ML20209E799

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Proposed Tech Spec 3/4.7.4,supporting Svc Water Sys Upgrades to Define Applicability for 168 H Action Statement.Ser Encl
ML20209E799
Person / Time
Site: North Anna  Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 07/01/1985
From:
VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:
Shared Package
ML20209E787 List:
References
NUDOCS 8507120289
Download: ML20209E799 (7)
v • d • e


Text

.

~.

~w ENCLOSURE 1 PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ,

CHANGE - UNIT 1 8507120289 050701 PDR ADOCK 05000338 P PDR

PLANT SYSTEMS 3/4.7.4 SERVICE WATER SYSTEM LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION 3.7.4.1 At least two service water loops (shared with Unit 2) shall be OPERABLE.

APPLICABILITY: MODES 1, 2, 3 and 4.

ACTION:

a. With only one service water loop OPERABLE, restore at least two loops

~ l to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />,

b. The allowable time that one of the two service water loops can be inoperable as specified in Action Statement a. may be extended beyond 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> up to 168 hours0.00194 days <br />0.0467 hours <br />2.777778e-4 weeks <br />6.3924e-5 months <br /> as part of service water system upgrades
  • l provided 3 out of 4 service water pumps and 1 out of 2 auxiliary ,

service water pumps have been operable since initial entry into the -

action statement and remain operable during the extended action statement or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.7.4.1 At least two service water loops shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:

a. At least once per 31 days by verifying that each valve (manual, power operated or automatic) servicing safety related equipment that is not locked, sealed, or otherwise secured in position, is in its correct position.
b. 'At least once per 6 months by measurement of the movement of the pumphouse and wing walls.
c. At least once per 18 months during shutdown, by:
1. Verifying that each automatic valve servicing safety related equipment actuates to its correct position on a safety injection signal.
2. Verifying that each containment isolation valve actuates to its correct position on a containment high-high signal.
  • Isolation of one service water loop for up to 168 hours0.00194 days <br />0.0467 hours <br />2.777778e-4 weeks <br />6.3924e-5 months <br /> is permitted only as part of service water system upgrades. System upgrades include modification and maintenance activities associated with the installation
. of new discharge headers and spray arrays, mechanical and chemical cleaning of service water piping and valves, pipe repair and replacement, valve repair and replacement, . installation of corrosion mitigation measures and inspections of and repairs to buried piping interior coatings and pump house components.

NORTHANNA-UhIT1 3/4 7-18

4 ENCLOSURE 2 PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE - UNIT 2 l

l 1

l l

l l

PLANT SYSTEMS 3/4.7.4 SERVICE WATER SYSTEM LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION i

3.7.4.1 At least two service water loops (shared with Unit 1) shall be OPERABLE.

-APPLICABILITY: MODES 1, 2, 3 and 4.

ACTION:

a. With only one service water loop OPERABLE, restore at least two loops l to OPERABLE status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.
b. The allowable time that one of the two service water loops can be inoperable as specified in Action Statement a. may be extended beyond 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> up to 168 hours0.00194 days <br />0.0467 hours <br />2.777778e-4 weeks <br />6.3924e-5 months <br /> as part of service water system upgrades *  !,

provided 3 out of 4 service water pumps and 1 out of 2 auxiliary -

service water pumps have been operable since initial entry into the action statement and remain operable during the extended action statement or be in at least HOT STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />.

SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.7.4.1 At least two service water loops shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:

a. At least once per 31 days by verifying that each valve (manual, power operated or automatic) servicing safety related equipment that is not locked, sealed, .or otheprise secured in position, is in its correct position.
b. At least once per 6 months by measurement of the movement of the pumphouse and wing walls,
c. At least once per 18 months during shutdown, by:
1. Verifying that each automatic valve servicing safety related equipment actuates to its correct position on a safety injection signal.
2. Verifying that each containment isolation valve actuates to its correct position on a containment high-high signal.
  • Isolation of one service water loop for up to 168 hours0.00194 days <br />0.0467 hours <br />2.777778e-4 weeks <br />6.3924e-5 months <br /> is' permitted only as part of service water system upgrades. System upgrades include modification and maintenance activities associated with the installation of new discharge headers and spray arrays, mechanical and chemical cleaning of service water piping and valves, pipe repair and replacement, valve repair and replacement, installation of corrosion mitigation measures and inspections of and repairs to buried piping interior coatings and pump house components.

NORTH ANNA - UNIT 2 3/4 7-15

il

  • 4 ENCLOSURE 3 SAFETY EVALUATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PROPOSED CHANGES

Safety Evaluation for Supplemental Proposed Changes The supplemental proposed changes to Technical Specification 3/4.7.4 represent administrative changes and additional limitations in entering

, proposed Action Statement b. These changes clarify subsequent actions should the conditions of the action statement not be met and additionally limit entry into the proposed Action Statement b to actions which are part of general service water system upgrades. As such, this submittal does not alter the conclusions, safety review, or significant hazards determination of the previous request.

50.59 Safety Review '

Pursuant to 10CFR50'59,

. we have reviewed the proposed Technical Specification changes and have concluded that no unreviewed safety question exists: (i) The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction is not increased by these supplemental changes.

One change places an additional limitation on the use of the proposed -

Action Statement to actions which are- part of Service Water System upgrades. The other change merely specifies subsequent actions, consistent with Action Statement a., should the conditions for entering Action Statement b not be met. (ii) The pessibility of a different type of accident other than discussed in the UFSAR has not been created by this proposed change. As noted above, the proposed changes are enveloped by the previous submittal and no new or different type of accidents are created by these additional changes. (iii) The margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification is not reduce 51 by the proposed changes. Instead, the proposed changes provide clarification and an additional limitation for entry into the previously proposed Action Statement.

50.92 Significant Hazards Review The supplemental proposed changes do not pose a significant hazards consideration as defined in 10CFR50.92. The Commission has provided examples of changes that constitute no significant hazards consideration in Federal Register, Volume 48, page 14870. Example (i) consists of purely administrative changes. Example (ii) consists of additional limitations, restrictions, or controls beyond those presently specified in the Technical Specification.

The supplemental propose change is similar to example (i) in that it clarifies the intent of subsequent actions should the conditions of proposed Action Statement b not be met. Specifically, the proposed change requires HOT STANDBY within six hours and COLD SHUTDOWN within the following thirty hours should the Action Statement conditions not be met.

This is consistent with the subsequent actions specified in existing Action Statement a.

The proposed change is similar to example (ii) in that specifying entry into Action Statement b. only as part of Service Water System upgrades

- .e limits the use of the Action Statement to those entries identified as part of the upgrade program. Although the upgrade program scope may evolve over the next several years, the general activities include the installation of new discharge headers and spray arrays, mechanical and chemical cleaning of service water piping and valves, pipe repair and replacement, valve repair and replacement and the installation of corrosion mitigation measures. Corrosion mitigation measures include the installation of corrosion rate monitoring probes, a corrosion inhibitor chemical addition system, and recirculation lines to eliminate stagnant areas. Extended action statements may also be required to allow inspection of and subsequent repairs to buried piping interior coatings and pump house components. This limitation in use of the Action Statement is clearly enveloped by the previous significant hazards consideration evaluation.

Based on the above examples, we conclude that the proposed change does not pose a significant hazards consideration.

~

5 i

p

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20209E799&oldid=3080199"