ML17342A671
| ML17342A671 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17342A670 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8608270386 | |
| Download: ML17342A671 (3) | |
Text
~pS REOy, Vp0~c 1
/p %**y+
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NP. 118 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-31 AND AMENDMEtIT NO. 112TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-41 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TURKEY POINT UNIT NOS.
3 AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-250 AND 50-251 I.
INTRODUCTION On November I, 1983, the NRC issued Generic Letter 83-37 to all licensees, including Florida Power and Light Company (FPL), the licensee for Turkey Point Plant, Units 3 and 4, requesting it to determine whether the auxiliary feed-water (AFW) system design and Technical Specifications are consistent.with the guidance provided in the Generic Letter for improved reliability and performance of the AFW system.
In this regard, the safety related AFW system at Turkey Point Plant, Units 3 and 4, was judged to not have appropriate diversity.
As a result, by letter dated November I, 1985, FPL committed to implement appropriate Technical Specification requirements, in accordance with the Generic Letter, for the Standby Feedwater System to provide greater assurance of its availability.
By letter dated January 30, 1986, and supplemented July 30,
- 1986, FPL submitted a request for amendments to the facility operating licenses, proposing Technica1 Specifications for the non-safety grade Standby Feedwater System (SFS).
Staff review of this matter included the existing AFWS Technical Specifications, as well as the proposed changes to them, and the supporting bases.
II.
EVALUATION The licensee indicated that the purpose of the proposed Technical Specifications are to ensure the availability of the two non-safety grade motor driven, standby feedwater pumps during plant operation.
These pumps are normally powered by the non-safety 4160 Volt C-bus; in the event of a loss of off-site power, five non-safety grade diesel generator have the capability to provide backup power.
The licensee has proposed that with one standby feedwater pump unavailable, the unavailable pump must be restored to available status within 30 days, or a report will be submitted to the NRC within 30 days describing the cause of the unavailability, and providing a schedule for the resolution.
With both pumps unavailable or less than 60,000 gallons of water in the Demineralized Water Storage Tank (DWST), the problems will be corrected within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or a Special Report will be submitted to the NRC which includes details of the corrective actions.
- Further, each standby feedwater pump shall be.demonstrated operable at least once per 31 days on a staggered test basis.
The licensee 8b0827038b 8b0813 PDR,,
ADOCK 05000250 PDR
initially proposed a quarterly test interval which is inconsistent with the test interval in the Westinghouse Standard 'Technical Specifications for auxiliary feedwater pumps.
Based on discussions with the staff, the licensee agreed to the test interval which is consistent with the Westinghouse Standard Technical Specifications, and modified and supplemented its amendment request by letter dated July 30, 1986.
This change resulted in the adding the definition of Staggered Test Basis to page 1.9 of the Technical Specifications and changing pages 4.21-1 and 84.21-1 to reflect the requirement.
In addition, the change in frequency of the test to achieve consistency results in a minor change to the action previously
- noticed, and is within the scope of the action described in the notice.
- Thus, this amendment request was not renoticed.
. The system is not automatically initiated and would require operator action.if used.
Although the system was installed and is used for a source of feedwater during normal startup, it could provide an additional source of water during accident mitigation for decay heat removal if multiple failures would result in loss of the safety-related water.
The addition of Technical Specification requirements for surveillance and Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO's) on this non-safety system will provide a higher degree of assurance that this additional source of water would be available for decay heat removal.
III. FINDINGS The staff finds that the proposed changes to the Turkey Point, Units 3 and 4
Technical Specifications, regarding surveillance of the non-safety grade standby feedwater
- system, are consistent with the Standard Technical Specifi-cations and will provide a higher degree of assurance that the system will be available if needed.
The reporting requirements for loss of a single
- pump, both pumps or inadequate volume of water will assure that the NRC staff is aware of the conditions, plans for, correcting the conditions and the time necessary to restore the system to operable status, thus assuring the system will not be unavailable for extended periods of time.
Therefore, based on our evaluation, we conclude that the proposed changes are acceptable.
IV.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments involve changes in the installation, use, or surveillance of the facilities components located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFR 20.
The staff has determined that these 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 individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, these 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 be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
P V.
CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(I) 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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
August 13, 1986 Princi al Contributor: