ML20236L178

Summarizes 870617 Telcon W/Licensee on Licensee Proposed Tech Spec 3.14 Re Spent Fuel Pool Cooling & Discrepancy Between NRC Understanding & Licensee Proposal.Licensee Committed to Modify Proposed Tech Spec

ML20236L178
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	08/03/1987
From:	Ridgely J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Wermiel J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC-61351, NUDOCS 8708100160
Download: ML20236L178 (2)

Text

-

August 3,1987

) Ob Docket No. 50-271 MEMORANDUM FOR: Jerry tiermiel, Section Leader Plant Systems Branch i Division of Engineering and Systems Technology '

FROM: John,Ridgely, Mechanical Engineer Plant Systems Branch Division of Engineering and Systems Technology

SUBJECT:

VERMOMT YANKEE TELECON (JUNE 17,1987) RELATED TO THE LICENSEP S PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 3.14 - SPENT FUEL P0OL EXPANSION TAC NO. 61351 A conference call was held between the Vermont Yankee licensee (Stan Miller and Robert Capstick) and tie staff (Vern Rooney and John Ridgely) at 3:53 P.M.

Eastern Standard Time to discuss the proposed Technical Specification 3.14 related to spent fuel pool 1 cooling and the discrepancy between what the staff l' understood and what the licensee was going to propose. The staff understood that the licensee was going to propose a Technical Specification that would ,

require, among other things, that the reactor be in COLD SHUTDOWN conditions '

prior to using the RHR system for cooling the spent fuel pool. This was

! specified in the proposed Technical Specification. After a discussion with l the licensee, the licensee agreed to modify the proposed technical specification to read as follows:

"3.14.C From and after the date that both fuel pool cooling subsystems i

are made or found inoperable or the fuel pool temperature cannot be maintaired below 150 F', the reactor shall be in a cold shutdown condition prior to using the RMP system to cool the saent fuel pool and prior to the fuel pool temperature exceeding 200 ;. (Underlined words are new).

A random selection of a, Vermont Yankee Technical Specification was taken and the wording was compared to the proposed Technical Specification 3.14. The Technical Specification selected was 3.7.9, "Drywell/ Suppression Chamber i d/p". There were a number of phrases used in the proposed Technical l Specification 3.14 that did not appear to be standard. The licensee was  !

questioned en the wording and they stated that they would review and revise the wording of the proposed technical specif Uation as appropriate to conform to the standard wording in their Technical Specifications.

The June 11, 1987 submittal h dicated that the licensee had reviewed the functhnability of the reactor building ventilation system for a spent fuel pool water temperature transient and not for a steady state pool temperature of 200 F. The licensee stated Yn the conference call that the duration of the ,

transient was on the order of days. Thus, the time that the spent fuel pool I 8708.t00160 DR 870B03 ADDCg 05000273 PDR 1 ,

t /

.J

water temperature was at or near 200 F could have been sufficiently long as to have failed the ventilation system if the system could not have handled the higher water temperature. Thus, while the staff's understanding was that the HVAC was going to be reviewed for a ster.dy state pool temperature of 200 F, the evaluation performed by the licensee appears to be reasonably realistic and thus there is reasonable assurance that should the spent fuel pool temperature reach 200 F, the reactor building HVAC will remain operable, w k ff pPlantSystemsBranchohnRidgely, Mech [nica Enginee Division of Engineering and Systems Technology DISTRI O Mie5_BilHfile O )N PDRs PSB Rdg Plant File JWermiel JKudrick AThadani JRidgely VRooney M

1 l

JRidgelf);cfPSB: DEST (t/- I 8/J /87

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _