ML20078D976

From kanterella
Revision as of 00:26, 25 April 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Proposed Changes to Tech Spec Tables 2-6(a) & 3-7 to Update Surveillance Capsule Removal Schedule
ML20078D976
Person / Time
Site: Fort Calhoun Omaha Public Power District icon.png
Issue date: 10/03/1983
From:
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:
Shared Package
ML20078D962 List:
References
NUDOCS 8310050271
Download: ML20078D976 (11)
v • d • e


Text

. - . - --

o

  • i TABLE 2-6(a)

(Continued) i Located Accessible In High Difficult to During Inaccessible Radiation Remove for

  • Snubber Normal During Normal Areas During Functional No. Elevation Operation Operation Shutdown Testing WS-74 1053' 0" X WS-75A 1053' 0" X WS-78 1038' 4" X WS-79 1049' 6" X WS-80 1049' 6" X WS-81 1049' 6" X WS-83 1033' 4" X WS-86A 999' 0" X WS-87 999' 0" X WS-88 999' 0" X WS-88A 999' 0" X WS-89 1002' 6" X j WS-90 1001' 6" X WS-90A 1005' 6-5/8" X WS-91 1019' 0" X WS-92 ' 1019' 0" X WS-92A 1026' 0" X WS-93 1032' 0" X WS-94 1032' 0" X l WS-95 1032' 0" X WS-96 1032' 0" X X WS-97 1032' 0" X X WS-98 1032' 0" X X WS-100 1039' 0" X WS-101 1039' 0" X HCV-327-S 1025' 0" X

, llCV-329-S 1025' 0" X IICV-331-S 1025' 0" X llCV-333-S 1025' 0" X MSS-1 1054' 7" X- X MSS-2 1054' 8-1/2" X X MSS-3 1038' 0" X l MSS-4 Top 1038' 6" X X i

i i

Amendment No. 21, 59, 72 2-77 ATTACH!1Ef1T A

-8310050271 831003 PDR ADOCK 05000285 P PDR

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

TABLE 2-6(a)

(Continued)

Located Accessible in High Difficult to During Inaccessible Radiation Remove for

  • Snubb e r No rmal During Normal Areas During Functional No. Elevation Operation Operation Shutdown Testing RCS-21 1032' 0" X RCS-22 1037' 6" X RCS Bottom 1032' 0" X RCS-25 1033' 0" 'X RCS-27 1052' 9" X RCS-28 1052' 9" X RCS ^0 1045' 6" X RCS-30A 1047' 0" X RCS-31 1052' 0" X RCS-32 1052' 0" X RCS-33 1052' 0" X RCS-34 1047' 0" X RCS-39 1048' 0" X RCS-41 1048' 0" X RCS-42 1007' 9" X RCS-44 1007' 9" X RCS Top 1009' 6 X RCS Bottom 1009' 6" X RCS-4 7-Top 1009' 6" X RCS-4 7-Bottom 1009' 6" X RCS-49 1009' 6" X RCS-51 1007' 9" X Amendment No. 27 2-80.

l l

TABLE 2-6(a)

(Continued)

Located Accessible In High Difficult to During Inaccessible Radiation Remove for

  • Snubber Normal During Normal Areas During Functional No. Elevation Operation Ope ration Shutdown Testing RCS-52 1007' 9" X RCS-64 Top 1032' 0" X RWS-79 1046' 0" X X RWS-128A 998' 8-1/2" X RWS-128B 998' 8-1/2" X RWS-130 998' 8-1/2" X RWS-131 998' 8-1/2" X SG-Al 1049' 0" X X SG-A2 1049' 0" X X SG-A3 1049' 0" X X SG-A4 1049' 0" X X SG-B1 1049' 0" X X SG-B2 1049' 0" X X SG-B3 1049' 0" X X SG-B4 1049' 0" X X SIS-1 9 79' 6" X SIS-1A 9 79' 6" X SIS-3 9 79' 6" X SIS-4 979' 6" X SIS-4A 9 79' 6" X SIS-5 979' 6" X SIS-SA 9 79' 6" X SIS-6 979' 6" X SIS-6A 9 79' 6" X SIS-7 979' 6" X SIS-8 979' 4" X SIS-8B 979' 6" X SIS-8C 979' 6" X SIS-9 9 79' 6" X SIS-9A 979' 6" X SIS-9B 979' 6" X SIS-10 983' 6" X

! SIS-11 983' 6" X SIS-16 981' 6" X SIS-16A 981' 6" X SIS-17 979' 6" X Amendment No. 21, 39, 72 2-81

TABLE 2-6(a)

(Continued)

)

Located 'l Accessible In High Difficult to During Tnaccessible Radiation Remove for

