ML14183A140
| ML14183A140 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14183A139 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8904270444 | |
| Download: ML14183A140 (3) | |
Text
o UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 122 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-23 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The licensee, Carolina Power & Light Company, responded to the recommendations related to reactor trip breaker modifications contained in Generic Letters 83-28 and 85-09 in a response dated January 12, 1987.
These Generic Letters requested the licensee to propose changes to the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, Technical Specifications (TS) that would address changes in the surveillance requirements made necessary by the installation of automatic actuation of the shunt trip attachments of the reactor trip breakers, as required by Generic Letter 83-28, Item 4.3. The original requested changes were clarified and modified by Generic Letter 85-09. The staff found the proposed TS changes acceptable, but noted that they were incomplete because they failed to include operability requirements for the reactor trip breakers and the automatic trip logic that were consistent with the recommendations of Generic Letter 85-09. The licensee responded with a submittal dated October 3, 1988 that addressed these concerns. The October 3, 1988 submittal was supplemented by a letter dated April 4, 1989, consisting of changes to clarify and eliminate the potential for confusion in the operability requirement statements.
2.0 EVALUATION This amendment will impose new surveillance and operability testing require ments. The staff found the licensee's proposed changes that addressed the surveillance test requirements acceptable. The letter dated October 3, 1988 proposed the addition of Section 3.10.5 containing operability requirements for the reactor trip breakers, their diverse trip features and the auto matic trip logic in response to staff's request. The staff reviewed these changes and communicated their concern with the wording of the proposed operability requirement for the diverse trip features in Section 3.10.5.3 and with the inclusion in proposed Section 3.10.5.4 of a proposal that would allow power operation to continue with "non-trip features" of the reactor trip breakers inoperable. The staff rejected this proposal because no limits were set on: (1) how many trip breakers could have such features inoperable at any one time, (2) how many such features would be allowed to be inoperable on any one reactor trip breaker, or (3) what period of time such features would be allowed to be inoperable. In addition, the staff believes that if parts of the breaker are inoperable, the continued ability of the breaker to perform its safety function is questionable. Further, the status of these features is addressed in the operability definition in Section 1.3 of the Technical Specifications. The licensee responded to these concerns by a letter dated April 4, 1989 which revised the wording of the operability requirement in Section 3.10.5.3 17O-44 4 OO&
,3 9 ro~
i
~
4.,
0..i C2.
-2 and removed proposed Section 3.10.5.4. The staff finds the limiting conditions of operation related to the reactor trip breakers, as amended by the April 4, 1989 letter, to be acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment changed 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 to the surveillance requirements. 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 off site; 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 significant 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 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.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment as requested by the license in its letter dated January 12, 1987 involves no significant hazards consideration, which was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER (52 FR 5851) on February 26, 1987. When the license supplemented the proposed amendment by letter dated October 18, 1988, the Commission made another proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, which was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER (53 FR 44249) on November 2, 1988. The licensee's letter dated April 4, 1989, consists of changes to clarify and eliminate the potential for confusion in the operability requirement statements and did not change the initial determination of no significant hazards consideration as published in th FEDERAL REGISTER. The staff has consulted with the State of North Carolina.
No public comments or requests for hearing were received, and the State of North Carolina did not have any comments.
The staff 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, 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.
Principal Contributors: R. Lo D. Lasher Dated: April 20, 1989
AMENDMENT NO. 122 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR ROBINSON, UNIT 2 "Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR PDII-1 Reading S. Varga (14E4)
G. Lainas E. Adensam P. Anderson R. Lo OGC D. Hagan (MNBB 3302)
E. Jordan (MNBB 3302)
B. Grimes (9A2)
T. Meeks (4) (P1-137)
W. Jones (P-130A)
E. Butcher (11F23)
Tech Branch that had input in package (Principal Contributor of SE)
ACRS (10)
GPA/PA ARM/LFMB cc:
Licensee/Applicant Service List