ML20207S213
| ML20207S213 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 03/03/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207S209 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703190132 | |
| Download: ML20207S213 (2) | |
Text
___
gbg k
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.,{
g w+sHWGTON, D. C. 20555 -
.....l;a f
g
^\\
y SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N05.$06 AND 109T0 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-24 AND DPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 INTRODUCTION 3-In a letter dated August 26, 1986, Wisconsin Electric Power Company (the licensee) submitted an application for a licensing amendment to change the technical specification (TS) for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
The amendment request proposed revising the surveillance requirements for the main steam stop valves, main steam safety valves, and pressurizer
~
safety valves.
DISCUSSION Under the proposal, Technical Specification 15.4.1, " Operational Safety Review," Items 11 and 12 of Table 15.4.1-2 would be revised to extend the maximum period of set point testing of all main steam safety valves and the pressurizer safety (valves from once each refueling to once every five years.
Footnote 12) to Table 15.4.1-2 calls for the following revised testing schedule:
"An approximately equal number of valves shall be tested each refueling outage such that all valves will be tested within a five year period.
If any valve fails its test, an additional number of valves equal to the number originally tested shall be tested.
If any of the additional tested valves fail, all remaining valves shall be tested."
This test frequency, and provision for an additional test when a valve fails to function properly, is in accordance with the ASME Code Secticn XI for Inservice Testing of Category C Safety and Relief Valves; and the licensee states that this revised testing schedule is consistent with the Point Beach Nuclear Plant Inservice Program.
With regard to Technical Specification 15.4.7, " Main Steam Stop. Valves,"
the proposal consists of a revised test condition.
It would change the surveillance requirement under which the valve closure time is verified during refueling outage from no-flow to low-flow environment.
In order to test the valves in a hot, steamy environment (i.e., the condition in which the valves are expected to perform their safety function), the licensee states that there would be some minimum steam flow across the 8703190132 870303 '
PDR ADOCK 05000266%
P PDR
f.T s
main steam stop valves. Thevalvesaredesigned,iniuchawaythatsteani flow will act to decrease closure time. Thus, testing the valve closure time even at low flow would be conservative with' respect to the conditions existing when the valve is required to perform its intended safety function since the valve should~closepuch faster in the expected high flow condition of the main steam line rupture..
The staff review of licensee's technical specificatibn amendment proposal was performed in accordance with the guidelines of Standard Review Plan section 3.9.6 and the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI. The evaluation by the staff indicated that the proposed changes are consistent with applicable guidelines; the staff, therefore, concludes that the request is acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a-facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Fart 20 and
~
4 a change to the surveillance requirements. The staff has determi nd that the amendments involve no significant increase in thz 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 occupalforait that these amendments involve no.significant hazar, published a proposed f radiation exposure. The Commission has previouslyds consideration and timre has been no public coment on such finding.. Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environ-mental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuanc.e of these amendments.
C0!lCLUSION m
Wehaveconcluded,basedontheconsiderationsdiscussedabove,that(1)\\there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endanferedbyoperationintheproposedmanner,and(2)suchactivitieswill be codducted in compliance with the Comission's regulatti.as, and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
~
Date: March 3, 1987 Principal Contributor:
K. Dempsey f
I I
I i
' c
.