ML17335A231

Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-58 & DPR-74,changing Runout Limits for Safety Injection Pump to 675 Gpm Unless Pump Is Specifically Tested to Higher Flow Rate Not Exceeding 700 Gpm

ML17335A231
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	09/14/1998
From:	POWERS R P INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. (FORMERLY INDIANA & MICHIG
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML17335A233	List: ML17335A231 ML17335A234
References
AEP:NRC:1274, NUDOCS 9809220081
Download: ML17335A231 (12)

Text

CATEGORY11REGULATYINFORMATION DISTRIBUTIO SYSTEM(RIDS)DOCKET¹0500031505000316ACCESSION NBR:9809220081, DOC.DATE:

98/09/14NOTARIZED:

YESFACIL:50-315 DonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit1,IndianaM50;316PonaldC.CookNuclearPowerPlant,Unit2,IndianaMAUTH.NAMEAUTHORAFFILIATION POWERS,R.P.

'IndunaMichiganPowerCo.(formerly Indiana&MichiganEleRECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION RecordsManagement Branch(Document ControlDesk)

SUBJECT:

Application foramendstolicensesDPR-588DPR-74,revising TSpage3/45-6.D1STRZBUT10N CODE:A'OOZDCORTESRECEZVED:LTR

)ENCLISZEE:P1TITLE:ORSubmittal:

GeneralDistribution NOTES:AT,ERECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-3LASTANG,JINTERNAILECENTER01NRR/DSSA/SPLB NUDOCS-ABSTRACT EXTERNAL:

NOACCOPIESLTTRENCL111111111111RECIPIENT IDCODE/NAME PD3-3PDNRR/DE/ECGB/A NRR/DRCH/HICB NRR/DSSA/SRXB OGC/HDS3NRCPDRCOPIESLTTRENCL1111111110110D'NOTETOALL"RIDS"REC1PIENTS:

PLEASEHELPUSTOREDUCEWASTE.TOHAVEYOURNAMEORORGANIZATION REMOVEDFROMDISTRZBUTION LISTSORREDUCETHENUMBEROFCOPIESRECEIVEDBYYOUORYOURORGANIZATION, CONTACTTHEDOCUMENTCONTROLDESK(DCD)ONEXTENSION 415-2083TOTALNUMBEROFCOPIESREQUIRED:

LTTR13ENCL12 IC indianaMichigan~PowerCompany500CircleDriveBuchanan, Ml491071373 September 14,1998AEP:NRC:1274 10CFR50.92DocketNos.:50-31550-316U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission ATTN:DocumentControlDeskMailStop0-Pl-17Washington, D.C.20555-0001 Gentlemen:

DONALDC.COOKNUCLEARPLANTUNITS1AND2TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION AMENDMENT SAFETYINJECTION PUMPRUNOUTFLOWLIMITSThisletteranditsattachments constitute anapplication foramendment tothetechnical specifications (T/Ss)forCookNuclearPlantunits1and2.Thisamendment willchangetherunoutlimitsforasafetyinjection pumpto675gpmunlessthepumpisspecifically testedtoahigherflowratenotexceeding 700gpm.Background information relevanttotheT/Schangeandouranalysesconcerning significant hazardsconsiderations arecontained inattachment 1tothisletter.Attachment 2containsthecurrentT/Spages,marked-up toreflecttheproposedchange.TheproposedrevisedT/Spagesarecontained inattachment 3.Thissubmittal proposesachangetoT/Spage3/45-6forbothunit1and2.Theproposedchangewillnotresultinasignificant changeinthetypesofeffluents orasignificant increaseintheamountsofanyeffluents thatmaybereleasedoffsiteorasignificant increaseinindividual orcumulative occupational radiation exposure.

Theproposedchangehasbeenreviewedandapprovedbytheplantnuclearsafetyreviewcommittee andthenuclearsafetyanddesignreviewcommittee.

Werequestthattheapprovedamendment beeffective thirtydaysfromissuance.

