ML20128B704: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
StriderTol Bot insert
 
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 18: Line 18:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:ru
{{#Wiki_filter:ru
  . ..s.-
..s.-
D DA/RYLAND h                   COOPERAT/VE
D DA/RYLAND h
* P.O. BOX 817   2615 EAST AV SOUTH . LA CROSSE. WISCONSIN 54601 (608) 788 4 000 June 25, 1985 In reply, please refer to LAC-10968 DOCKET NO. 50-409 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn: Mr. John Zwolinski Operating Branch #5 Division of Operating Reactors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC       20555
COOPERAT/VE
* P.O. BOX 817 2615 EAST AV SOUTH. LA CROSSE. WISCONSIN 54601 (608) 788 4 000 June 25, 1985 In reply, please refer to LAC-10968 DOCKET NO. 50-409 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn:
Mr. John Zwolinski Operating Branch #5 Division of Operating Reactors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE LA CR''SSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (LACBWR)
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE LA CR''SSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (LACBWR)
P"     [0NAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-45 EM II.E.4.2.6 (L   aINMENT ISOLATION) OPERABLE VALVES
P"
[0NAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-45 EM II.E.4.2.6 (L
aINMENT ISOLATION) OPERABLE VALVES


==REFERENCES:==
==REFERENCES:==
Line 31: Line 35:


==Dear Mr. Zwolinski:==
==Dear Mr. Zwolinski:==
 
Reference 1 contained the NRC Safety Evaluation on the operability of the 4-inch vent header isolation valves.
Reference 1 contained the NRC Safety Evaluation on the operability of the 4-inch vent header isolation valves. It requested information and proposed Technical Specifications on the vent header internal valve closure time.
It requested information and proposed Technical Specifications on the vent header internal valve closure time.
Reference 2 provided the requested information and stated that since LACBWR Technical Specifications already require surveillance testing of the valve and measurement of its closure time, an additional specification establishing a time limit was not necessary. The procedure implementing the required surveillance test has been modified to specify the closure time limit. Also, if a dynamic test is successfully conducted demonstrating valve closure at 52 psig, the closure time limit would not be needed. Therefore, it would not be efficient to change the Technical Specifications.
Reference 2 provided the requested information and stated that since LACBWR Technical Specifications already require surveillance testing of the valve and measurement of its closure time, an additional specification establishing a time limit was not necessary. The procedure implementing the required surveillance test has been modified to specify the closure time limit. Also, if a dynamic test is successfully conducted demonstrating valve closure at 52 psig, the closure time limit would not be needed. Therefore, it would not be efficient to change the Technical Specifications.
The NRC has asked (telecon, Dudley (NRC) and Goodman (DPC), May 16, 1985) whether a dynamic test of the vent header internal valve will be conducted at the completion of the next scheduled Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT). At this time, DPC plans to attempt to perform a dynamic test of the vent header valves following the next ILRT. If a dynamic test is not conducted, DPC will propose a Technical Specification which establishes a closure time limit for
The NRC has asked (telecon, Dudley (NRC) and Goodman (DPC), May 16, 1985) whether a dynamic test of the vent header internal valve will be conducted at the completion of the next scheduled Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT). At this time, DPC plans to attempt to perform a dynamic test of the vent header valves following the next ILRT.
            'the vent header internal valve.
If a dynamic test is not conducted, DPC will propose a Technical Specification which establishes a closure time limit for
Two items covered in Reference 1 are in need of clarification. First, the WPl.6.8                                                 1 8507030322 950625           '
'the vent header internal valve.
n  y PDP   ADOCK 05000409             '
Two items covered in Reference 1 are in need of clarification. First, the WPl.6.8 1 8507030322 950625 y
U P                 PM.             A i0
PDP ADOCK 05000409 n
U P
PM.
A i0


i l~                       Mr. Jchn Zwolinzki, Chief                                                                                             June 25, 1985 Operating Branch #5                                                                                                                   LAC-10968
i l~
!                        manufacturer of the vent header external valve, 55-25-004, is Black, Sivalls and Bryson, Inc.
Mr. Jchn Zwolinzki, Chief June 25, 1985 Operating Branch #5 LAC-10968 manufacturer of the vent header external valve, 55-25-004, is Black, Sivalls and Bryson, Inc.
The other item deals with the procedural requirements covering closure of the vent header external valve. The major primary leak procedure and the alarm response procedure for high Containment Building activity require the vent I                         header external valve to be closed. The procedures do not stipulate only when I-                         the pressure in containment is less' than 40 psig. The reason for this is
The other item deals with the procedural requirements covering closure of the vent header external valve. The major primary leak procedure and the alarm response procedure for high Containment Building activity require the vent I
                        .two-fold. First, the containment pressure is predicted to be above 40 psig for only a short period of time. Therefore, the disadvantages of further complicating the procedures by the addition of the stipulation outweigh any advantage. It is highly unlikely that the operators would be turning the valve control switch during that short period of time (from 6-20 seconds following a recirculation line break). Secondly, it is known that the valve can close under flow conditions when the containment pressure is 40 psig. It is not known whether it will close at higher containment pressure. Therefore, even if.the pressure is above 40 psig, an attempt should be made to close the valve and terminate the release. For both of these reasons, the major primary leak procedure requires the operator to close the vent header external valve without specifying a containment pressure range for conduct of that step.
header external valve to be closed. The procedures do not stipulate only when I-the pressure in containment is less' than 40 psig. The reason for this is
.two-fold.
First, the containment pressure is predicted to be above 40 psig for only a short period of time. Therefore, the disadvantages of further complicating the procedures by the addition of the stipulation outweigh any advantage. It is highly unlikely that the operators would be turning the valve control switch during that short period of time (from 6-20 seconds following a recirculation line break). Secondly, it is known that the valve can close under flow conditions when the containment pressure is 40 psig. It is not known whether it will close at higher containment pressure. Therefore, even if.the pressure is above 40 psig, an attempt should be made to close the valve and terminate the release. For both of these reasons, the major primary leak procedure requires the operator to close the vent header external valve without specifying a containment pressure range for conduct of that step.
If there are any questions, please contact us.
If there are any questions, please contact us.
Yours truly, D IRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE Wf                               $6                   -
Yours truly, D IRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE Wf
E    ank Linder, General Manager FL:LSG:sks cc: Jamec G. Keppler, Region III NRC Recident Inspector Richard Dudley, LACBWR Project Manager l
$6 E
ank Linder, General Manager FL:LSG:sks cc: Jamec G. Keppler, Region III NRC Recident Inspector Richard Dudley, LACBWR Project Manager l
l i
l i
WPl.6.8                                                                   !
WPl.6.8 !
        -._ ,. _ - ._.-.._.. - . . _ - - , _ _ ._ _ --- _ _ _ _ _ _, _. _                                              , _ . . _ . - . , _ _ . - _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _}}
, _.. _. -., _ _. - _. _. _ _ _ _ _}}

