ML20084K146

Audit of Nuclear Plant Tech Specs,Lasalle County Station, Unit 2

ML20084K146
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	03/31/1984
From:	Beahm D, Fehringer J EG&G, INC.
To:	Meyer C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-FIN-A-6816 EGG-EA-6539, TAC-54184, NUDOCS 8405110119
Download: ML20084K146 (10)

Text

I .

~

t >; r EGG-EA-6539 M' arch 1984 AUDIT OF NUCLEAR PLANT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS LA SALLE COUNTY STATION, ONIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-374 J. M. Fehringer D. M. Beahm OI k[kbkO!

P N4 PDR

0) b i Prepared for the

,JS,'QTlNg(L

!'l  :

g4 f h .d ++

, O 0.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION (:-'

Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-ID01570 FIN No. A6816

DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their '

employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal Itability or responsibility for any third party's use,

• of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed in this recort or represents that its use by such third party would

~

not infringe privately owned right2. ~ .

4 n

a . .

EGG-EA-6539 n

LA SALLE COUNTY STATION, UNIT 2 AUDIT OF NUCLEAR PLANT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Docket No. 50-374 TAC No. 54184 Published March 1984 J. M. Fehringer D. M. Beahm EG&G Idaho, Inc.

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Responsible NRC Individual and Division:

C. Meyer/ Division of Licensing k

Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID01570

( FIN No. A6816 i

L

ABSTRACT This report documents the review of the LaSalle County Station, Unit 2, (LaSalle-2) Technical Specifications (T/S) to determine if selected sections of the T/S are consistent with the LaSalle Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) as amended, and the LaSalle Safety Evaluation Report (SER) as supplemented. Inconsistencies are listed in this report but no further  :

evaluation was conducted to determine if the inconsistency was an ,

indication of an error in any of the subject documents.

FOREWARD This report is supplied as part of the " Audit of Nuclear Plant Technical Specifications" being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Licensing, by EG&G Idaho, Inc., NRC Licensing Support Section.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under i authorization B&R 20 19 10 11 1 FIN No. A6816. -- ,

P 5

11

d' CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION.............................l....................... 1 n

2. REVIEW CRITERIA .......,...........................................

1

3. DISCUSSION .......................................................

2

4. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... 5

5. REFERENCES ....................................................... 5 TABLE I. LaSalle-2 Technical Specification /FSAR/SER Consistency Summary .............................................. 3

.Me P

iii

AUDIT OF NUCLEAR PLANT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

1. INTRODUCTION The LaSalle C'ounty Station, Unit 2 (LaSalle-2) is a boiling water reactor (BWR) plant. It has been selected for an audit to determine if the LaSalle Technical Specifications (T/S)1, are consistent with the LaSalle Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)2 as amended, and the LaSalle Safety Evaluation Report (SER)3 as supplemented. The specific sections of the T/S selected for audit and summary results are listed in Table I.

, Inconsistencies between these sections of the T/S and the FSAR and SER were identified but no further evaluation was conducted to determine if the inconsistencies were indications of error in any of the sub.iect documents.

2. REVIEW CRITERIA The T/S Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCOs) and Action Statements for each technical specification listed _in Table I (Section 3) were.

compared with the FSAR and SER to determine if the T/S are consistent to.

i the FSAR and SER. Emphasis was on the T/S Operational Mode 1, power operation, with exceptions noted in this report. Setpoints and lists of valves, instruments, overcurrent protective devices and electrical buses in the T/S were checked against tables in the FSAR and SER.

?

The SER was reviewed to ensure that requirements in the SER were addressed in the T/S.

The T/S bases and surveillance requirements were not reviewed in this audit of the T/S.

An explanation of each inconsistency between the T/S and the FSAR and SER is included in this report.

'=

3. DISCUSSION The following inconsistencies were identified:

n

1. T/S Section 3/4.6.5.2 (Secondary Containment Automatic

-Isolation Dampers).

T/S Table 3/4.6.5.2 (Secondary Containment Automatic Isolation Dampers) includes Reactor Building Purge Train Isolation Dampers 2VQ-037 and 2VQ-038. However, these damperes are not addressed in Table 6.5-1 (Standby Gas Treatment System Components) or in any other section of the FSAR.

2. T/S Section 3/4.8.3.2 (Primary Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protection Devices) .

T/S Table 3/4.8.3.2 (Primary Containment Penetration Conductor

'Overcurrent Protection Devices) identifies all protective devices that

- shall be operable. The completeness of thi.s. table cannot be verifted becaus~e the FSAR and SER does not include a table identifying the required overcurrent protection devices.

Table I contains a summary of the LaSalle,T/S sections reviewed; consistencies and inconsistencies with the FSAR and/or the SER a.e shown.

9 0

4 2

TABLE I. LASALLE-2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS /FSAR/SER CONSISTENCY

SUMMARY

l SECTION CONSISTENT / INCONSISTENT 3/4.3 INSTRUMENTATION 3/4.3.2 ISOLATION ACTUATION INSTRUMENTATION , Consistent 3/4.3.3 EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM Consistent ACTUATION INSTRUMENTATION 3/4.5 EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEMS 3/4.5.1 ECCS - OPERATING Consistent  !

3/4.5.3 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER Consistent 3/4.6 CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS 3/4.6.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT Primary Containment Integrity Consistent  ;

Primary Containment Leakage Consistent Primary Containment Air Locks Consistent  :

MSIV Leakage Control System _.

Consistent Primary Containment Structural Consistent Integrity Drywell and Suppression Chamber Consistent Internal Pressure Drywell and Suppression Chamber Consistent Purge System 3/4.6.2 DEPRESSURIZATION SYSTEMS Suppression Chamber Consistent Suppression Pool Spray Consistent Suppression Pool Cooling Consistent 3/4.6.3 CONTAINMENT ISOLATION VALVES Consistent 3

w________

i TABLE I. (Continued)

SECTION CONSISTENT / INCONSISTENT [

3/4.6.5 SECONDARY CONTAINMENT Secondary Containment Automatic Inconsistent l Isolation Dampers i L

Standby Gas Treatment System Consistent 3/4.6.6 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT ATMOSPHERE CONTROL Primary Containment Atmosphere Consistent Cor. trol Systems Drywell and Suppression Chamber Consistent Oxygen Concentration 3/4.8 ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEMS 3/4.8.1 A.C. SOURCES A.C. Sources-Operating Consistent 3/4.8.2 ONSITE POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS Distribution - Operating .

Consistent D'.C. Sources - Operating Consistent Primary Containment Penetration Inconsistent Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices 4

4 CONCLUSION As shown in Table

, 24 I with information in the FSAR technical specification were This Table I. identified in ons two of secti and SER for

. LaSalle Uni compared inconsistency or which ofreview did notonsdetermine shown in ththe tec the documents e significance of the was in error.

\

5 REFERENCES \

1. \

\

LaSalle County Station  ;

1983

, Unit 2, Technical Specifications R

2. ev. December LaSalle County Station 3

, Unit 2, FSAR up to Amendment N LaSalle County Station o. 63

\

, Unit 2, SER up to Supplement o. 7 N

g

.