ML20212F115
| ML20212F115 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212F112 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9711040187 | |
| Download: ML20212F115 (4) | |
Text
..,
t a*
- %qk UNITED STATES p
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 30006 4001
\\*****
1AFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 207 AND B6 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N05. DPR-66 AND 6 i
,DUQUESNE LIGHT CMPANY 0H10 EDIS0N CMPANY l
PENNSfLVANIA POWER COMPANY THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY.
THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION. UNIT Nos. I AND 2 DQCKET NOS. 50-334 AND 50-412
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated October 4, 1996, the Duquesne Light Company (the licensee)
. submitted a request for changes to the Beaver Valley Power Station Unit Nos.
I and 2 The requested changes w(BVPS-1 and BVPS-2), Technical Specifications (TSs).ould revise the surv 4.1.Z.4.1, 4.5.2.b and 4.6.2.1.b and associated Bases. The subject surveillance requirements are applicable to the charging /high-head safety injection pumps, low-head safety injection (LHSI) pumps, and the containment quench spray pumps. The proposed changes replace the current specific test acceptance criteria contained in these surveillance requirements with requirements to verify pump performance in accordance with the inservice testing (IST) program, the emergency core cooling system (ECCS)- flow analysis, or the containment integrity safety analysis, as applicable. The proposed changes also make minor editorial changes in these TSs and make conforming changes in the TS Index pages.
2.0 LVALUATION 2.1 Proposed Technical Specification Changes 2.1.1 Charging Pumps The licensee has proposed to delete the acceptt.nce criteria and testing reference for the charging pumps from TSs 4.1.2.3.1 and 4.1.2.4.1 and reference TS 4.5.2.b.1 in both the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 TSs. These specifications currently require that each charging pump be demonstrated operable by verifying that each pump meets or exceeds a discharge pressure
[M AM E 4
l
j t
s'.
j i
2-l of 2402 psig on recirculation flow when tested pursuant to TS 4.0.5.
The licensee has also proposed to modify TS 4.5.2.b to state that testing would be l
performed at the frequency specified in the IST program. TS 4.5.2.b.I would i
also be modified to state that the charging pump's developed head be greater i
than the required developed head as specified in the IST program and the ECCS flow analysis.
2.1.2 Low-Head Safety Injection Pumps The licensee has proposed to delete the requirement in TS 4.5.2.b.2 to verify j
that each LHSI pump meets or exceeds a discharge pressure of 159 psig on 1
recirculation flow when tested in accordance w' th TS 4.0.5.
This i
specification would be modified to state that the LHSI pump's developed head I
j at the flow test point would be verified at the frequency specified in the IST i
program (note modification in 4.5.2.b as stated in Section 2.1.1 is greater than or equal to the required developed head as specified in the IST program and ECCS flow analysis).
j 2.1.3 Quench Spray Pumps i
The licensee has proposed, in TS 4.6.2.1.b, to delete the requirement to verify on recirculation flow that each quench spray pump develops a differential pressure of greater than or equal to 142 psid at a flow of i-greater than or equal to 1600 gpm when tested in accordance with TS 4.0.5.
The licensee has proposed that each quench spray pump's developed head at the
(
flow test point be greater.than or equal to the required developed head as
]
specified in the IST program and the containment integrity safety analysis.
l-2.2 Evaluation of Proposed Technical Specification Changer
(
2.2.1 Charging Pumps i-The TSs currently require that the charging pumps be tested in accordance with
_ specific criteria contained-in TS 4.5.2.b.1 and the licensee's IST program
[
referenced in TS 4.0.5.
The changes would remove the specific acceptance criteria from the TS and replace it with direct references to the IST program j
and the licensee's ECCS flow analysis.
SectionIIIofthelicensee'sISTprhranforBVPS-1andBVPS-2contains minimum operatin page5oftheirSgointcurvesfortprogram for each plant that these curves are a graphic charging pumps. The licensee states on
{
representation of the minimum allowable pump flow versus head, which is required to meet the applicable safety analysis, for each centrifugal pump in the IST program. Plotting acceptable pump performance on the minimum operating point graph in the IST program using the discharge pressure criteria of 2402 psig from the current TS and the recirculation flow rate from the last pump inservice test reveals that the performance point is above the plotted minimum operatir,g point curve. Therefore, the change to the TS provides an equivalent test to that which currently is included in the TS and is acceptable.
?&9 1s =u owar m'up e n t e r--W ps en4wie-r'-=f-irer-9*v9*-+-rret-+
w pe=-
t==
m ew ew-e--
ase e s-us.sw yrme ews.gmv-'-$4-am3-u m wi-r-2-*
- + - - -
--'u=r us gmy r-
-mev=ss+=-es W
t
. 2.2.2 Low-Head Safety Injection Pumps The TSs currently require that the LHS! pumps be tested in accordance with specific criteria contained in TS 4.5.2.b.2 and the licensee's IST program referenced in TS 4.0.5.
The changes would remove the specific acceptance criteria from the TS and replace it with direct references to the IST program-and the licensee's ECCS flow analysis.
Section III of the licensee's IST program for BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 contains minimum operating point curves for the LHSI pumps. The licensee states on page 5 of their IST program for each plant that these curves are a graphical representation of the m nimum allowable pump flow versus head, which is required to meet the applicablo safety analysis, for each centrifugal pump in the IST program.
Plotting acceptable pump perfomance on the minimum operating point graph in the IST program using the discharge pressure criteria of 159 psig from the current TS and the recirculation flow rate from the last pump inservice test reveals that the performance point is above the plotted minim a operating point curve. Therefore, the change to the TS provides an equivalent test to that which currently is included in the TS and is acceptable.
2.2.3 Quench Spray Pumps The TSs currently require that 8 % (
with specific criteria contained in.ench spray pumps be tested in accordance TS 4.6.2.1.b and the licensee's IST program referenced in TS 4.0.5.
The changes would remove the specific acceptance criteria from the TS and replace it with direct references to the IST program and the licensee's containment integrity safety analysis.
Section III of the licensee's IST program for BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 contains minimum operating point curves for the quench s ray pumps. The licensee states on page 5 of their IST program for each lant that these curves are a
- graphical representation of the minimum allowab e pump flow versus head, which is required to meet the applicable safety analysis, for each centrifugal pump in the IST program. Plotting acceptable pump performance on the minimum operating point graph in the IST program using the discharge pressure and flow criteria of 142 psid and 1600 gpa respectively from the current TS reveals that the perfomance point is on the plotted minimum operating point curve.
Therefore, the change to the TS provides an equivalent test to that which currently is included in the TS and is acceptable.
2.2.4 Editorial Changes
'The licensee has adjusted page numbers in the TS Index and changed a footnote reference from an asterisk to a number. This changes are editorial in nature and are.teceptable.
j o * *.,
j :
i 2.3 Summary 4
i Based r,in the above evaluation, the NRC staff finds that the licensee has
'i j
. demonstrated the adequacy of the proposed changes for the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 j
15.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
1 I
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvaniv State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
y
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
I The amendments chan e a requirewnt with respect to installation or use of a I
facility component ocated within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR l
Part 20 and changes survalliance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 radiatior, exposure.
The Commission has praviously issued a i
proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no_ public comment on such finding (61 FR 66706). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR j
51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be i
prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
]
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, i
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 i
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common I
defense-and security or to the health and safety of the public, s
l Principal Contributor:
J,. Colaccino j
Date: October. 28, 1997 i
i, i
i l
J