ML17221A439
| ML17221A439 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17221A438 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8710080266 | |
| Download: ML17221A439 (8) | |
Text
~gfl RE0y
+
~o nO CO0 I
4p 0
+a*++
I g '$%$
}
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. ~H TO'FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-16 FLORIDA POWER Il'I LIGHT COMPANY, ET AL.
ST.
LUCIE PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-389 INTRODUCTION By letter dated December 2, 1986, the Florida Power and Light Company (the licensee) requested technical specification changes for the St. Lucie Plant, Unft No. 2.
The proposed changes would reduce the steam generator water level setpofnts for reactor trip and auxiliary feedwater fnitfatfnn.
The staff pub-lished fn the Federal Re fster on February 11, 1987 an initial determination that the propose amen ment oes not involve a significant hazards considera-tion.
The initial determination was based upon the licensee's December 2, 1986 submittal.
By letter dated February 3, 1987, the licensee provided additional information.
The additional information provided by the licensee does not change the staff's initial determination of no significant hazards consideration for the proposed amendment.
EVALUATION The staff requested that fts contractor, EG5G Idaho, review and evaluate the licensee's proposed changes.
The contractor's report is attached.
It con-cludes that the changes are acceptable.
The staff has reviewed the contrac-tor's report and agrees with the evaluation and conclusion of the report.
- Thus, the proposed technical specification changes are acceptable; ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined fn 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase fn the amounts, and no significant change fn the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there fs no significant fncrease in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The CoIImIfssion has previously publfshed a proposed findfng that the amendment involves no signi-ficant hazards consideration and there has been no public comnent on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility crfterfa for categorical exclusion set forth fn 10 CFR 551.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared fn connection with the issuance of the amendment.
87100802h6 870924 PDR ADOCK 05000389j
)
P PDR
~ ~
p r
~ ~
~
y t
p A ~
(
~ t P 8 ~ g I
I I
~
f't
~ I C
r 1
~
1 'I.'
~
I I(
C
'1
(
I p
~
J
~
V
%e ~
V
~
r r
~
t I
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 Comnission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
pate:
September 24, 1987 Princi al Contributor'.
E. Tourigny
Attachment:
EGKG Report
e a I
I P
( I
ATTACHMENT RE'JIE'A OF FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY'S PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION RE'JISION FOR LOM l EVEL STEAM GENERATOR SEVOINTS FOR ST.
LUCIE VNIT 2 I.
BACKGROUND By letter L-86-452, dated December 2, 1986, Florida Power 8 Light Company (FPL) proposed to revise Technical Specification 2.2.1, Reactor Protection Instrumentation (RPS) and 3/4.3.2, Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) Instrumentation and the associated Bases of the St. Lucie, Unit 2, Technical Specifications.
Additional information 'was provided by let er L-87-39, dated February 3, 1987.
The proposed amendment revises Technical Specification 2.2.1, Reactor Protection Instrumentation (RPS),
and 3/4.3.2, Engineered Safety Features Actuation System
{ESFAS) Instrumentation and the associated Bases.
The proposed change lowers the RPS steam generator low level trip setpoint from > 39.5% narrow range
{NR)
{allowable value > 39.1% NR) to > 20.5%
NR (allowable value >
19.5>> NR).
The Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation Signal (AFAS) steam generator low level trip setpoint is lowered from its current-value of > 20.6%
NR (allowable value > 20.N NR) to > 19.0%
NR (allowable value > 18.0>> NR).
The existing Technical Specification setpoints.correspond to a Cycle 1 analysis assumption of steam generator low level RPS setpoint.of 30>> narrow range (NR) for the Nost limiting event, Loss of Feedwater, and 5>> NR setpoint for all accidents.
~ ~
4
~ I A
6 II.
',DISCUSSION dit was not taken for an installed safety grade During C'cle 1, cre s
was Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation Signal
(
),
AFAS) thus necessitating the ties and instrument error are 30 narrow range setpoint.
Uncertain
'eflected in the 9.5>> difference between 3K and 39.5>>.
During Cycle 2 and 3, taking credit for the AFAS, the analytical f 5'X NR for Reactor Chapter 15 Accident Analysis setpoint value of Trip insures that the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) pressure limit of 11% of design pressure is not exceeded.
The The 5% NR setpoint value is also used for AFAS in the Chapter 15 Accident Analysis; I
The margin to allow for instrumentation uncertainties which include inherent process nstrumen tation errors, equipment response
- time, instrument ra an e
d ft d environmental concerns is 14.5>> for reactor trip and 13>>
or
" f AFAS This compares with the 9.5% margin used for Cycle l.
III.
CONCLUSION The proposed technical specification change is acceptable; as Qe Chapter 15 Accident analysis is based on'a low steam Generator Trip and AFAS actuation at 5 NR and there is reasonable assurance that an acceptable margin ex sw e
b tween the proposed valuer and the PJ analytical value.
0