ML17223A166
| ML17223A166 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 05/05/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17223A164 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906120023 | |
| Download: ML17223A166 (1) | |
Text
+g1 IItgyi 1
+~
tp n0c IA j
0 Vi/<<
<<0 0 %*14 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION jYASHINGTON,D. C. 20555 Enclosure 1
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT RE VEST FOR CHANGES IN THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEH AND THE AUXILIARY FEEDMATER ACTUATION SYSTEM FLORIDA POMER 5 LIGHT GNPANY ET AL.
ST.
LUCIE PLANT UNIT NO.
2 DOCKET NO. 50-389
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By letter dated Hay 22, 1984, the Florida Power 3 Light Company (FPKL) proposed an amendment to the St. Lucfe Plant, Unit 2 Operating License which would extend the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) and the Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation System (AFAS) actuation logfc (subgroup relay} surveillance interval from 6 months to 18 months.
As a result of the staff's revfew, it was determined that there was insufficient information and justification to accept the proposed amendment to change the surveillance requirements.
This was documented by a draft Safety Evaluation dated June 14, 1985.
By letter dated October 31, 1985, FPSL submitted the information and analysfs fn response to NRC's concerns with certain aspects of the reliability analysis.
2.0 EVALUATION The staff and EGKG, the staff's contractor, have reviewed the information and the analysis.
Based on the data and methodology reviews and uncertainty and time-dependent reliability analyses, we find that the proposed test interval extension from 6 to 18 months will have a significant impact on the ESFAS and AFAS availabflities as modeled by FPhL.
Details of these findings are provided fn the enclosed Technical Evaluation Report (EGG-RE(-7842 dated November 8, 1988)
(TER).
3.0 CONCLUSION
The TER finds the proposed extension of the surveillance interval unacceptable.
The staff agrees with that finding and concludes that the proposed request for the amendment is denied.
Date:
Nay 5, 1989 Prfncf al Contributor:
8906120023 890505 PDR ADOCK 05000389 P