ML20065C297
| ML20065C297 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 08/27/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20065C276 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8209230313 | |
| Download: ML20065C297 (4) | |
Text
,
-)
I[?
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE 0FFICE OF HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDHENT HO. 2 TO LICENSE HPF-12 SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY SOUTil CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE AUT110RITY INTRODUCTION By letter, dated August 13, 1982, the Soeth Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCEAG) requested changes to correct inconsistencies in three Technical Specifications regarding isolation of the containment purge and exhaust lines on high radiation.
In addition, changes were requested to correct typographical errors in tvo other Technical Specifications.
EVALUATION Table 3.3-3 specifies the total number of channeis, channels to trip, and minimum channels operable for isolating the containment purge and exhaust lines on containment high radiation for Modes 1, 2, 3, and 4.
The current Technical Specifications indicate that four channels are available to isolate the purge and exhaust lines for tiodes 1, 2, 3, and 4.
liowever, the design includes only two channels, i.e.
radiation monitors RM-A2 and RM-A4. Therefore the minimun channels to trip is one since a trip will occur if the setpoint is exceeded on either RM-A2 or RM-A4 and both channels must be operable.
Table 3.3-4 in the current Technical Specifications specifies the trip setpoint and allowable values for containment high radioactivity at twice the background levels. The licensee requested that these values be changed to be consistent wi th Speci fication 3.11.2.1.
The licensee requested that a clarification be made to the surveillance requirements of 4.9.8 to require verification that for a high radiation test signal from the reactor building manipulator crane area channels, isolation of the 36-inch purge supply and exhaust valves occurs. This is consistent wi th the design. The current specification implies that isolation of the 6-inch line would also be required.
The licensee also requested that two typographical errors be corrected. These occur in Table 3.3-12 and Table 3.8-1.
We have reviewed each of the above changes that the licensee has proposed and find them acceptable. These changes are administrative in nature and are consistent with the design that was reviewed and approved by the staff during the operatina license stage.
820923031'3 820827 PDR ADOCK 05000395 P
PDR sunuxue) part )
nne ronu ais bow nncu ano OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usc.m mi-am
. EHylRONftEHTAL CONSIDERATION We have deternined that the anendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total at.ounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in anf significant envi 'onmental impact. Having nade this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environnental inpact and, pursuant to 10 CFR Section Sl.5(d)(4), that an environmental inpact state: tent or neagative declaration and environnental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this anendment.
CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the anendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safet/ nargin, the anendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed nenner, and (3) such activities will be in compliance with the Cmaission's regulations and the issuance of this amendnent will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
DATE:
M 27 4
.ar
- See previous yellow.
DL:LB#1*
DL:LBvl OL:LBf1
- v..
..p..f.y..........
- o...e, >
.ayl. g'....onghlood
.u m.= > saushbrook/.y.t..ukan e:..........
92....lg2,,,,,,,,,g6.7 /.g,2...
g/.gzg2, i
om,>
mnc ronu ais tro-soi nneu o24a OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
_ ),
use.m mi-3no
2-7
/
/
We have reviewed each of the changes that the licensee has proposed and find then acceptable. These changes are acninistrative in nature and are' consistent with the design that was reviewed and approved by the staf f durin,g'the operating license stage.
/
/
EllVIROTtENTAL CONSIDERATION
/
/
We have determined that the anendment does not authorize a' change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any signif1 Cant environmental ifdpact. llaving nade thi5' determination, we have further concluded that the amendnent involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental inpact and, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 51.5(d)(4), that an environnental impact statement'or negative declaration dnd environdental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
CONCLUSION
/
We have concluded, based on the considera ons discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendnent does not involve,a'significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decriase in a safety margin, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration..(2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed nanner, and (3) such activities will be in compliance with the Connission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the cor.vnon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
/
/
DATE:
/
/
l
/
l l
j'
/
/
/
/
/
/
.1
..,..f.
.//,........
.....,.f... p.......
DL:LB#1 DL:LS#1 DL LBK1 OFFsCt.>
svan=4) Rushbrook/y,t,WRaf)e _
,IMT.Qg]
b,1,oo,d
. /q.../. 82 8/s c
........./.. 8 2 '......
8/.M /.82 8
omy unc reau sis oow nacu o:4o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usaro. % - m..
i,
.o 5
t i
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE i
/
0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
,/
l
/
RELATED TO AMENDMENT H0. 2 i
/
l TO LICENSE NPF-12 SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY i
SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY I
/
INTRODUCTION
/
/
By letter, dated August 13, 1982, the South Carolina Electric & Gas Company l
(SCE&G) requested changes to correct inconsistencies in three Technical Specifications regarding isolation of the containment purge and exhaust lines on high radiation.
In addition, changes were requested to correct typographical errors in two other Technical Specifications.
EVALVATION j
Table 3.3-3 specifies the total numoer of channels, channels to trip, and mininum channels operable for isolatingethe containment purge and exhaust lines on containment high radiation for/Hodes 1, 2, 3, and 4.
The current Technical Specifications indicate that four channels are available to isolate the purge and exhaust lines for fiodes,1, 2, 3 and 4.
However, the design includes only two channels, i.e. radiation monitors RM-A2 and Rf t-A4.
Therefore the minimum channels to trip is one since a trfp will occur if the setpoint is exceeded on either R!i-A2,or R!i-A4 and both channels must be operable. The licensee also requested /that the Technical Spectfications be changed to permit entry into another operational mode with less than the minimun nunber of channels operable, prov'ded the purge and exhaust ifnes are isolated. The licensee stated that this is conststent with the intent of Action 17 which allows operation to continue provide,d that the containment purge and exhaust valves are naintained closed. Table 3.3.4 in the current Technical Specifications speciffes the.
trip setpoint and' allowable values for containment high radioactivity at twice the background levels. The Ifcensee requested that these values be changed to be consistent with Specification 3.11.2.1.
/
The Ifcensee requested that a clariffcation be made to the surveillance requirements'of 4.9.8 to require verification that for a high radiation test signal from the reactor building manipulator crane area channels, isolation of the 36-inch purge supply and exhaust valves occurs. Thf s is consistent with the, design. The current specification implies that isolation of the 6-inch line would also be required.
l The lic'ensee also requested that two typographical errors be corrected. These occur /in Table 3.3-12 and Table 3.8-1.
orocn>
sua m a>
ome>
Nac ronu m oog Nacu om OFFICIAL RECORD COPY us= nn-mm
_