  • Snubber Normal During Normal Areas During Functional No. Elevation Operation Operation Shutdown Testing SIS-17A 979' 6" X SIS-18 979' 6" X SIS-19 9 79' 6" X SIS-20 979' 6" X SIS-21 9 79' 6" X SIS-21A 981' 6" X SIS-21B 981' 6" X SIS-21C 981' 6" X SIS-22 981' 6" X SIS-23 981' 6" X l SIS-24 983' 6" X SIS-24A 983' 6" X SIS-26 979' 6" X SIS-27 981' 6" X SIS-27A 981' 6" X SIS-27B 981' 6" X SIS-28 980' 0" X SIS-28A 980' 0" X SIS-29 980' 0" X SIS-30 979' 6" X SIS-30A 979' 6" X SIS-31 981' 6" X SIS-31A 981' 6" X SIS-32 9 80' 0" X SIS-32A 980' 0" X SIS-32B 980' 0" X SIS-33-Top 981' 6" X SIS Bo t tom 981' 6" X X SIS-34 980' 0" X SIS-35-Top 980' 0" X SIS Bottom 980' 0" X SIS-36-Top 974' 6" X Amendment No. 27, 59 2-82

l TABLE 2-6(a)

(Continued)

Located Accessible In liigh Difficult to During Inaccccaible Radiation Remove for

  • Snubbe r Normal During Normal Areas During Functional No. Elevation Operation Operation Shutdown Testing SIS-162 1014' 6" X SIS-164 1014' 0" X SIS-165 10:4' 6" X SIS-165A 1014' 6" X Top SIS-165A 1014' 6" X Bo ttom SIS-166 1014' 6" X SIS-167 1014' 6" X SIS-168 1014' 6" X SIS-168A 1014' 6" X Top SIS-168A 1014' 6" X Bottom SIS-169 1007' 7" X SIS-169A 1007' 7" X SIS-170 1007' 8" X SIS-170A 1007' 5" X SIS-172 1032' 0" X SIS-173 1036' 8" X SIS-174 1049' 2" X SIS-174A 1049' 6" X SIS-174B 1051' 7-1/4" X X SIS-174C 1052' 6" X X SIS-174D 1063' 7-1/4" X X SIS-174E 1064' 6" X X SIS-175 1057' 0" X X SIS-175A 1056' 5-1/2" X l SIS-176B 1052' 6" X X SIS-176C 1051' 7-1/4" X X SIS-176D 1064' 6" X X SIS-176E 1063' 7-1/4" X X SIS-176G 1074' 0" X X SIS-17611 1074' 0" X X l

Amendment No. 27, #$s 59 2-87

TABLE 2-6(a)

(Continued)

Located Accessible In High Difficult to During Inaccessible Radiation Remove for

During 7N ormal . Areas During Functional No. Elevation Operatio . Operation Shutdown Testing SIS-183 1055' 9-1/2" s X l

SIS-184 979' 6" . X - '

SIS-185 979' 6" X  !

STS-187 983' 6" X

. SIS-188 988' 6" X

' ' SIS-20 2 1009' 0" X SIS-204 9951 0'1 . X

i. SIS-205 9 79' 6" X .

SIS-206 983' 6" X i

SIS-208 1003' 1-I/8" X' WDS'-10 7 1004' 0" X , '

, WDS-122 Right 991' 6" X WDS-122 'T -

Left' -991' 6" s

X -

  • ~
'w [ ' s . .

2 ,.

NOTE: Modificati ns to this table due to changes in high radiation areas should be submitted to the NRC as part of the next

,s- licensing amendment request.

q, , s -

E *TW4

-~

RRS Raw Water System SG Steam Generator

] SIS Safety Injection System WDS Waste Disnosal Systam 1

's x w; , -

I ',

'\,

V .6 ,

s.

'e

. Amendment.No. 21, jf, 72 2 i e

L g -

I. Y, ,

e  : -

f r/ . <

TABLE 3-6

[ REACTOR COOLANT PUMP SURVEILLANCE

,I- ,.

j Requirement Method Fr'equency 8

1.1 Reactor Coolant Pump,,- Visual inspection of upper When motor is t Flywheels surface of top disc and bot- disassembled tom surface of bottom disc; for mainte- j volumetric inspection from nance purposes.

circumference ofvall disc segments. ,

i s

I TABLE 3-7 CAPSULE REMOVAL SCHEDULE Removal Refueling Schedule Capsule Schedule EFPY Removed 1 2.6 2250 2 5.9 2650 3 10 450 4 17 850,950,2750 5' 24 850,950,2750 6 '

Standby Any Remaining Capsule 7 >

Standby 2250*

8 Standby 2650*

i The alternative capsule for4 removal should be determined prior to attempting removal of any scheduled capsule.

  • Replacement capsule assemblies were installed in the 2250 and 2650 locations after early withdrawal of the criginal 2650 capsule. These capsules will benchmark the change in core loading design initiated at 5.9 EPPY. f 1

4

\

Amendment.No. 46 3-27

,' s

DISCUSSION AND SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION FOR UPDATES TO THE SHOCK SUPPRESSOR OPERABILITY TABLE 2-6(a)

Table 2-6(a) was updated with minor changes. There was one snubber name changed from SIS-178 to SIS-23 to avoid confusion with a solid strut, also designated SIS-178. MSS-3 and SIS-183, shown as "Ac-cessible During Normal Operation", should correctly be listed as

" Inaccessible During Normal Operation" and RWS-89 should actually be listed as RUS-79.

