ML20198S555
| ML20198S555 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 12/22/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198S551 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9901110359 | |
| Download: ML20198S555 (4) | |
Text
._m-p usuq y
t UNITED STATES j
g
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGYON, D.C. 20006-0001
\\...../
l SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
}
RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.147 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-10 l
l AND AMENDMENT NO.139 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-15 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY l
l THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA l
SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNITS 2 AND 3 1
DOCKET NOS. 50-361 AND 50-362 I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated June 30,1997, Southem Califomia Edison Company, et al. (SCE or the licensee) requested changes to the operating license for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit No. 2 and the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating Licenst Nos. NPF-10 and NPF-15) for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (SONGS). The proposed changes would delete License Condition 2.C.(19)b for SONGS Unit 2, " Shift Manning," and revise TS 3.3.1,3.3.2,3.3.5,3.3.10,3.3.11,3.4.7,3.4.12.1,3.7.5, 5.5.2.10, and 5.5.2.11 for both SONGS units. The specific changes are discussed in the evaluation below. The proposed changes are required to either reinstate provisions of the original SONGS Units 2 and 3 TS which had been revised as part of NRC Amendments Ne 127 and 116, make corrections to the current TS, or rernove iriformation inadvertently addec that is not applicable to the design of the units.
2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 Deletion of SONGS Unit 2 License Condition 2.C.(19)b, " Shift Manning" The current license condition states that the licensee shall develop and implement administrative procedures to limit operating staff working hours. Also, this condition lists guidelines to be followed in the event of the need to require substantial amounts of overtime.
The licensee in its submittal stated that the information included in this license condition conflicts with that which is included in the SONGS Topical Report that has been implemented as part of the licensee's adoption of the Improved Technical Specifications (ITS). Further, the staff in its safety evaluation approving the ITS for SONGS noted that specific overtime limits 9901110359 981222 PDR ADOCK 05000361 p
.___._..m e.
Je
, need not be included in the TS but may be controlled by administrative procedures. This l-change does not affect the current staffing policies, commitments, or implementation at the site.
l Since this license condition serves no purpose and the staffing requirements and guidelines are j
included in the SONGS Topical Report which provided the appropriate level of administrative l
control for the issue of staff manning, the staff hereby approves deletion of SONGS Unit 2 l
License Condition 2.C.(19)b.
l l
'2.2 TS 3.3.1, " Reactor Protective Instrumentation (RPS)-Operating."
L l
The licensee proposed a change to TS 3.3.1 that would delete the exception of the power range
(
neutron flux channels from Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.3.1.7. Currently, SR 3.3.1.7 l
requires that a channel functional test be performed on each RPS channel except for the power range neutron flux channels. Deleting the exception results in increasing the number of
' channels that would be tested and makes this TS conform to the surveillance specification that was included in the previous version of the TS prior to approval of the ITS amendments. The staff finds that this change results in a TS that is more conservative and is therefore acceptable.
l 2.3 TS 3.3.2, " Reactor Protective instrumentation (RPS)-Shutdown" l
The licensee proposed adding a footnote to SR 3.3.2.5 that would exclude neutron detectors from the response time testing requirement. This staff finds that this change is consistent with the previous version of the TS in Table 3.3-2, which was in effect prior to the ITS amendments,
. is consistent with staff policy, and is acceptable.
l 2.4 TS 3.3.5 " Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) Instrumentation" The licensee proposed deleting the reference to the requirement to calibrate bypass removal function of the recirculation action signal (RAS)in SR 3.3.5.4. In the June 30,1997, submittal, l
the licensee noted that the bypass removal function is not part of the units' RAS design. The staff finds that this change is editorial and administrative in nature and is therefore acceptable.
1 i
j.
