with one RCP initially running and 250*F at 300 psi with one RCP initially running) will bound all the different combinations of initial temperature, pressure and operating pumps.
5.
In the determination of the new enable temperature, NRC Branch Technical Position RSB 5-2 is incorrectly referenced by stating that, T
+ 90*F.
The Branch Technical PosTNo'n=actEahly defines the enable temperature as i
the water temoerature corresponding to a metal temperature of at least RT, + 90*F at the beltline location (%t or tt).
Please evaluate and l
account for the temperature difference between the RCS water and the (%t or tt) weld location.
ENCLOSURE
t O
6.
The maximum allowable p*ressure is calculated for four different temperatures, 70'F,100 F,120*F, and 250'F, however, the steady state t
pressure vs. temperature curves contained in TS figures 15.3.1-1 and 2 do not appear to correspond to the same values.
If this is the case, please describe where these two different sets of limit curves originate. Additionally, a new enable temperature is calculated for this submittal, please describe why the limit curves are also not re-calculated.
j I
J l
l
.