ML17262A832
| ML17262A832 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 04/23/1992 |
| From: | ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17262A830 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9205060110 | |
| Download: ML17262A832 (18) | |
Text
ATTACHMENTARevisetheTechnicalSpecificationpagesasfollows:Remove3~1314.14-14.14-24..14-34.14-44.14-54..14-64.14-74.14-8Insert3%1314.14-14.14-24.14-34.14-44.14-54.14-64.14-74.14-84-.14-94.14-10'9205060110920423PDRADOCK05000244PPDR 3.13SnubbersLimitinConditionfor0eration3..13.1WithRCSconditionsabovecoldshutdown,allsafety-related3.13.2snubbersshallbeoperable.Thisspecificationdoesnotapplytothosesnubbersinstalledonnonsafety-relatedsystemsifthesnubberfailure,and,aresultingfailureofthesupported.nonsafety-related.systemshowntobecausedbythatsnubberfailure,wouldhavenoadverseeffectonanysafety-relatedsystem.ActionWithoneormoresnubbersinoperable,within72hoursreplaceorrestoretheinoperablesnubber(s)tooperablestatusand,performanengineeringevaluationperSpecification4.14.1fonthesupported.componentordeclarethesupportedsysteminoperableand.followtheappropriateactionstatementforthatsystem.BasisSnubbersarerequiredtobeoperabletoensurethatthestructuralintegrityofthereactorcoolantsystemandallothersafety-relatedsystemsismaintainedduringand.followingaseismicorothereventinitiatingdynamicloads.Snubbersmaybereplacedbyrigidstructuralsupports(bumpers)providedananalysisisperformedtodemonstratethatappropriateacceptancecriteriaaresatisfiedfordesignbasisseismicand.pipebreakeventsandprovidedthatthebumpersareinspected.periodicallyinamannerappropriateforrigidstructuralsupports.AmendmentNo.3~131Proposed 4.144.14.1SnubberSurveillanceReirementsEachsnubberrequiredbySpecification3.13tobeOPERABLEshallbedemonstrated.OPERABLEbytheperformanceofthefollowinginserviceinspectionprograminadditiontotherequirementsofSpecification4.2.a~Insection.esAsusedinthisspecification,"typeofsnubber"shallmeansnubbersofthesamedesignandmanufacturer.,irrespectiveofcapacity.b.VisualInsectionscSnubbersarecategorizedasinaccessibleoraccessibleduringreactoroperation.Eachofthesecategories(inaccessibleandaccessible)maybeinspectedindependentlyaccordingtothescheduledeterminebyTable4.14-1.Thevisualinspectionintervalforeachtypeofsnubbershallbedeterminedbaseduponthecriteriaprovided.inTable4.14-1.VisualXnsectionAccetanceCriteriaVisualinspectionsshallverifythat(1)thesnubberhasnovisibleindicationsofdamageorimpairedOPERABILITY,(2)attachmentstothefoundationorAmendmentNo.4.14-1Proposed supportingstructurearefunctional,and(3)fastenersfortheattachmentofthesnubbertothecomponentandtothesnubberanchoragearefunctional.Snubberswhichappearinoperableasaresultofvisualinspectionsshallbeclassifiedasunacceptableandmaybereclassifiedacceptableforthepurposeofestablishingthenextvisualinspectioninterval,providedthat:(1)thecauseoftherejectionisclearlyestablishedandremediedforthatparticularsnubberandforothersnubbers,irrespectiveoftypethatmaybegenericallysusceptible;or(2)theaffectedsnubberisfunctionallytested.intheas-foundconditionanddeterminedOPERABLEperSpecification4.14.1e.Allsnubbersfoundconnectedtoaninoper-ablecommonhydraulicfluidreservoirshallbecountedasunacceptablefordeterminingthenextinspectioninterval.Areviewandevaluationshallbeperformedanddocumentedtojustifycontinuedoperationwithanunacceptablesnubber.Ifcontinuedoperationcannotbejustified,thesnubbershallbedeclaredinoperableand.theACTIONrequirementshallbemet.AmendmentNo.374.14-2Proposed TABLE4.14-1SNUBBERVISUALINSPECTIONINTERVALPopulationorCategoryNUMBEROFUNACCEPTABLESNUBBERS(Ref.Note7)ColumnAColumnBColumnCExtendIntervalRepeatIntervalReduceInterval(Notes1and2)(Notes3and6)(Notes4and6)(Notes5and6)801001502003004005007501000orgreater122.029244056364878109Note1:Thenextvisualinspectionintervalforasnubberpopulationorcategorysizeshallbedeterminedbaseduponthepreviousinspectionintervalandthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringthatinterval.Snubbersmaybecategorized,basedupontheiraccessibility'uringpoweroperation,asaccessibleorinaccessible.Thesecategoriesmaybeexaminedseparatelyorjointly.However,thisdecisionmustbeAmendmentNo.4.14-3Proposed f
Note2:Note3:Note4:Note5:Note6:Note7:documentedbeforeanyinspectionandshallbeusedasthebasisuponwhichtodeterminethenextinspectionintervalforthatcategory.Interpolationbetweenpopulationorcategorysizesandthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersispermissible.UsenextlowerintegerforthevalueofthelimitforColumnsA,B,orCifthatintegerincludesafractionalvalueofunacceptablesnubbersasdeterminedbyinterpolation.IfthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersisequaltoorlessthanthenumberinColumnA,thenextinspectionintervalmaybetwicethepreviousintervalbutnotgreaterthan48months.IfthenumberofacceptablesnubbersisequaltoorlessthanthenumberinColumnBbutgreaterthanthenumberinColumnA,thenextinspectionintervalshallbethesameasthepreviousinterval.IfthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersisequaltoorgreaterthanthenumberinColumnC,thenextinspectionintervalshallbetwo-thirdsofthepreviousinterval.However,ifthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersislessthanthenumberinColumnCbutgreaterthanthenumberinColumnB,thenextintervalshallbereducedproportionallybyinterpolation,thatis,thepreviousintervalshallbereducedbyafactorthatisone-thirdoftheratioofthedifferencebetweenthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringthepreviousintervalandthenumberinColumnBtothedifferenceinthenumbersinColumnBandC.TheprovisionsofSpecificationSection4.0areapplicableforallinspectionintervalsuptoandincluding48months.Todeterminethenextsurveillanceinterval,anunacceptablesnubbermaybereclassifiedasacceptableifitcanbedemonstratedthatthesnubberisoperableinitsas-foundconditionbyperformanceifafunctionaltestandifitsatisfiestheacceptancecriteriaforfunctionaltesting.AmendmentNo.4.14-4Proposed 04 4.14.1.dFunctionalTestsAtleastonceper18monthsduringshutdown,arepresentativesample(atleast10-oofthesnubbersrequiredbySpecification3.13)shallbefunctionallytested.eitherinplaceorinabenchtest.Foreachsnubberthatdoesnotmeetthefunctionaltestacceptancecriteriaof.Specification4.14.1e,anadditional10%ofthesnubbersshallbefunctionallytesteduntilnomorefailuresarefoundoruntilallsnubbershavebeenfunctionallytested.Therepresentativesampleselectedforfunctionaltestingshall,asfaraspractical,includethevariousconfigurations,operatingenvironments,rangeofsizesandcapacitiesofsnubbers.Inadditiontotheregularsample,snubbersplacedinthesamelocationsassnubberswhichfailedthepreviousfunctionaltestshallberetestedatthetimeofthenextfunctionaltest.Additionally,ifafailedsnubberhasbeenrepairedandreinstalledinanotherlocation,thatfailedsnubbershallalsoberetested.Thesesnubbersshallnotbeincludedintheregularsample.Ifduringthefunctionaltesting,additionalsamplingisrequireddueto,failureofonlyonetypeofsnubber,thefunctionaltestingresultsshallbereviewedatthattimetodetermineifadditionalsamplesshouldbelimitedtothetypeofsnubberwhichhasfailedthefunctionaltesting.AmendmentNo.4.14-5Proposed 