2.5 TS 3.3.10, " Fuel Handling isolation Signal (FHIS)"
The licensee proposed a typographical change to replace the word " ignition" with the word
" initiation" in the Note to SR 3.3.10.3. This change is editorial and administrative in nature and the staff finds it acceptable. The second change the licensee proposed is to replace the requirement to perform a channel functional test to verify that the setpoint of the fuel handling isolation signal radiation monkor is less that or equal to SE4 counts per minute (cpm) above background with the following: "the allowable value of the setpoint is sufficiently high to prevent spurious alarms / trips, yet sufficiently low to assure an alarm / trip should an inadvertent release l
occur." The proposed wording is that which existed in the previous version of the TS prior to t
the ITS amendments. The licensee suggests that the change would allow it to administratively propose more conservative setpoints under certain conditions which would be established by the current version of the SR. The staff has deferred consideration of this proposed change at j
this time. During discussions with the licensee, it was noted that the licensee will evaluate
- measured radiation levels during upcoming refueling outages to determine the potential for i
4
^
1 i
oi la i
2 3-I i
spurious alarms / trips. The licensee will then determine if this change is still needed, and will l
revise and resubmit this change if appropriate.
2.6 TS 3.3.11, " Post Accident Monitoring instrumentation" The licensee proposed to change the title for Function 6 of Table 3.3.11-1 from " Containment j
Sump Water Level (wide range)" to
- Containment Water Level (wide range)". This change is made to reflect plant specific design information. The staff finds that this change is for clarification, is administrative in nature, and is therefore acceptable.
i i
2.7.
TS 3.4.7, "RCS Loops-Mode 5, Laops Filled" l
l' The licensee proposed changing the current SR 3.7.2 from " Verify required SG secondary side
~
- water level is 2 50% (wide range)." to "Wrify required SG secondary side water levelis > 50%
(wide range)." Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.4.7 uses " greater than". This change l
makes the surveillance consistent with the LCO. The staff finds that this change clarifies and
)
corrects the TS surveillance and is therefore acceptable.
1 j
2.8 TS 3.4.12.1, "Lcw Temperature Overpressure Protection (LTOP) System"
!j.
The licensee proposed changinphe APPLICABILITY statement for LCO 3.4.12.1 for MODE 6 from "when the head is on the reactor vessel" to "when the head is on the reactor vessel and the RCS is not vented." This change provides clarification and is consistent with the wording included in the previous version of the TS prior to the approval of the ITS amendments. The staff finds that this change is administrative in nature and is therefore acceptable.
i
}L 2.9 TS 3.7.5, " Aux liary Feedwater (AFW) System" The licensee proposed deleting from SR 3.7.5.3 and SR 3.7.5.4. the phrase "when in MODE 1, p
2, or 3," relating to when the surveillance for the AFW automatic valve actuation and positioning i
should be performed. The Bases for these two surveillances indicate that they should be perfo:med during shutdown conditions. The staff finds that this change corrects inconsistencies in the TS and is therefore acceptable.
2.10 Section 5.5.2.10,'"In6ervice Testing Program" 2
The licensee proposes a revision to Section 5.5.2.10 to change the title to include the inservice inspection program and to reflect the fact that the programs have been relocated to other licensee controlled specifications. The staff finds these changes to be administrative in nature and are therefore acceptable.
2.11 Section 5.5.2.11. " Steam C 9nerator (SG) Tube Surveillance Program" The licensee proposed to renumber the table in this section from 5.2.11 to 5.5.2.11 1 to correct a typographical error. This change was made by Amendment No.140. Also, a reference to 10 CFR 50.72 is proposed to be changed to 10 CFR 50.73 to reflect the proper regulation related to providing a licensee event report for NRC notification. Lastly, the phrase " Plug defective tubes and inspect an additional 25 tubes in this SG" is proposed to read, " Plug defective tubes g
-+---y rt
-=-9'
-r-'T s-a v'
v
- 7+--
6s fe
, and inspect an additional 2S tubes in this SG."_ This change was made by Amendment No.
~
140. The staff finds that these changes correct typographical errors and provide clarification and are therefore acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Califomia State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility componen! 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 significsnt 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 (63 FR 11921). 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 t.mendments.
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 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: Chet Postusny Date:
December 22, 1998