ML20127C109
| ML20127C109 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127C104 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9301130308 | |
| Download: ML20127C109 (2) | |
Text
-
1 p4Mog
- h,,
UNITED STATES l' 3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g,
.t WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 o
'h,.....p SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATIOS RQ3TED TO AMENDMENT NO. 80 TO FACIllTY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3B ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. UNIT 3 DOCKET N0. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated October 21, 1992, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), submitted a request for changes to the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested change would revise TS 4.7.1.2.a.1 to decrease the value of the secondary steam supply pressure specified for surveillance of the turbine-driven emergency feedwater (EFW) pump from 2880 psig to 2750 psig.
In addition, the submittal requests to change the term " secondary steam supply pressure" to " steam generator pressure."
2.0 EVALVATION The most probable cause of degradation of the Waterford 3 Steam Generator tubes is intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC).
To reduce the propensity of the steam generator Alloy 600 V-tubes for stress corrosion cracking and intergranular attack, the licensee is requesting a reduction of the primary-side temperatures of 611'F for the hot leg and 553*F for the cold leg to ?pproximately 603*F and 545'F respectively. Although these values ramain wi'.hin TS requirements, reducing primary side temperatures will result in a proportional reduction in secondary steam supply pressure. The reduced secondary steam supply pressure will be below the value specified for surveillance testing of the EFW pump.
r.irrently, TS 4.7.1.2.a.1 requires surveillance of the EFW pump every 31 days
~
to verify that the pump develops a discharge pressure of 21342 psig on recirculation flow when the secondary steam supply pressure is 2880 psig.
With the new reduced primary temperatures, Waterford 3 would be required by the surveillance requirements to raise the primary side temperatures or reduce the plant load until secondary steam supply pressure exceeded 880 psig in order to verify pump performance.
Raising the primary side temperatures or reducing the plant load on a monthly basis could increase the possibility of reactor transients. The requested change to TS 4.7.1.2.a.1 to require a secondary steam supply pressure of 2750 psig will allow surveillance testing of the EFW pump under stable conditions at the new reduced primary temperatures.
9301130308 930106 PDR ADOCK 05000382 P
, In its submittal, the licensee stated that the EFW pump curve indicates that a power of 300 bhp at a speed of 4400 rpm is required to provide the desired discharge pressure of 1342 psig.
The expected performance curve for the turoine driver demonstrates that a steam inlet pressure of 135 psig is sufficient to provide the required 300 bhp.
Thus, at a secondary steam supply pressure of 750 psig, the steam pressure at the turbine driver will greatly exceed the necessary value of 135 psig.
Therefore, the proposed reduction in required secondary steam supply will not affect the EFW pump's capability to deliver the required flow rate and discharge pressure during operation.
Based on its review, the staff concludes that decrecsing the value of the sacondary steam supply pressure required by TS 4.7.1.2.a.1 from 2880 psig to 2750 psig will have no impact on the capability of the pump to perform its required function and is therefore acceptable.
Additionally, the staff finds the substitution of " steam generator pressure" for " secondary steam supply pressure" to be editorial in nature and acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Louisiana State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes a surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amandment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a pro-posed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (57 FR 55579).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmerdal impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 CUhCLUSION The Coraitssion has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
M. Sykes Date:
January 6, 1993
.