ML20116J900
| ML20116J900 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 11/06/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20116J893 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9211160424 | |
| Download: ML20116J900 (4) | |
Text
--
ps atouq'o
~g UNITED STATES
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7.
j W ASHINGTON. D. C. 2055S
%,..../
ENCLOSURE 3 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.164 TO FACILITY-OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-77 AND AMENDMENT NO.154 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-79 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY SE000YAH NUCLEAR PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-327 AND 50-328
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated August 21, 1992, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA or the licensee) proposed amendments to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) Units 1 and 2.
The requested changes would add a statement to Action a of TS 3.6.5.2 and to the Mode 5 and 6 actions-of TS 3.7.7 that would exclude implementation of the provisions of TS 3.0.4.
TS 3.0.4 requires that entry into an operational mode or other specified condition cannot be made unless the TS conditions for the Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO) are met without reliance on the provisions contained in the action statements.
It also requires that exceptions to this requirement be stated in the individual specifications.
2.0 EVALUATION Generic Letter 87-09, " Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) on the Applicability of Limiting-Conditions for Operation and Surveillance Requirements," recognizes that TS 3.0.4 unduly restricts
-facility operation when conformance with action statements provides an acceptable level of-safety for continued operation.
In addition, for an LC0 that has action statements permitting continued operation for an unlimited period of time, entry into an operational mode should be permitted in accordance with the action statements.
The restriction-on a change _.in operational modes should only apply where the action statements establish a specified time interval in which the LC0 must be met or a shutdown would be required.
TS 3.6.5.2 requires that certain specified channels of the ice bed temperature monitoring system be operable in plant operating Modes 1, 2, 3_-and 4.
Action i
Statement a of this specification requires that if this ice bed temperature indication:is not available in the main control room, the ice bed temperature must be determined at the local ice condenser temperature monitoring panel 9211160424 921106 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
, every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.
Since the present TS do not specifically exclude application of TS 3.0.4 when the control room indication is inoperable, its_ application
<~
has the effect of preventing chan3es_ to the plant operating mode, especially plant startup,.whenever the control room indication.is not available, even i
though local indication is available.
However, plant operation is not i
affected if it is already operating (or no mode change is desired) and the ice bed temperatures are determined frcm the local ice condenser temperature
+
monitoring panel every 12 hurs.
Therefore, the licensee has proposed adding i
to this requirement, a statement that excludes application of TS 3.0.4 whenever the control room indication is not available. The present requirements to determine the ice bed temperatures locally every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> if the control room indication is not available, and the required action to be taken if neither monitoring system is available, would not be changed by the proposed amendment.
2 The licensee has determir.ed that a similar condition exists for the control room emergency ventilation system (CREVS).
TS 3.7.7 requires that two independent CREVS be operable in all plant operating modes.
Since this TS does not specifically exclude application of TS 3.0.4,'its application prevents changes between Modes 5 and 6 if one or both of the control room emergency ventilation systems are inoperable.
Because this restriction could impact refueling outage activities, the licensee has proposed adding an action e
statement that would exclude application of the provisions ~ of TS 3.0.4 whenever one or both of the CREVS are inoperable and the plant is.in operating Modes 5 or 6.
lhe present statements concerning the actions to be taken in the event that one or both of the CREVS is inoperable would not be changed by the proposed amendment.
For the ice t,ca temperature monitoring system, Action a of TS 3.6.5.2 allows for indefinite unit operation when the control room indication is inoperable and temperatures can be determined every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> at the local monitoring panel.
For the CREVS, the action statements associated with Mode 5 and 6 allow indefinite unit operation in Modes 5 or 6 with one train inoperable l
provided the train is restored to operable status within 7 days or the CREVS is placed in the recirculation mode.
With both trains of CREVS inoperable, indefinite unit operation in Modes 5 or 6 is allowed provided all operations involving core alterations or positive reactivity changes are suspended.
l The staff has determined that for the conditions explained above, the provisions of Generic Letter 87-09 are applicable.
Therefore, it is unreasonable and unnecessary to apply _the restrictions of TS 3.0.4.
Compliance with the specified action statements establish an acceptable level of safety when control room monitoring of the ice bed temperature,'.or-one or both CREVS are inoperable.
Based on this evaluation, the staff finds the proposed TS changes acceptable.
2 l
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's. regulations, the Tennessee State official j
was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
l l
4
+ -,..
d ;-
}
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL 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 significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released off site, 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 (57 FR 45090). Accordingly, the amendments i
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 l
of the amendments.
l
5.0 CONCLUSION
i j
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 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, f
Principal Contributor:
D. LaBarge t
l Date: November 6, 1992 i
4 i;
4 a
- -