Latest revision as of 14:41, 12 December 2024

Informs That Procedure Implementing Required Surveillance Tests for Containment Isolation Operable Valves Per TMI Item II.E.4.2 Modified to Specify Closure Time Limit.Change to Tech Specs,Per NRC 850115 Request,Unnecessary
ML20128B704
Person / Time
Site: La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png
Issue date: 06/25/1985
From: Linder F
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE
To: Zwolinski J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TASK-2.E.4.2, TASK-TM LAC-10968, NUDOCS 8507030322
Download: ML20128B704 (2)


Text

ru

..s.-

D DA/RYLAND h

COOPERAT/VE

  • P.O. BOX 817 2615 EAST AV SOUTH. LA CROSSE. WISCONSIN 54601 (608) 788 4 000 June 25, 1985 In reply, please refer to LAC-10968 DOCKET NO. 50-409 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn:

Mr. John Zwolinski Operating Branch #5 Division of Operating Reactors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

SUBJECT:

DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE LA CRSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (LACBWR)

P"

[0NAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-45 EM II.E.4.2.6 (L

aINMENT ISOLATION) OPERABLE VALVES

REFERENCES:

(1) NRC Letter, Zwolinski to Linder, dated January 15, 1985.

(2) DPC Letter, Linder to Zwolinski, LAC-10598, dated February 27, 1985.

Dear Mr. Zwolinski:

Reference 1 contained the NRC Safety Evaluation on the operability of the 4-inch vent header isolation valves.

It requested information and proposed Technical Specifications on the vent header internal valve closure time.

Reference 2 provided the requested information and stated that since LACBWR Technical Specifications already require surveillance testing of the valve and measurement of its closure time, an additional specification establishing a time limit was not necessary. The procedure implementing the required surveillance test has been modified to specify the closure time limit. Also, if a dynamic test is successfully conducted demonstrating valve closure at 52 psig, the closure time limit would not be needed. Therefore, it would not be efficient to change the Technical Specifications.

The NRC has asked (telecon, Dudley (NRC) and Goodman (DPC), May 16, 1985) whether a dynamic test of the vent header internal valve will be conducted at the completion of the next scheduled Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT). At this time, DPC plans to attempt to perform a dynamic test of the vent header valves following the next ILRT.

If a dynamic test is not conducted, DPC will propose a Technical Specification which establishes a closure time limit for

'the vent header internal valve.

Two items covered in Reference 1 are in need of clarification. First, the WPl.6.8 1 8507030322 950625 y

PDP ADOCK 05000409 n

U P

PM.

A i0

i l~

Mr. Jchn Zwolinzki, Chief June 25, 1985 Operating Branch #5 LAC-10968 manufacturer of the vent header external valve, 55-25-004, is Black, Sivalls and Bryson, Inc.

The other item deals with the procedural requirements covering closure of the vent header external valve. The major primary leak procedure and the alarm response procedure for high Containment Building activity require the vent I

header external valve to be closed. The procedures do not stipulate only when I-the pressure in containment is less' than 40 psig. The reason for this is

.two-fold.

First, the containment pressure is predicted to be above 40 psig for only a short period of time. Therefore, the disadvantages of further complicating the procedures by the addition of the stipulation outweigh any advantage. It is highly unlikely that the operators would be turning the valve control switch during that short period of time (from 6-20 seconds following a recirculation line break). Secondly, it is known that the valve can close under flow conditions when the containment pressure is 40 psig. It is not known whether it will close at higher containment pressure. Therefore, even if.the pressure is above 40 psig, an attempt should be made to close the valve and terminate the release. For both of these reasons, the major primary leak procedure requires the operator to close the vent header external valve without specifying a containment pressure range for conduct of that step.

If there are any questions, please contact us.

Yours truly, D IRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE Wf

$6 E

ank Linder, General Manager FL:LSG:sks cc: Jamec G. Keppler, Region III NRC Recident Inspector Richard Dudley, LACBWR Project Manager l

l i

WPl.6.8 !

, _.. _. -., _ _. - _. _. _ _ _ _ _