ML19332B577
| ML19332B577 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 09/05/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19332B576 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8909120171 | |
| Download: ML19332B577 (4) | |
Text
_
~penaesy\\
l UNITED sTATas NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
o WASHWGTON. O. C. 30558 l
Ii-~j\\.....
\\
/
l
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION f.
RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.1170 i
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-76 HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY CITY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF SAN ANTONIO CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS DOCKET NO. 50-498 50lr~d TEXAS PROJECT, UNIT 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
+.
By letter dated June 1,1989, Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P, the lit.ensee) proposed changes to the plant and Final Safety Analysis Report (FSARLfor the South Texas Project, Unit 1 (STP-1) regarding design changes to the Unit I core. The submittal included revisions to Chapters 4 and IE of the FSAR which describe the core design change and accident analysis.
A similar proposal was submitted (June 15, 1988 and supplemented July 8, 1988)'for Unit 2 (STP-2) and accepted by the staff. The Safety Evaluation was transmitted to the licensee by letter dated November 16, 1988 ar.c has included in the Safety Evaluation Report related to the operation of South TexasProject, Unit 2(NUREG-0781), Supplement 6.
The proposal under consideration in this Safety Evaluation is a request to apply to Unit I the results of the Unit 2 review.
Both units will then have a common licensing basis.
2.0 DISCUSSION This amendment is being issued pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59(c) because HL&P identified the change as an unreviewed safety question.' No change to the Technical Specifications is required by this amendment.
3.0 EVALUATION The intent of the licensee's proposal is to apply the revised STP-2 safety analysis assumptions to the reanalysis of STP-1 transients and accidents and thereby confirm that the licensing basis results are appitcable to each South Texas Unit. The proposed annotated FSAR pages tre revised to make the updated FSAR applicable to both units.
8909120171 890905
^
t gDR ADOCK0500g8 1
~-
~ ~...
,=l
?
,f, i
),
=
.f}
The revised assumptions are rele.ted to core design and consist of a small I
change in the stuck rod reactivity coefficients, an increase in the value of the hot snot peaking factor (F ), increased uncertainties in o
temperature a-4 pressure and reactivity insertion rate, and the use of the current value for the thermal design flow rate.
(
The accident sequences which are affected by the revised assumptions are identified by the licensee as:
Steam line break event Loss of forced ~ reactor coolant flow events Locked rotor events Rod withdrawal at power events Dropped rod and misaligned rod events Rod ejection events These events were reanalyzed in connection with a revised core design for STP-2 Cycle 1 and approved by the staff in Supplement 6 to NUREG-0781 (Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Operation of South Texas Project Unit 2. Docket No. 50-499, January 1989).
The staff has confimed through a comparative review that the present
. proposal for application of the STP-2 analysis to the STP-1 Cycle 2 and future cycles is consistent with the prior approval proposal end is In accordance with the licensee's June 1, 1989 submittal, acceptable.
the annotated pages should be incorporated in an updated FSAR applicable to both units.
4 fa fNVIRONMENTALCONSIDERATION l
Fursu' ant to 10 CFR 51.21, 51.32 and 51.35, an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact have been prepared and published in I
the Federal Reaister on August 31, 1989 (54 FR 36072). Accordingly, based upon the environmental assessment, the Comission has determined that the issuance of this amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
Based upon its evaluation of the proposed changes to the South Texas f:
Project, Unit 1 Technical Specifications, the staff has concluded that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that t6 health and safety (of the public
- 2) such will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, ion's regula-activities will be conducted in compliat ce with the Comiss tions and (3) the issuance of the amendt. ant will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
The staff, therefore, concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable, and are hereby incorporated into the South Texas Project Final Safety Analysis Report.
Date: September 5, 1989 Principal Contributor:
M. McCoy
. - -, -.,,, -. - _ -... - - - ~,,, -,,, -. _
- -,,.. -. - -