ML20197B870
| ML20197B870 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 10/10/1986 |
| From: | Donohew J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Fiedler P GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197B877 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-59828, NUDOCS 8610310009 | |
| Download: ML20197B870 (8) | |
Text
%
... L..>.x.a. a: - a
.:~ +.i.
J
.a ww._.;_..
. _3 _
..~..,..
.s...._,u...__....w...._.
- .a acuk UNITED STATIES 8
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
,I wAsHINGTOfd. D. C. 20005 k,.....
October 10, 1986 DockGt No. 50-219 Mr. P. B. Fiedler Vice President and Director Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Post Office Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731
Dear Mr. Fiedler:
l
SUBJECT:
CONTAINMENT PURGE AND VENT ISOLATION VALVES (MPA B-24. TAC 59828)
Re:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station In your letter dated September 24,198d, you proposed to cancel the comit-ments to. install new containment purge and vent isolation valves (Valves).
These new Valves were discussed in the staff's Safety Evaluation (SE),
" Containment Purging And Venting During Power Operation," dated January 21, 1986. This SE evaluated your responses to Multi-Plant Action (MPA) B-24, Containment Purging during Power Operation, and approved the use of the new Clow Valves you stated in your letter dated February 28, 1984, were to replace the existing Valves.
The enclosed evaluation on your proposal not to replace the existing valves was preoared by Brookhaven National Laboratory, a staff contractor, under the direction of the staff. The staff has reviewed the evaluation and concludes that the information submitted by GPU Nuclear, the licensee, adequately demonstrates the ability of the existing Valves to close from the 30 open position against the rise in containment pressure in the event of a Design Basis Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA). Based on this, the staff concludes that the existing Valves are acceptable and that you do not need to replace these Valves with the new Clow Valves. Your proposal to cancel the commitments to install the new Clow Valves is, therefore, acceptable to the staff.
In the SE dated January 21, 1986, the staff stated that the following infomation was needed:
(1) the amount of containment atmosphere that may be released through the existing valves during a LOCA before valve closure and (2) the justification for valves V-28-17 and V-28-18 having valve closure -
times greater than 15 seconds.
In addition, Enclosures 1 and 3 attached to the SE provided the following guidance:
(1) amplification of Branch Technical Position CSB 6-4 on testing of resilient seal for the containment purge and vent valves, and (2) acceptable Technical Specifications for valves with resilient' seals and listing Valve closure times. You are now requested to provide the above information and Technical Specifications to the staff within 90 days of receiot of this letter on the Valves you expect to use.
I 8610310009 e6101o PDR ADOCK 05000219 P
w -
.u u.-
w---j 3y, yy~;-g,_ 3 _;_
_ -3 a - _. : ^ - -
L i
i Mr. P. B. Fiedler October 10, 1986 The enclosed SE is based on the Valves being limited to a maximum opening of 30'.
This limit is based on the staff's interim position for containment purge in its letter dated October 23, 1979. The licensee committed to limit the opening of these Valves to 30 until such time as the Valves are demonstrated qualified or replaced by qualified Valves. The data on the Fisher Valves in Reference H of the enclosed SE seem to indicate that the valves may close from a opening larger than 30 against LOCA pressure. This could mean that the containment can be inerted or deinerted in significantly less time than the 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> allowed by the Technical Specification which
'could reduce the time period when the containment is being puroed and vented during power operation. This would reduce the risk of a LOCA when con-tainment is not isolated and inerted to less than 4% oxygen. You are requested to consider this possibility and advise the staff of your con-clusions within 2 months of the date of your restart from the current Cycle
-11R outage..The installation in the Cycle 11R outage of the high radiation signal to isolate these Valves may make this possibility unnecessary.
l
'The staff's review of your.second request in the September 24,1985,. letter to cancel the commitment to upgrade the containment nitrogen purge and vent system to comply with 10 CFR 50.44(g) was issued in the staff's letter dated May 5, 1986. This review is not complete because you have requested a meeting with the staff on this technical issue in your letter dated June 16, 1986. This review will consider your modification to add a second keylocked switch for this system to assure that a single failure will not disable the ability to purg'e and vent containment. This modification is discussed in Section 2.3 of the SE dated January 21, 1986, on MPA B-24.
The staff's evaluation of your third request in your September 24, 1985 letter to cancel the proposed modification to install a pressure relief vent in the exhaust duct was' issued in the SE dated April 18. 1986. The staff found your proposed action acceptable.
In your letter dated June 17, 1986, on this subject, you provided a document from the Center line Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma and requested under 10 CFR 2.790 that it be considered proprietary and treated accordingly. In that letter, you did not provide the basis per 10 CFR 2.790 for the document to be withheld from public disclosure and an affidavit. Please provide these within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
e a
q.
1
~ _,, -, -.. -. - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr. P. B. Fiedler October 10, 1986 The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required i
under P.L.96-511.
i I
Sincerely, 1$kc
. Donohew, hr., Project Manager BWR Project Directorate #1 Division of BWR Licensing
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/ enclosure:
See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR BWD1 Reading R. Bernero OGC-BETH (Info only)
E. Jordan B. Grimes J. Partlow J. Zwolinski J. Donohew C. Jamerson B. D. Liaw ACRS (10)
OC file DBL:BWD1 0
DBL:BWD1
{}/
w:
JZwolinski CJamerso 4
lD/o'1/86
/86 to/p /86
- i
.-. ~..a.,:.u
&.a. w.a:.s.; a u..w = -. x.:_ u u u a
- z......ww..u.
............_.<_u..:m.............._.
.Mr. P. B. Fiedler Oyster Creek Nuclear Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Generating Station cc:
Mr. Ertiest L. Blake, Jr.
Resident Inspector Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge c/o U.S. NRC 2300 N Street, NW Post Office Box 445 Washington, D.C.
20037 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 J.B. Liberman, Esquire Comissioner Bishop, Liberman, Cook, et al.
New Jersey Department of Energy 1155 Avenue of the Americas 101 Comerce Street New York, New York 10036 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Mr. David M. Scott, Acting Chief Regional Administrator, Region I Bureau of Nuclear Engineering U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Department of Environmental Protection 631 Park Avenue CN 411 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 BWR Licensing Manager GPU Nucltar 100 Interpace Parkway Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Deputy Attorney General State of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 36 West State Street - CN 112 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 Mayor Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road Forked River, New Jersey 08731 Licensing Manager Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Mail Stop: Site En'ergency Bldg.
P. O. Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731
... ~ -
G g,
e
r.
.., c.
.. c.. _
c.n o
UNITED STATES i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
l
- E wasamoTom.o.c.noess k.....
October 10, 1986
~
Dockst No. 50-219 Mr. P. B. Fiedler Vice President and Director Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Post Office Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731
Dear Mr. Fiedler:
SUBJECT:
CONTAINMENT PURGE AND VENT ISOLATION VALVES (MPA B-24, TAC 59828)
Re:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station In your letter dated September 24, 1986, you proposed to cancel the comit-ments to. install new containment ~ purge and vent isolation valves (Valves).
These new Valves were discussed in the staff's Safety Evaluation (SE),
" Containment Purging And Venting During Power Operation," dated January 21, 1986. This SE evaluated your responses to Multi-Plant Action (MPA) B-24, Containment Purging during Power Operation, and approved the use of the new Clow Valves you stated in your letter dated February 28, 1984, were to replace the existing Valves.
The enclosed evaluation on your proposal not to replace the existing valves was prepared by Brookhaven National Laboratory, a staff contractor, under the direction of the staff. The staff has reviewed the evaluation and concludes that the information submitted by GPU Nuclear, the licensee, i
adequately demonstrates the ability of the existing Valves to close from the 30* open position against the rise in containment pressure in the event of a Design Basis Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA). Based on this, the staff concludes that the existing Valves are acceptable and that you do not need 1'
to replace these Valves with the new Clow Valves. Your proposal to cancel the commitments to install the new Clow Valves is, therefore, acceptable to the staff.
~
In the SE dated January 21, 1986, the staff stater that the following infomation was needed:
(1) the~ amount of containment atmosphere that may I
be released through the existing valves during a LOCA before valve closure l
and (2) the justification for valves V-28-17 and V-28-18 having valve closure times greater than 15 seconds.
In addition, Enclosures 1 and 3 attached to the SE provided the following guidance:
(1) amplification of Branch Technical i
l Position CSB 6-4 on testing of resilient seal for the containment purge and
~
l Vent valves, and (2) acceptable Technical Specifications for valves with resilient seals.and listing Valve closure times. You are now requested to
~
provide the above information and Technical Specifications to the staff within 1.
