ML20078K115
| ML20078K115 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 11/08/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20078K112 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9411220331 | |
| Download: ML20078K115 (3) | |
Text
pm%q f;.
A 7
i)*I E
UNITED STATES i[N;g (4 e*
f!
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION v
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NVCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 160 AND 141 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY PHE ADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated June 13, 1994, the Public Service Electric and Gas Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. I and 2 Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested chariges would add a new section 3.0.6 and the associated Bases that would permit an out-of-service component to be returned to service under administrative controls for the purpose of determining operability.
In addition, the header information on the page containing the new section 3.0.6 would be corrected to read " LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION".
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee proposed the addition to the Salem 1 and 2 TS of a Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.0.6 and the associated Bases, adapted from NUREG-1431, Standard Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants, LC0 3.0.5.
The licensee requested this change in order to clarify the intent of LC0 3.0.2 to prevent misinterpretation of the LC0 and associated Bases. The new LCO states, " Equipment removed from service or declared inoperable to comply with ACTIONS may be returned to service under administrative control !.oiely to perform testing required to demonstrate its OPERABILITY or the OPERABILITY of other equipment.
This is an exception to LCO 3.0.2 for the system returned to service under administrative control to perform the testing required to demonstrate OPERABILITY."
Currently, when a channel of instrumentation required by TS malfunctions or fails to meet the surveillance acceptance criteria, it is declared inoperable and the associated action statement is entered.
Several specifications require inoperable instrumentation channels to be placed in the tripped condition.
Specification 3.0.6 establishes the allowance for restoring 9411220331 941108 PDR ADOCK 05000272 p
equipment to service under administrative controls when it has been removed from service or declared inoperable to comply with the associated ACTION. LC0 3.0.6 is applicable to all TS; however, the intent of LCO 3.0.6 is not to replace more specific guidance contained in any individual specification. The sole purpose of this specification is to provide an exception to LCO 3.0.2 to allow the performance of surveillance requirements to demonstrate OPERABILITY of the equipment being returned to service or the OPERABILITY of other equipment.
Therefore, in order to perform the associated surveillance tests to demonstrate operability, the instrumentation may need to be taken out of the tripped condition. However, the instrumentation still remains administrative 1y inoperable and all applicable action requirements and time constraints remain in effect until all applicable requirements are met.
The staff has reviewed the proposed change and concludes that the addition of LCO 3.0.6 and its as'ociated Bases is a clarification of LC0 3.0.2 and maintains complianc with the intent of LCO 3.0.2.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed c',oge acceptable.
The licensee has also proposed to change the header information on Page 3/4 0-2.
The current header lists the APPLICABILITY as SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS. The correct applicability is LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION.
This is an editorial change and the staff finds it acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
i 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 and change surveillance requirements.
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 (59 FR 39590). Accordingly, the 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 the amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
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
.' l 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:
J. Stone Date: November 8, 1994 9
.=:-
- - - - - - - - --