4.14.1.e.FunctionalTestAccetanceCriteriaThesnubberfunctionaltestshallverifythat:1)Activation(restrainingaction)isachievedwithinthespecifiedrangeinbothtensionandcompression;2)Snubberbleed,orreleaseratewhererequired.,ispresentinbothtensionand,compression,withinthespecifiedrange;3)Whererequired,theforcerequiredtoinitiateormaintainmotionofthesnubberiswithinthespecifiedrangeinbothdirectionsoftravel;and4)Forsnubbersspecificallyrequirednottodisplaceundercontinuousload,theabilityofthesnubbertowithstandloadwithoutdisplacementisverified.Testingmethodsmaybeusedtomeasureparametersindirectlyorparametersotherthanthosespecifiedifthoseresultscanbecorrelatedtothespecifiedparametersthroughestablishedmethods.FunctionalTestFailureAnalsisAnanalysisshallbemadeofeachfailuretomeetthefunctionaltestacceptancecriteriatodeterminethecauseofthefailure.TheresultsofthisanalysisAmendmentNo.34.14-6Proposed shallbeused,ifapplicable,inselectingsnubberstobetestedinanefforttodeterminetheoperabilityofothersnubbers,irrespectiveoftype,whichmaybesubjecttothesamefailuremode.Forthespecificcaseofasnubberselectedforfunctionaltestingwhicheitherfailstoactivateorfailstomove,i.e.,frozen-in-place,the.causewillbeevaluatedand,ifcausedbymanufacturerordesigndeficiency,allsnubbersofthesametypesubjecttothesamedefectshallbefunctionallytestedorevaluatedinamannertoensuretheiroperability.AnytestingperformedaspartofthisrequirementshallbeindependentoftherequirementsstatedinSpecification4.14.1dforsnubbersnotmeetingthefunctionaltestacceptancecriteria.Foranysnubbersfoundinoperable,anengineeringevaluationshallbeperformedonthecomponentstowhichtheinoperablesnubbersareattached.Thepurposeofthisengineeringevaluationshallbetodetermineifthecomponentstowhichtheinoperablesnubbersareattachedwereadverselyaffectedbytheinoperabilityofthesnubbersinordertoensurethatthecomponentremainscapableofmeetingthedesignedservice.AmendmentNo.4.14-7Proposed 4.14.1.gSnubberSealServiceLifeMonitorinThesealservicelifeofhydraulicsnubbersshallbemonitored.andsealsreplacedasrequiredtoensurethattheservicelifeisnotexceededbetweensurveillanceinspectionsduringaperiodwhenthesnubberisrequiredtobeoperable.ThesealreplacementsshallbedocumentedandthedocumentationshallberetainedinaccordancewithTechnicalSpecification6.10.2.BasisSnubbersareprovidedtoensurethatthestructuralintegrityofthereactorcoolantsystemandallothersafetyrelatedsystemsismaintainedduringandfollowingaseismicorothereventinitiatingdynamicloads.Thevisualinspectionfrequencyisbasedonthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringtheprevious'nspectioninproportiontothesizesofthevarioussnubberpopulationsorcategories.Asnubberis-consideredunacceptableifitfailstheacceptancecriteriadelineatedbySpecification4.14.1.c.Thevisualinspectionintervalisbaseduponthepreviousinspectionintervalandmaybeaslongastwofuelcycles,nottoexceed48months,dependingonthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringthepreviousvisualinspection.AmendmentNo.4.14-8Proposed
ttUnacceptablesnubbersshallbeevaluatedtodetermineiftheyareinoperable.Forinoperablesnubberstheapplicableactionrequirementsshallbemet.Whenasnubberisfoundinoperable,anengineeringevaluationofthesupportedcomponentisperformedinordertodetermineifanysafety-relatedcomponentorsystemhasbeenadverselyaffected.bytheinoperabilityofthesnubber.Thisevaluationisinadditiontothedeterminationofthesnubbermodeoffailure.Theengineeringevaluationshalldeterminewhetherornotthesnubberfailurehasimpartedasignificanteffectonorcauseddegradationofthesupportedcomponentorsystem,toensuretheyremaincapableofmeetingthedesigned,service.Whenthecauseoftherejectionofasnubberisclearlyestablished..and,remediedforthatsnubberandforanyothersnubbersthatmaybegenericallysusceptible,andverifiedbyinservicefunctionaltesting,thatsnubbermaybeexemptedfrombeingcountedasinoperable.Genericallysusceptiblesnubbersarethosewhichareofaspecificmakeormodelandhavethesamedesignfeaturesdirectlyrelatedtothesnubberrejectedorarethosewhicharesimilarlylocatedorexposedtothesameenvironmentalconditionssuchastemperature,radiation,and.vibration.Todeterminethenextsurveillanceinterval,anunacceptablesnubbermaybereclassifiedasacceptableifitcanbedemonstratedthatthesnubberisoperableinitsas-foundconditionbyperformanceofafunctionaltestandifitsatisfiestheacceptancecriteriaforfunctionaltesting.AmendmentNo.4.14-9Proposed Toprovideassuranceofsnubberfunctionalreliability,arepresentativesampleoftheinstalledsnubberswillbefunctionallytestedduringplantshutdownsatlessthanorequalto18monthintervals.Observedfailuresofthesesamplesnubbersshallrequirefunctionaltestingofadditionalunits.Hydraulicsnubbersandmechanicalsnubbersmayeachbetreatedasadifferententityfortheabovesurveillanceprograms.Theservicelifeofasnubberisevaluatedviamanufacturerinputandengineeringinformationthroughconsiderationofthesnubberserviceconditionsandfunctionaldesignrequirements.Theonly'snubbercomponentswithservicelivesnotexpectedtoexceedplantlifearesealsand,o-ringsfabricatedfromcertainsealmaterials.Therefore,asealreplacementprogramisrequiredtomonitorsnubbersealando-ringservicelifetoassuresnubberoperabilityisnotdegradedduetoexceedingcomponentservicelife.AmendmentNo.4.14-10Proposed ATTACHMENTBDESCRIPTIONTheproposedamendmentredefinesthesnubbervisualinspectionschedulepursuanttoguidancecontainedinGenericLetter90-09.ThecurrentformatofSpecification4.14.1willalsobemodifiedtoparalleltheformatdelineatedinthemodelcontained.inGenericLetter90-09.Therefore,someeditorialchanges,inadditiontochangestothebasis,weremadetoensureconsistency.Thecurrentschedule,describedinTechnicalSpecification4.14.1a,isbasedonlyonthenumberofinoperablesnubbersfoundduringthepreviousinspection,irrespectiveofthesizeofthesnubberpopulation.Thecurrentinspectionintervalisbasedonafuelcycleofupto18months,withamaximumallowableextensionnottoexceed25percentofthespecifiedsurveillanceinterval.Theinspectionintervaldependsonthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringthepreviousvisualinspection.Thealternativeinspectionschedule,describedinGenericLetter90-09,isbasedonthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringthepreviousinspectioninproportiontothesizesofvarioussnubberpopulationsorcategories.Asnubberisconsideredunacceptable,inbothcases,ifitfailstheacceptancecriteriaofthevisualinspection.Thealternativeinspectionintervalisbasedonafuelcycleofupto24monthsand.maybeaslongastwofuelcycles,or48monthsforplantswithotherfuelcyclesdependingonthenumberofunacceptablesnubbersfoundduringtheprevious.visualinspection.SYSTEMSANDCOMPONENTSAFFECTEDSafety-RelatedHydraulicandMechanicalSnubbersSAFETYFUNCTIONOFAFFECTEDSYSTEMSANDCOMPONENTSThesafetyfunctionofSurveillanceRequirement4.14.1a(visualinspectionreguirement),istoensurethatnoobservabledeficienciesexistwithanysnubberinstallationthatwouldrenderasnubberinoperable.Snubbersarerequiredtoensurethatthestructuralintegrityofthereactorcoolantsystemandallothersafetyrelatedsystemsismaintainedduringandfollowingaseismicevent.Snubbers,ordynamicrestraints,areusedtorestrainpipingorequipmentduringseismiceventsortransientloads,yettheyallowrelativelyunrestrained.movementofthepiping/componentduringnormalheatuporcooldownoperations.
EFFECTSONSAFETYSnubberinserviceinspectionrequirementsconsistofvisualinspectionandfunctionaltesting.Visualinspectionisintendedtodetectpotentialimpairedoperabilitycausedbyleakage,corrosionordegradationduetoenvironmentalexposure.Functionaltestingtypicallyinvolvesremovingthesnubberandtestingonaspecifically-designedteststandtoverifyitsabilitytooperatewithinspecifiedperformancelimits.Ingeneral,functionaltestingisintendedtoprovidea95-oconfidencelevel,that90to100percentofthesnubbersareoperablewithinacceptablelimits.Theperformanceofthevisualinspectionisaseparateprocesswhichiscomplimentarytothefunctionaltestingprogramandprovidesadditionalconfidenceinsnubberoperability.RochesterGasandElectricCorporationhascompareddatagathered.onGinnaStation'shydraulicandmechanicalsnubberstothatreportedbyBrookhavenNationalLaboratory(BNL).TheBNLreportwaspreparedfortheCommission,"DevelopmentofAlternativeSnubberSurveillanceRequirements:RecommendedInterimSnubberSurveillancePlan,"datedJune12,1989insupportofGenericLetter90-09.ThemethodologypresentedintheBNLreportisthebasisforGenericLetter90-09.TheresultsofthedatagatheredonGinnaNuclearPowerStationcomparedfavorablytothedataevaluatedbyBNL.Theresults,forbothGinnaandBNL,showedthatthepercentfailureratesfoundforvisuallyexaminedandfunctionallytestedsnubbersarelow.ThefailureratesforGinna'svisualexaminationsalsocomparedfavorablytofunctionallytestedsnubbers.Thevisualinspectionshadfailureratesof6.0%and4.0%forthehydraulicandmechanicalsnubbersrespectively.Thecorrespondingfailureratewhensnubbersweresubjectedtoanactualtestwas2.2%.TheresultsdescribedabovearedocumentedinGinnaSafetyEvaluationnumberNSL-0000-SE004.ThissafetyevaluationwasreviewedandapprovedbyGinna'sPlantOperationsReviewCommittee(PORC).Itisapparent,fromtheresultsforGinna,thatextendingthevisualinspectionintervalpursuanttotheguidancecontainedinGenericLetter90-09isreasonable.Itisemphasizedthat,basedonthereliabilityanalysisforextensionofthevisualinspectionintervalpresentedintheBNLstudy,themaximumpermissiblenumberofinoperablesnubberssatisfyingthereliabilitycriteriondependsonthegroupsizeandthefutureinspectionperiod.Thus,thereductioninmarginofsafetyisconsideredtobeinsignificant.Thisproposed.amendmentcomplieswiththesnubberreliabilitycriterionthataminimumof90%ofthesnubbers(inthegroup)beoperableinthenextinspectionperiod.Further,theproposedchangecomplieswiththeguidancecontained.inGenericLetter90-09.
10CFR50.92EVALUATIONTheproposedchangeintheGinnaTechnicalSpecificationsdoesnotinvolveasignificanthazardconsideration.ThebasisforthisdeterminationisdocumentedinGinnaSafetyEvaluationnumberNSL-0000-SE004.ThissafetyevaluationwasreviewedandapprovedbyGinna'sPlantOperationsReviewCommittee(PORC).Thisevaluationconfirmed.thathistoricalmaintenanceandsurveillancedataforsnubbersatGinnadoesnotinvalidateanextensiontotheexistinginspectioninterval,i.e.RGGE'sexperienceisconsistentwithindustryexperience.Furthersupportforthebasisfortheabovedeterminationisasfollows:ThereisnosignificantincreaseintheprobabilityorconsequencesofanaccidentpreviouslyevaluatedbecauseaccidentconditionsandassumptionsarenotaffectedbytheproposedTechnicalSpecificationchange.Theeffectontheavailabilityofthesnubbersduetoanincreaseinthevisualinspectionintervalhasbeenshowntobenegligible.Further,functionaltestingaloneassures,witha95-oconfidencelevel,thatatleast90-oofthesnubbersareoperablewithoutanyvisualinspection,asassuredbyTechnicalSpecification4.14.1c(changedto4.14.1dpertheproposed.amendment).Thiswillensurethatsystemreliabilityremainsessentiallyunchanged.Furthermore,.theproposedchangewillreducefutureoccupationalradiationexposure.Thepossibilityofanewordifferentkindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviouslyevaluatedisnotcreated,.Inmattersrelated.tonuclearsafety,allaccidentsareboundedbypreviousanalysis.Theproposedchangedoesnotadd.toormodifyanyequipmentorsystemdesignnordoesitinvolveanychangesintheoperationof-anyplantsystem.Theabsenceofahardwarechangemeansthattheaccidentinitiatorsremainunaffected,sonouniqueaccidentprobabilityiscreated.Theproposedamendmentdoesnotinvolveasignificantreductioninthemarginofsafetyasdefined.inthebasisforanyTechnicalSpecificationbecausetheproposed:amendmentwillcontinuetoensure,with95-oconfidence,thatatleast90percentofthesnubbersareoperable,asassuredbythecalculationsreportedintheBNLreportwhichisthebasisforGenericLetter90-09.Therefore,thefunctionofthetotalpopulationofsnubbersisreasonablyassured.Equipmentreliabilitywillbemaintained.andnoLimitingConditionforOperation(LCO)orLimitingSafetySystemSetpoint(LSSS)wouldbeaffected.Thus,thereductioninmarginofsafetyisconsideredtobeinsignificant.CONCLUSIONOnthebasisoftheabove,RG&Ehasdeterminedthattheamendmentrequestdoesnotinvolveasignificanthazardsconsideration.