ML14183A071
| ML14183A071 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14183A070 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-84-13, NUDOCS 8611140297 | |
| Download: ML14183A071 (2) | |
Text
0
,UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGuLATION RELATED TO AMENDIENT-NO. 106 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-?3 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261 INTRODUCTION By letter dated September 9, 19P5, Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee) requested a license amendment to change the Technical Specifications (TS) for the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2. The TS chanoes requested consisted of:
(1) Low temperature physics tests -
TS 3.3.1.1 & 3.3.2.1 - delete references to low temperature physics testing; (2) Snubbers - TS 3.13-1 & Table 3.13 delete requirement for snubber listing; (3) Turbine Trip Logic - TS Table 4.1 change word: "calibration" to "test"; and (4) Environmental Qualification - TS & 6.14 - delete.
EVALUATION Item (1), low temperature physics testing, is only required for initial plant startup, and thus, is limited to the first cycle requirement only. Since this requirement does not apply to subsequent cycles of operation, deletina the requirement would remove a potential confusion in the TS. This deletion is therefore, acceptable.
Item (2) deletes snubber listings, Table 3.13-1 and Table 13.13-9 from the TS and any references to these tables. Deletion of these tables eliminates the need for frequent TS amendments to incorporate any change in snubber listings.
The licensee would incorporate the snubber listings (location, size, and system affected) into plant procedures.
Generic Letter (GL) 84-13 to All Power Reactor Licensees (Except SEP Licensees) suggests the deletion of snubber lists since any change to snubber quantities, types, or locations would be a chanae to the facility and therefore subject to the provisions of 10 CFR Part 50.59. These changes would then have to be reflected in the records as required by TS paragraph 4.13-3.
Based on the above discussion as well as the fact that the licensee has followed the guidance of our GL 84-13, we therefore find the proposed change acceptable.
B611140297 861028 PDR ADOCK 05000261 P.
Item (3), Turbine Trip Logic, Table 4.1-1, inadvertently lists the turbine trip logic verification as a calibration but the turbine trip logic invojves contact closure of breaker or relay, i.e., equipment performing. Consequently the aopropriate terminology should "testing" in lieu of "calibration." This chanqe is a correction in terminology and reduces confusion in the TS. Therefore, the proposed change is acceptable.
Item (4), Environmental Qualification (EQ), was imposed by Order dated October 24, 1980. -TS 6.14.1 imposed an implementation deadline of June 30, 198?
for EQ of safely-related electrical equipment. That deadline was subsequently superseded by 10 CFR Part 50.49. TS 6.14.2 established a deadline of December 1, 1980 to provide complete and auditable centralized records of EQ documentation. These requirements have subsequently been superseded by 10 CFR Part 50.49(j).
Since these sections of the TS have been outdated and superseded by regulations, they have no further use, therefore, the requested deletion is acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the amendment 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 proposed finding that this amendment involves no sionificant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
CONCLUSION We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: October 28, 1986 Principal Contributor:
G. Requa