ML17348B063
| ML17348B063 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/26/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17348B062 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9109030160 | |
| Download: ML17348B063 (3) | |
Text
~p,g Appal Wp O~
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.
147 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-31 AND AMENDMENT NO. 142 TO 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
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 2, 1991, Florida Power and Light Company (FPL, the licensee),
proposed that Appendix A of Facility Operating Licenses DPR-31 and DPR-41 be amended to modify Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Technical Specifications (TS) Section 3.4.8.2 by revising the surveillance requirements for battery chargers.
2.0 EVALUATION Section 3.4.8.2 of the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 TS addresses the surveillance requirements for the battery chargers.
The proposed amendments would revise the Turkey Point TS to reflect results from the pre-operational testing of the new battery chargers, which were installed as part of the Emergency Power System (EPS)
Enhancement Project.
During the pre-operational testing phase, FPL determined that under low load conditions, the battery chargers would not consistently load share within 10% of their rating.
The present TS calls for total battery terminal voltage to be greater than or equal to 129 volts on float charge and the battery chargers'utput voltage to be greater than or equal to 129 volts.
It also states that, if two battery chargers are connected to a battery bank, the battery charger currents should not differ from one another by more than 10% of the battery charger ratings.
The licensee proposes that, even though the load sharing may exceed 10%
variation, each charger is still capable of providing the required design output current.
Battery charger load sharing is not required for the safety-related function of the chargers for Turkey Point and, therefore, verification of charger voltage and current is a more appropriate determination of battery charger operability.
Under normal operating conditions, each battery charger is expected to supply loads in excess of 10 amperes and have an output voltage greater than or equal to 129,volts.
Ten amperes represent the minimum current which can be readily observed to establish operability.
Therefore, verification of a battery charger to supply a minimum of 10 amperes and maintain an output voltage 'greater than or equal to 129 volts is expected to be a normal method of verifying battery 9109030160 9>082+
+i l
PDR ADOCK 05000250 P
PDR i
charger operability. If a current value from a battery charger is less than 10 amperes, it will be tested to demonstrate its ability to accept and supply the DC loads independent of its associated battery charger.
The current surveillance requirements for DC sources in the Turkey Point TS are in accordance'with the Standard Technical Specifications requirements.
It is important to note that the proposed change to these surveillance requirements are s'ite specific, and will not otherwise affect their ability to remain in accordance with the Standard Technical Specifications.
3.0 SUMRARY The staff agrees with the licensee that an output voltage greater than or equal to 129 volts and a current value equal to 10 amperes from the battery chargers is sufficient to demonstrate operability.
The proposed change does not reduce the capability to assure battery charger operability, it satisfies the Standard Technical Specifications for one charger
- system, and poses no threat to public health or safety.
Therefore, the proposed changes to Section 3.4.8.2 of the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 TS are acceptable.
4.0 STATE-GONSULTATION Based upon the written notice of the proposed amendments, the Florida State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments change a surveillance requirement.
The NRC 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 individual 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 (56 FR 33957).
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.
6.0 GONCLUS ION The Commission 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
M. Pratt Date: August 26, 1991
)