90 days of receipt of this letter on the Valves you expect to use.
i
, ~.-,
v-na., - - - - -- - --- -,
.. L u.=.&. Lu.q.,3 y
Qf'y
_y.Q.g_.wi...
. i-Mr. P. B. Fiedler
-2 October 10, 1986 1*
The enclosed SE is based on the Valves being limited to a maximum opening of 30'.
This limit is based on the staff's interim position for containment purge in.its letter dated October 23, 1979. The licensee committed to limit the opening of these Valves to 30' until such time as the Valves are demonstrated qualified or replaced by qualified Valves. The data on the Fisher Valves in Reference H of the' enclosed SE seem to indicate that the valves may close from a opening larger than 30' against LOCA pressure. This could mean that the containment 'can be inerted or deinerted in significantly less time than the 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> allowed by the Technical Specification which 3; -
could reduce the time period when the containment is being purged and vented during power operation. This would reduce the risk of a LOCA when con-tainment is not isolated and inerted to less than 4% oxygen. You are requested to consider this possibility and advise the staff of your con-clusicns within 2 months of the date of your restart from the current Cycle 11R outage. The installation in the Cycle 11R outage of the high radiation signal to isolate these Valves may make this possibility unnecessary.
The staff's review of your second request in the September 24,1985, letter 2
to cancel the commitment to upgrade the containment nitrogen purge and vent system to comply with 10 CFR 50.44(g) was issued in the staff's letter dated l-May 5, 1986. This review is not complete because you have requested a meeting with the staff on this technical issue in your letter dated June 16, 1986. This review will consider your modification to add a second keylocked switch for this system to assure that a single failure will not disable the i
ability to purge and vent containment. This modification is discussed in Section 2.3 of the SE dated January 21, 1986, on MPA B-24.
l The staff's evaluation of your third request in your September 24, 1985 l
letter to cancel the proposed modification to install a pressure relief vent j
in the exhaust duct was' issued in the SE dated April 18, 1986. The staff j
found your proposed action acceptable.
l In your letter dated June 17, 1986, on this subject, you provided a document from the Center Line Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma and requested under 10 CFR 2.790 that it be considered proprietary and treated accordingly. In that letter, you did not provide the basis per 10 CFR 2.790 for the document to be withheld from public disclosure and an affidavit. Please provide these within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
l
+.
l
VE L... : ; - -..z.:.....
a z.:.-.L a m a. u k w M.21 =~ '+ w 2 :_ _ :- -
- usaw
. 7.,.3
.. t... m.:....
.y.............
.c....
Mr. F. B. Eiedler October 10, 1986 j
~
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirenents contained in this letter i'
affect fewer ttan ten respondents; therefore, Ol'.B clearance is n.. required under P.L. 9E-511.
Sincerely, d
Wi%
Nr t'ack N.
- onobew, r.,
ject Manager BWR Project Directorate #1 Division of Bh"A Licensing
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/ enclosure:
See ocxt page i
t
[
4'..g.
- e "k..
e
.. w_.~
2.
.......~,,:
.a. x. u : u w w -. _.w
. w u. _
..._.........,:._.....:m.s._.........
Mr. P. B. Fiedler Oyster Creek Nuclear Oyster. Creek Nuclear Generating Station Generating Station
~
Cc:
Mr. Erhest L. Blake, Jr.
Resident Inspector Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge c/o U.S. NRC 2300 N Street, NW Post Office Box 445 Washington, D.C.
20037 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 J.B. Liberman, Esquire Conmissioner Bishop, Liberman, Cook, et al.
New Jersey Department of Energy 1155 Avenue of the Americas 101 Commerce Street New York, New York 10036 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Mr. David M. Scott, Acting Chief Regional Administrator, Region I Bureau of Nuclear Engineering U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Department of Environmental Protection 631 Park Avenue CN 411 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 BWR Licensing Manager GPU Nuclear 100 Interpace Parkway Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Deputy Attorney General State of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 36 West State Street - CN 112 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 Mayor Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road Forked River, New Jersey 08731 Licensing Manager Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Mail Stop: Site Emergency Bldg.
P. O. Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 W'-
m
--