ML17300B244
| ML17300B244 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 12/22/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17300B243 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9001100152 | |
| Download: ML17300B244 (4) | |
Text
g',pe RfcII Cy C0O cA
++*++
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMlSSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY-EVALUATION.BY. THE. OFFICE-QF. NUCLEM.REACTOR REGULATION RELATED.TO AMENDMENT NO. -~5-TO-EACILITY-OPERATING-LICENSE NO.-NPF 41 AMENDMENT.NO.. 30. TO. FACILITY.OPERATING LICENSE. NO.. NP F~51 AND.AMENDMENT.NO. 21 -TO.SACD.ITY.-OPERATING.LICENSE "NQ.
NPF 74 ARIZONA.PUBLIC. SERVICE. COMPANY ET ~ AL.
PALO VERDE. NUCLEAR GENERATING-STATION.UNITS.1 2
AND.3.
DOCKET. NOS.
STN. 50 528.
STN.50 529
. AND. STN.50-530 CObl C3 c'an+
iROQ
,AO
~O ig,b-)
00O
, CVXC IOU t~g OQ jOC tEOIL
,OA 9
Q.Q'.0 INTRODUCTION By letter dated October 10, 1989 the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) on behalf of itself, the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, Southern California Edison
- Company, El Paso Electric Company, Public Service Company of New Mexico, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Southern California Public Power Authority
( licensees),
requested changes to the Technical Specifications for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Appendix A to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74, respectively).
The proposed changes would revise Technical Specification (TS) Section 3.3.2 (Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) Instrumentation) for Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) Units 1, 2, and 3, by revising Table 3.3-5, Engineered Safety Features
Response
Times, to add a footnote that would exclude the turbine-driven auxiliary feedwater pump from response time testing until appropriate plant conditions (i.e.,
steam pressure) exist in Mode 3.
2.0 DISCUSSION. AND - EVALUATION The current Technical Specification LCO 3.3.2 requires certain Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) instrumentation channels to be operable with response times as shown inTable 3.3-5.
One of the ESFAS components required to be operable in Modes 1, 2, 3, and 4 is the turbine-driven auxiliary feedwater pump.
However there may be inadequate steam pressur e in Mode 4 to adequately test the turbine-driven AFW pump.
The operability technical specification for the AFW system, TS 3.7.1.2 also requires operability of the turbine-driven AFW pump in Modes 1, 2, 3, and 4
but states under Surveillance Requirement 4.7.1.2 concerning monthly operability testing of the AFW pumps:
"The provisions of Specification 4.0.4 are not applicable for the turbine-driven pump for entry into Mode 3."
This allows postponement of the surveillance test for the turbine-driven AFW pump until Mode 3 conditions exist and adequate steam pressure is available to perform the surveillance test.
The licensees'equested aIIIendments will eliminate any potential conflict between these two technical specifications by adding the following note to
v
~
~
v v
v I
~
g
~
v C
v I
3.0 4.0 TS 3.3.2, Table 3.3-5, "Engineered Safety Features
Response
Times," for the turbine-driven AFW pump:
"The provisions of Specification 4.0.4 are not applicable for the turbine-driven Auxiliary Feedwater pump ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES
RESPONSE
TIME for entry into Mode 3."
The proposed change will provide for consistency between the two technical specifications covering the operability of the turbine-driven AFW pump.
recognizes that the turbine-driven AFW pump cannot be adequately tested until Mode 3.
Therefore an exclusion from Specification 4.0.4 is provided to allow for entry into Mode 3, where operabi lity testing can be completed.
This allowance does not currently exist for LCO 3.3.2 concerning ESFAS response time testing for the turbine-driven AFW pump.
Extending this exclusion from Specification 4.0.4 to LCO 3.3.2 will be consistent with the existing allowance already provided in LCO 3.7.1.2 and wi 11 eliminate a potential source of confusion in the Technical Specifications.
The staff has reviewed the material submitted by the licensee
- and, on the basis of the above evaluation, concludes that the proposed changes to Technical Specifications are acceptable.
CONTACT WITH STATE. OFFICAL The Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency was advised of the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration with regard to this change.
No comments were received.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 5.0 The amendments involve changes to a requirement with respect to the use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 in-dividual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 to be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLUSION The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed
- above, that (I) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public wi 11 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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
We therefore, conclude that the proposed changes are acceptable.
PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:
Michael J. Davis DATED:
December 22, 1989
/