ML20115J430

License Amend Request 92-12 to License NPF-86,changing TS to Correct Acceptance Value for Sum of RHR Sys Injection Line Flow Rates

ML20115J430
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	10/22/1992
From:	Feigenbaum T NORTH ATLANTIC ENERGY SERVICE CORP. (NAESCO)
To:
Shared Package
ML20115J421	List: 05000443/LER-1992-002, Forwards License Amend Request 92-12 to License NPF-86, Changing TS to Correct Acceptance Value for Sum of RHR Sys Injection Line Flow Rates,Per LER 92-02-00 ML20115J430 ML20115J433
References
NUDOCS 9210280179
Download: ML20115J430 (3)

Text

,

4 9 North genenoox grariou unir 1

==milemi: At/anfic Energy Service Corporation Facility Operating License N!'F-86 Docket No. 50-443 License Amendment Request No.'92-12L Change in Residual Heat Removal System-Injection Line Flow Rate Acceptance Value This License Amendment Request is submitted by North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation pursuant to 10CFR50.90. The following information is enclosed in support of this License Amendment Request:

.Section I - Introduction and Description of Proposed Changes

. Section ll -

Markup of Proposed Changes

. Section ill - Retype of Proposed Changes

. Section IV -

Safety Evaluation of Proposed Changes

. Section V -

Determination of Significant Hazards for Proposed Changes

. Section VI -

Environmental Impact Assessment i

Sworn and Subscribed to before me this

') 3, / day of I N N U t ) ,1992

,, , /? / D 6:</ LW

, '!/ld/// f/. [?/ [%jil'o /

Ted feigenbaum sd Notary Public Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer 7w n. - .. .

~

'/ .l m.<, g , , , j 921028o179 921022 PDR ADOCK 0500o443 P PDR

. 1 4

1, Introduction and Description of Proposed Chance A. Introduction-During a routine review of the Seabrook Station procedure used to perform a full-stroke :

exercise of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) pump discharge ched valves and associated cold leg injection check valves (Station Procedure OX1413.05, "RHR Cold Shutdown Testing")

an inconsistency was noted between the acceptance value for the sum of the injection line flow rates with a single pump running as specified in the procedure and the value r,pecified in Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.5.2h.3. The acceptance value listed in the procedure was 4350 gpm, while the Technical Specification value was 2828 gpm. The purpose of Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.5.2h is to verify satisfactory flow rates in the ECCS subsystem injection lines following modifications which might alter the flow characteristics in these subsystems.

Upon discovering this inconsistency North Atlantic' requested that Westinghouse review the ~

Emergency Core Cooling Systcm (ECCS) analysis to- determine if the RilR flow rate used in the analysis was consistent with the value provided in Technical Specification 4.5.2h.3. -

Westinghouse notified North Atlantic that while 2828 gpm is the appropriate value for flow through three of the four RHR injection lines, the correct value for flow through four RHR injection lines, and thus the value which should appear in Technical Specification 4.5.2h.3, is 3868.4 gpm. Westinghouse stated that the inconsistency would not constitute a significant safety issue if no flow altering modification of the RilR system had been made since the RHR system demonstrated flow greater than 3868.4 gpm during initial testing. North Atlantic reviewed preoperational test records and determined that system flow rates were satisfactory.

During the development and review of this proposed Technical Specification change it was deter nined that the non-conservative acceptance value of 2828 gpm was used for post modification testing performed in-1989 after the installation of check valves in the suction ,

lines to the RHR pumps from the Refueling Water Storage Tank and the Containment Emergency Sump. The RilR "A" train was tested in September 1989 with a value which '

exceeded 3868.4 gpm. However, when the RHR "B" train was tested in November '1989, a value of .3776 gpm was accepted. The test was performed injecting into.the loops with the _

Pressurizer vented to atmosphere and flow to the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) throttled to ensure that it exceeded 2828 gpm but did not overfill the RCS, Upon discovering this acceptance of a non-conservative value North Atlantic reviewed additional test records and determined that the RHR system was tested on -September 10, 1991 during the first refueling outage to verify ECCS check valve operability.with the reactor vessel head off. The flow rate for the "A" train was 5013 gpm and the flow rate for the "IP train was 4696 gpm. Since both values exceed 3868.4 gpm, this test demonstrated that no operability or design basis concern exists.

This condition was evaluated and on February 12, 1992 it was determined that the non-conservative value in the Technical Specifications could have prevented the RHR system from performing its safety function of removing decay heat and mitigating the consequences of-an accident. This condition was reported to the NRC pursuant to 10CFR50.72(b)(2)(iii) as a four hour report and as Licensee Event Report 92-002-00 pursuant to 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(i) and 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(v). One of the corrective actions specified in LER 92-002-00 was to revise the acceptance value of Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.5.2h.3) to at least 3868.4 gpm.- This submittal addresses that corrective action.

1

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

B; Description of Pronored Chance The _ proposed. change-l_ consists _ solely of ur evising; Technical Specification Surveillance

- Requirement '4.5.2h.3 to provide 3869 gpm as the acceptance - value- for_: the suin of thle .;

injection line flow : rates for _ RilR pump lines with a. single: pump run'ning instead of the existing value- of 2828 gpm. This change is necessary _since the existing-value of:2828 gpm

'is non conservative. The bases for Technical Specification 3/4.5.2 were reviewed and it was_.

' determined that no change to the bases is necessary.

The proposed Technical Specification change is consistent with the . Westinghouse I!mergency Core Cooling System analysis of record. A review of the- associated calculationr. indicates that 2828 gpm is the calculated flow rate down three of the four injection lines with a single-pump running, Flow down three of the injection lines is calculated based on the single failure criteria whereby one of the four existing lines is assumed to spill- to containment. .

The calculated flow down all four, injection lines is 3868.4 gpm, which assumes - a 5%

degraded pump curve with all lines injecting to o psig RCS pressure, T

u

\

L t"

1 2-

, . _ ~ _ . .