View source for CNS-17-040, Withdrawal of Inservice Testing Relief Request 17-CN-002 Regarding an Alternative Method to Establish New Reference Values for Testing Chemical and Volume Control Pump

{{Adams
| number = ML17227A019
| issue date = 08/14/2017
| title = Withdrawal of Inservice Testing Relief Request 17-CN-002 Regarding an Alternative Method to Establish New Reference Values for Testing Chemical and Volume Control Pump
| author name = Simril T
| author affiliation = Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
| addressee name = 
| addressee affiliation = NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR
| docket = 05000413
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| case reference number = CNS-17-040
| document type = Letter type:CNS
| page count = 3
| project = 
| stage = Withdrawal
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Tom Simril
(-, DUKE                                                                                        Vice President Catawba Nuclear Station ENERGY~
Duke Energy CN01VP 14800 Concord Road York, SC 29745 o: 803.701.3340 I: 803.701 .3221 tom .simril@duke-energy.com CNS-17-040                                                                         10 CFR 50.55a August 14, 2017 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

==Subject:==
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)
Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Docket Number 50-413 Withdrawal of lnservice Testing Relief Request 17-CN-002 Regarding an Alternative Method to Establish New Reference Values for testing Chemical and Volume Control Pump

==Reference:==
Duke Energy letter CNS-17-039 to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Request for Alternative Method to Establish New lnservice Testing Values fora Chemical and Volume Control Pump, dated July 27, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML172088024)
By letter dated July 27, 2017, Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(z)(2), Duke Energy requested relief from ASME OMb-2006, Section ISTB-3320; specifically, the requirement in paragraph one, which states: *1f it is necessary or desirable, for some reason other than stated in ISTB-3310, to establish an additional set of reference values, a Group A or comprehensive test shall be run at the conditions of an existing set of reference values and the results analyzed. n On August 3, 2017, a conference call was held with the NRC to discuss whether relief was required. The first topic of discussion centered on whether ISTB-3320 imposed any specific requirements on timing or when the test at the conditions of the existing set of reference values had to be run. Catawba explained that based on the absence of more explicit detail in the requirements, it was taken that the test should be run immediately prior to the test at new reference values and this was the basis for Duke Energy requesting for relief. It was agreed during the call that the code does not explicitly state any time requirements and that previous Group A or Comprehensive tests may be analyzed to determine the current pump operation to be acceptable.
Following the initial discussion on the timing aspect of ISTB-3320, discussion shifted to ISTB-3320(a) which discusses establishing an additional set of reference values using the pump curve established with Preservice Testing. Catawba explained that the code of record at the tom .simril@duke-energy .corn

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CNS-17-040 August14, 2017 Page 2 time of installation of NV Pump 1A did not require a Preservice Test with a minimum of five points. Furthermore, Catawba explained that a four point head curve was performed to satisfy system requirements after installation and that a "shop curve" of 10 points was performed by the manufacturer at their facilities prior to shipment to Catawba. The two curves were in close agreement in the flow range considered for the new reference value (-150-160 gpm). Catawba will use these curves to establish the new reference values and will run a test in accordance with ISTB-3320 to verify the new reference values before their implementation.
Conclusion of the call and discussion was that relief from the code requirements was not required. As a result, Duke Energy is hereby withdrawing CNS relief request 17-CN-002.
There are no regulatory commitments contained in this letter.
If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Tolani E. Owusu at (803) 701-5385.
Sincerely, Tom Simril Vice President, Catawba Nuclear Station

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CNS-17-040 August 14, 2017 Page3 XC: (with Enclosure)
C. Haney, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 J. D. Austin, Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Catawba Nuclear Station M. Mahoney, NRC Project Manager (Catawba)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Mailstop 0-8H4A Rockville, MD 20852-2738 S. E. Jenkins, Manager S.C DHEC Radioactive & Infectious Waste Management jenkinse@dhec.sc.gov}}