980'7220081 9809'X4PDRADOCK05000815P'OR U.S~NuclearRegulatory Commission Page2AEP:NRC:1274 Inaccordance withtherequirements of10CFR50.91(b)(1),

copiesofthisletteranditsattachments havebeentransmitted totheMichiganPublicServiceCommission andtheMichiganDepartment ofPublicHealth.R.P.PowersVicePresident SWORNTOANDSUBSCRIBED BEFOREME~l~san*iINDENotaryPubliMycommission expiresl2Z01/jmcAttachments c:J.A.Abramson, w/attachments J.L.Caldwell, w/attachments MDEQ-DW&RPD,w/attachments NRCResidentInspector, w/attachments J.R.Sampson,w/attachments sLC

~~ATTACHMENT 1TOAEP:NRC:1274 SUPPORTING ANALYSESFORAMENDMENT TOTHETECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS SAFETYINJECTION PUMPRUNOUTFLOWLIMITS Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1274 Page1BackroundAmendment numbers84(6/24/85) and64(6/18/84),

respectively, totheunit1andunit2.technical specifications (T/Ss)incorporated achangetotheallowable safetyinjection (SI)pumprunoutlimitsinT/S4.5.2.h.Thechangeraisedthepermissible runoutflowofasingleSIpumpfrom650gpmto700gpm.Thepumprunoutflowchangeswerenecessitated byphysicalchangestotheSIpumpminiflowrecirculation lines.Thesephysicalchangesincreased miniflowcapacityfrom30gpmtoapproximately 60gpmanditwasanticipated thattheincreased miniflowwouldmakeitdifficult toachievealloftheSIpumpdesignflowobjectives withoutexceeding the650gpmrunoutlimitexistingatthattime.Thejustification forthechangefrom650to700gpmwasbasedonvendortesting(DresserIndustries) ofasingleCookNuclearPlantreplacement safetyinjection pumpandaspareelement.Thetestingestablished safepumpoperation uptoamaximumflowof700gpm.Weconfirmed thattheavailable netpositivesuctionheadtotheSIpumps,asinstalled attheplant,wasgreaterthanthatrequiredtosafelyachieve700gpmduringthevendortesting.Therefore, webelievedthistestingwasalsoapplicable tothethree(untested) installed pumps.In1991,wereceivedcorrespondence fromWestinghouse indicating thatthegenericrunoutlimitsforPacific2"JTCHpumpswas675gpmunlesseachspecificpumpwastestedtoahigherflow.Atourrequest,DresserreviewedthepumprunoutlimitsforCookNuclearPlant.Basedontheirreview,Dresserconcluded thefollowing:

1)forthespecificreplacement pumpandspareelementpreviously testedbythem,the700gpmrunoutlimitremainedapplicable (thisappliestotheunit2northpump);and2)forother(untested)

SIpumps,Dresser's positionwastoabidebythegeneralWestinghouse limitof675gpm(thisappliestobothunit1pumpsandtheunit2southpump).Theyindicated thatmanufacturing tolerances insandcastimpellers andmaterialchangesinthepumpcasing(ofthetestedreplacement pump)couldresultintestvariations thatlimitapplicability ofthetestingbetweenpumps.Dresseralsoindicated thatthegenericlimitof675gpmcouldbeincreased forthethreeuntestedpumps,withappropriate inplaceorvendortesting.ReviewofSIpumpflowbalancing dataindicated thatproperbalancing couldbeachievedwithoutexceeding 675gpmforthethreepumpsthathadnotbeenspecifically testedforhigherflows.Procedure 12EHP4030STP~208SIgU1&U2ECCSFLOWBALANCESAFETYINJECTlON SYSTEM",waschangedtoadministratively limitflowofthethreeuntestedpumpsto675gpm.Basedonprocedural controlsforlimitingrunoutflowofthethreeuntestedpumps,weconcluded in1992thattheintentofT/S4.5.2.hwasbeingmetandthatachangetotheT/Sswasnotnecessary.