Facility License Change 80-09, Amendment No. 59 to the Technical Specifications, changed the name of snubber SIS-174BB to SIS-176.

There has been a labeling problem with supports associated with these numbers and there has, in fact, never been a snubber designated as SIS-174BB. Therefore, SIS-176 (formerly SIS-174BB) should be deleted from Table 2-6(a).

In response to NUREG-0737, an analysis was performed on the Fort Calhoun pressurizer overpressure protection system to determine equipment operability in the event of valve opening. The systems analyzed included the PORV's, safety valves, related upstream and downstream piping, and piping restraints. The analysis was based on NRC sanctioned computer codes RELAP 5, FORCE, and TPIPE.

Results of the analysis show that if the PORV's were to open with the piping and restraints in their previous configuration, very large O water hammer forces would occur in the downstream piping. These forces would overstress both the pipe and the restraints. Modifi-cation of the system had to be made to reduce these overstressed con-ditions. After analyses of several different restraint configu-rations, the optimum configuration was determined and the following changes to Table 2-6(a) are required:

Delete RCS-23 Top RCS-23A RCS-24 Top RCS-24 Bottom RCS-26 Add RCS-G4 Top The following is a summary of the proposed changes to Table 2-6(a) of the Technical Specifications:

ATTACHMENT B

SIS-178 Changed to SIS-23 MSS-3 Listed as " Inaccessible During Normal Operat. ion" SIS-183 Listed as " Inaccessible During Normal Operation" RWS-89 Changed to RUS-79 SIS-176 Deleted RCS-23 Top Deleted RCS-23A Deleted RCS-24 Top Deleted RCS-24 Bottom Deleted RCS-26 Deleted RCS-64 Top Added The following significant hazards considerations have been made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.92:

(1) Will the change involve a significant increase in the proba-bility or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

No. The proposed change will not involve a significant in-crease in the probability or consequences of an accident pre-viously evaluated. The standards used in the design and in-stallation of the shock suppressors were at least as con-servative as those used during initial construction. The analysis of the shock suppressors was performed using accepted computer codes. As required by Technical Specifications, an 4 independent review of the engineering justification was per-formed and the justification was found to be valid. The changes to the shock suppressor list were reviewed and ap-proved by the Safety Audit and Review Committee, as is also required by the Technical Specifications.

, (2) Will the change create the possibility of a new or different type of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

No. The proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Some of the changes were administrative in nature.

These do not change the design, operability, or surveillance requirements of the snubber systems and, therefore, could not

-create the possibility of an unevaluated accident. The remain-ing changes are due to modifications of the snubber systems which were performed to reduce the possibility and conse-quences of a previously evaluated accident; therefore, the changes could not create-the possibility of an unevaluated accident.

(3) Will the change involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?

No. The proposed change will not involve a significant re-duction in a margin of safety. The changes are either admini-strative in nature or stem'from an attempt to decrease the possibility.and consequences of an accident or increase the margin of safety using NRC sanctioned ' codes and standards.

~ _ _

DISCUSSION AND SIGNIFICAUT HAZARbd CONSIDERATION FOR SURVEILLANCE CAPSULE REMOVAL SCHEDULE Table 3-7 (on page 3-27), the surveillance capsule removal schedule of the Technical Specifications, was revised to document the early withdrawal of surveillance capsule assembly W-265 and to document the installation of two replacement capsule assemblies- one at W-225 and one at W-265. The original W-265 capsule assembly was removed early, at 5.9 EFPY, to benchmark the end of a core loading design used up to that time and the two replacement capsule assemblies were installed to document the reduced fluence expected as a result of a core load-ing design change. The new core design initiated in the following cycle is expected to reduce the fluence at the inside surface of the reactor vessel by 34%.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.92, the following significant hazards consider-ations have been made:

(1) Will the change involve a significant increase in the proba-bility or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

No. Early removal of the W-265 capsule assembly and the in-stallation of the two replacement capsule assemblies will not cause a significant increase in the probability or consequence of a previously evaluated accident, but instead will provide better information on the fluence to the inside surface of the

, reactor vessel. The surveillance capsule holders mounted in the reactor vessel were originally designed to allow the in-sertion of replacement capsule assemblies as required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix G. The two replacement capsule assemblies are of the same design, installation, and manufacture as the original capsule assemblies.

(2) Will the change create the possibility of a new or different type of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

No. The replacement capsule assemblies will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated accident because they are of the same design, installation, and manufacture as the original capsule assemblies.

(3) Will the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

No. There is no significant reduction in the margin of safety involved because the replacement capsule assemblies occupy the holders of the original capsule assemblies and are, therefore, in the same configuration as the original capsule assemblies and do not affect the operation of the plant.

(

l JUSTIFICATION FOR FEE CLASSIFICATION 1

1 The proposed amendment is deemed to be C1, ass III, within of 10 CPR 170.22, in that it involves a single safety co A

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20078D976&oldid=2762589"