ML20077D734
| ML20077D734 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 05/17/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20077D733 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9106050007 | |
| Download: ML20077D734 (3) | |
Text
.
- j$* *tg%
UNITED s7 AVES
.[ T j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,g usectoN.o c rosss s
g*-
,laf;f y -
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR FEACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 24 AND 14 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS.- NPF-76 AND NPF-80 HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY CITY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF SAN-ANTONIO CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS DOCKET NOS. 50-498-AND 50-499 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, UNITS 1 AfiD 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated October 15, 1990,- Houston Lighting & Power Company, et.
al., (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specificatinns_(Appendix A to Facility Operating Licerse.Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80) for the South Texas Project. Units 1 and 2.
The proposed changes would allow continuation of surveillance testing for certain-engineered safety _ features:(ESF) actuation system instrumentation with one of four-redundant actuation devices inoperable by bypassing the inoperable actuation device.- This change is applicable to the pressurizer pressure-low safety injection, steam = generator water -
level-high-high turbine trip and feedwater isolation Tavg-low. coincident with-reactor trip feedwater' isolation,-steam generator water--level-low-low auxiliary feedwater pump start, and 4.16 KV ESF bus undervoltage functions.
2.0: EVALUATION The intent of-Action Statement 20, Technical Specification. Table 3.3-3,.is to allow continued startup and indefinite power operation when one of four redundant actuation devices is inoperable.. In addition, this action statement is'ir* ended to provide an allowance for.the continuation of' surveillance testing of the remaining operable actuation devices inlthe' set. Action Statement 20 is applicable to the following functions:-
1.e-Pressurizer. Pressure-Low Safety-Injection (2 of 4);
5.b Steam Generator Water Level-High-High Turbine' Trip and Feedwater-Isolation (E cf 4 for each S/G);'
t' 9106050007 910517-1 PDR ADOCK 05000498 p.
~
t J
5.f Tavg-Low Coir.cidert with Reactor Trip Feedwater' Isolation (2 of 4);
6.d Steam Generator Water Level-Low-Low Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Start (2 of 4 for each S/G); and 8.a.
4.16 KV ESF Bus Degraded Voltage /Undervoltage Loss of Power b,
(LOOP) Detection (2 of 4 for each ESF bus).
C I
If there is an inoprt.Fle channel already in the tripped condition, it has to be placed in bypass prior to conducting surveillance testing-on an operable channel to avoid satisfying the 2 of 4 logic condition and an ESF actuation.
Uhile under tett (not to exceed 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />), the inoperable channel can be taken i
fror the trip conditicr to the bypass conditier, and then returned te-trip af ter
)
the testing is completed. However, the present wording of t.ction Statement 20 requires that the inoperable charnel be in the tripped condition which prevents the surveillance from being performed without an ESF actuation. The present wording of Action Statement P0, while intending to permit surveillance testing, actually is worded to prevent accomplishment of the necessary actions.
Furthermore, the proposed wording change request is consistent with the wording of similar action statements for 2 of 4 logic schemes covered by other TS (e.g., Reactor Trip System, Table 3.3-1, Action-2.b and Action C b, Westinghouse Standard Technical Specification, Revision 4a). Two hours are allowed for Surveillance Testing which limits the risk of this configuration.
The proposed change has a. beneficial effect in that it permits the proper testing and surveillance of the other channels, while one channel is out of service.
Implementation of the proposed change does not involve a physical design modification of any existing equipment system or components.
Based on our review of the licensee's-submittal, the staff concludes that this Technical Specification change will not impact the safe operation of the platt and is therefore acceptable.
3.0 S_T_ ATE CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Texas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIR0!!ME! ITAL CONSIDERATION The amendments change a requirement. with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the. restricted area as defined in:
10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff..has' determined that the amendments involve no-significant increase in the amounts, and no sigrificant change in the types, of: any effluents that may-be released-offsite, and that there is re significant 4
.a e
c-n y
(
3, 3
I
{
increase in individual or curulative occupational radiaticn exposure. The l
Commission has previously -issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve I
no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding-(55 FR 53072). Accordingly,; the amendments. meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant i
to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared-in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
l 5 ~. 0 CONCLUSION t
The Commission has concluded,-based on the considerations discussed above,-
L that:
(1) there 15 reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such 1
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Connission's regulations, j
and (3) the issuance of the amendments will r.ot be inimical te'the common j
defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
4 Principal Contributor:
D. Nguyen j
Date: May 17,1991 i
i-4' n
a f
1 3
i -
4 l.
W n
. - - -