However,additional recentreviewhasconcluded thatachangetotheT/Sshouldhavebeeninitiated.

Thissubmittal providesthenecessary changeandalsoclarifies thebasisforsettingtheSIpumprunoutlimits.Thebasesclarification describes whytheinjection lineupismoreconservative thanthesumprecirculation lineup(whentheRHRpumpsareproviding asuctionpressureboost)forpotential SIpumprunout.Thisisduetosplitting oftheSI

Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1274Page2trainsduringcirculation, resulting inahighersystemresistance thanwitha-singleSIpumpinjecting toallfourreactorcoolantloops.DescritionofAmendment ReuestTechnical specification 4.5.2.h(SIsystemsinglepump)isbeingchangedtorequirethemaximumpermitted runoutflowrateforaSIpumpberestricted to675gpmunlessthepumpisindividually qualified toahigherflowrateofupto700gpm.Currently, T/S4.5.2.hrecognizes arunoutflowrateof700gpmforeachoftheSIpumps.Thebasisisbeingclarified todescribewhytheinjection lineupduringflowbalancing istheminimumresistance configuration forrunoutconsiderations.

Justification forAmendment Theproposedamendment isnecessary tocorrectatechnical discrepancy intherunoutflowlimitforsafetyinjection pumpsthat,havenotbeenspecifically testedtothelimitcurrently allowedbyT/S4.5.2.h.BasisforNoSignificant HazardsDetermination Inaccordance with10CFR50.92,thisproposedamendment doesnotinvolveasignificant hazardconsideration ifitdoesnot:1)Involveasignificant increaseintheprobability orconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Theproposedreduction intheSIpumprunoutflowdoesnotincreasetheprobability ofoccurrence ofanypreviously evaluated accidentbecausetheSIpumpsarenotconsidered tobeaccidentinitiators.

Inaddition, flowbalancing performed atCookNuclearPlanthasproventheabilitytodelivertheminimumT/Sflowof300gpmtoeachpairofcoldleginjection pointswithoutexceeding the675gpm(or700gpm)pumprunoutlimits.Therefore, theemergency corecoolingsystemperformance objectives of10CFR50.46arenotimpactedandthischangedoesnotinvolveasignificant increaseintheconsequences ofanaccidentpreviously evaluated.

2)Createthepossibility ofanewordifferent kindofaccidentfromanyaccidentpreviously evaluated.

Thisproposedchangeimposesagenericlimitonmaximumallowable flowforuntestedSIpumps.Nophysicalsystemchangesorchangesinoperating modesarebeingmadethatcouldintroduce newordifferent kindsofaccidents fromthosepreviously evaluated.

Asdiscussed in(1)above,theSIpumpsarenotconsidered accidentinitiators, andthisstatusisnotaffectedbythechangetotheSIpumprunoutlimits.

Attachment 1toAEP:NRC:1274 Page33)Involveasignificant reduction inamarginofsafety.Thischangereflectsareducedmaximumsinglepumpflowtobeobservedduringflowbalancing oftheSIsystem.FlowbalancetestingatCookNuclearPlanthasdemonstrated theabilitytomeetSIflowrequirements whilemaintaining anadequatemargintotherevisedlowerrunoutlimitsbeingproposedbythissubmittal.

BecausetheminimumrequiredSIflowdelivered tothecorehasnotbeenreducedbythischange,thechangedoesnotinvolveareduction inamarginofsafety.Basedonthepreceding, theevaluation concluded thattheproposedchangetotheSIpumprunoutlimitsdoesnotinvolveasignificant hazardsconsideration asdefinedin10CFR50.92.

ATTACHMENT 2TOAEP:NRC:1274 CURRENTPAGESMARKED-UP TOSHOWPROPOSEDCHANGESTOTHEDONALDCDCOOKNUCLEARPLANTUNITS1AND2TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION SAFETYINJECTION PUMPRUNOUTFLOWLIMITS UNITNO.1