ML20100N056
| ML20100N056 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20100N047 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8412120553 | |
| Download: ML20100N056 (2) | |
Text
p It;
'o UNITED STATES
<.8'
~g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%,...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 78 TO FACILITY LICENSE N0. DPR-71 AND AMENDMENT NO.105 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-62 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324 1.0 Introduction By letter dated June 6, l'9'84, the Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L/the licensee) submitted proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1 and 2.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specifications 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 to allow alternate actions to be taken rather than placing an inoperative channel of the Reactor Protection System (RPS) or Isolation System in the tripped condition when this would cause the Trip Function to occur.
2.0 Evaluation of Proposed Revisions The licensee has submitted to NRC revisions to Brunswick Technical Specifications 3.3.1, 3.3.2 and 4.3.2.3.
The proposed specific Technical Specifications are delineated below:
Technical Specification 3.3.1 - The requested TS change adds footnotes to TS 3.3.1 (Actions a and b). These footnotes defer placement of an inoperative channel in the tripped condition when this would cause the trip function to occur.
Instead, the appropriate action required by Table 3.3.1-1 is initiated. TS 3.3.1 is also revised to make it more closely conform to the Standard Technical Specifications (STS).
Technical Specification *3.3.2 - The requested TS change adds footnotes to TS 3.3.2 (Actions b and c). These footnotes defer placement of an inoperative channel in the tripped condition when this would cause the trip function to occur.
Instead, the appropriate action required by Table 3.3.2-1 is initiated. TS 3.3.2 is also revised to make it more closely conform to the Standard Technical Specifications.
Technical Specification 4.3.2.3 (Unit 1 only) - A footnote providing for a one-tine extension to Surveillance Requirenent 4.3.2.3 is deleted.
Technical Specifications 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 presently contain footnotes that defer placing an inoperable channel in the tripped condition when the requirements for the minimum number # operable channels is not satisfied 8412120553 841204 PDR ADOCK 05000324 E
A--
. for both trip systems and placement of the inoperable channel in the tripped condition would cause the Trip Function to occur. The proposed changes clarify the action required when the minimum number of operable channels is not satisfied for only one trip system and placement of the inoperable channel in the tripped condition would cause the Trip Function to occur.
This revision is consistent with the guidelines provided in the Standard Technical Specifications and allows the safety of the plant to be naintained without subjecting it to an abnormal operating condition.
Administrative changes in this revision make the Brunswick Technical Specifications more closely conform to the Standard Technical Specifications.
Based on our review of th'e'licens!e's June 6, 1984 submittal, consisting of the proposed Technical Specification changes and the associated discussions for their change, we have determined that this revision causes no significant increase in the probability or consequence of a previously-analyzed accident nor a significent reduction in safety margin. The revision is consistent with the tuidance provided in the Standard Technical Specifications and is acceptable.
3.0 Environmental Consideratior_s_
The amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the aniendments 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 Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eli for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(gibility criteria 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.
4.0 Conclusions We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) public such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the connon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
K. Porter, Region II Dated:
December 4,1984
.