ML20079F795
| ML20079F795 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079F789 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-49418, TAC-49419, NUDOCS 8401190276 | |
| Download: ML20079F795 (2) | |
Text
..
g* "/Gwy 4-o UNITED STATES
[
k;
{ Q} Q} }
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
"'"*"*C2
~;
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 40 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-2 AND Al1ENDMENT N0.30 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-8 ALABAMA POWER CC@ ANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-348 AND 50-364 INTRODUCTION By letter dated April 6, 1983, Alabama Power Company (licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications to correct an administrative error by deleting applicability of a footnote for Item 1.e. in Table 3.3-3.
The change was made at the Commission's request to correct the error found during the NRC staff review of Multi-Plant Action Item B-32, Blocked Safety Injection Signal During Cooldown.
DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION Technical Specifications set forth the operability requirements for engineered safety feature actuation (ESF) channels and indicate the conditions under which a channel may be bypassed.
As part of the NRC staff review of fiulti-Plant Action Item B-32, the staff identified a discrepancy between the bypass
. provisions stated in Technical Specification Table 3.3-3, Item 1.e., and the logic diagrams shown in Chapter 7 of the updated Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
Item 1.e., Differential Pressure Between Steam Lines-High in Table 3.3-3 indicates that this channel may be bypassed in Mode 3 below P-12.
This footnote is clearly in error as the logic circuitry is designed not to allow the bypass which the footnote indicates is available in Mode 3.
The correct circuitry design is shown in logic diagrams in Chapter 7 of the updated FSAR.
Alabama Power Company proposed to deleted the subject footnote in Technical Specification Table 3.3-3.
We have reviewed the proposed change and find that it correctly reflects the design of the ESF logic circuitry.
SAFETY
SUMMARY
Based.on the above evaluation, the proposed deletion of the footnote to Technical Specification Table 3.3-3', Item 1.e. is consistent with the Farley ESF logic circuitry design and is therefore acceptable.
ENVRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION We have determined that these amendments do not authorize changes in effluent types or total amounts, nor increases in power levels, and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concludd that the amendments involve actions which are insignificant 8401190276 840109 PDR ADOCK 05000348 P
e 2-from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4),
that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the consideration 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: January 9, 1984 Principal Contributor:
T. Dunning 1
a f
---m n
-,w-w---