ML20206Q766
| ML20206Q766 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/20/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206Q762 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-54726, TAC-54727, TAC-54860, TAC-54861, NUDOCS 8607030322 | |
| Download: ML20206Q766 (4) | |
Text
_ _
\\
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
{
,I WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NO. 49 TO NPF-10 AND l
AMENDMENT NO. 38 TO NPF-15 SAN' ON0FRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 & 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-361 AND 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Southern California Edison Company (SCE), on behalf of itself and the other licensees, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, The City of Riverside, California, and The City of Anaheim, California, has submitted several. app (SONGS), Unit lications for license amendments for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station-and 3.
Two such requests, designated Proposed Change Numbers (PCN) 108 and PCN-110, are evaluated herein. These changes are evaluated below.
2.0 EVALUATION OF CHANGES A.
PCN-108 By letter dated April 27, 1984, SCE requested that changes be made in Technical Spefication 3/4.8.4.1, " Containment Penetration Conductor Over-current Protective Devices." The proposed change would revise Table 3.8-1 of Technical Specification 3/4.8.4.1, " Electrical Equipment Protective Devices," which requires the operability of containment penetration con-ductor overcurrent protective devices. These devices are essentially circuit breakers which help to maintain containment integrity by preventing overcurrents from damaging electrical penetrations through the containment boundary. Table 3.8-1 provides a list of equipment located inside contain-ment which requires electrical power and, therefore, is associated with primary and backup overcurrent protective devices. Each piece of equip-ment is specified by an alpha-numeric designation, several of which are currently incorrect. The following equipment designations are currently incorrect:
for Unit 2, Containment Recirculation Unit E-333; for Unit 3 Standby Containment Normal Cooling Fan E-333, Containment Normal Cooling Fan E-334,,and Containment Recirculation Unit E-333. The proposed change would revise these, designations to read:
for Unit 2. Containment Recirculation Unit A-353; for Unit 3, Standby Containment Normal Cooling Fan E-393, Containment Normal Cooling Fan E-394, and Containment Recir-culation Unit A-353.
t
'B607030322 860620 PDR ADOCK 05000361 P
. The NRC staff has evaluated the proposed change and has concluded that the proposed change is strictly an editorial change and would correct the currently incorrect designation of equipment associated with over-l current protective devices.
Because the proposed change corrects existing errors ?.he staff finds proposed change PCN-108 to be acceptable.
B. PCN-110 By letter dated April 2, 1984, SCE proposed license amendments for San Onofre Units 2 and 3 which would permit clarification of the present wording of technical specification Section 4.3.3.2.a of Technic'al Specification 3/4.3.3.2, " Instrumentation - Incore Detectors," which requires the operability of the incore detection system. The incore detection system monitors neutron flux distribution within the reactor core. The flux information is provided to the core operating limit,
supervisory system (COLSS) which is used by the plant computer to make various calculations relating to power distribution within the reactor.
Surveillance requirement 4.3.3.2.a requires the incore detection system to be demonstrated operable by the perfonnance of a channel check within twenty-four hours prior to its use and at least once each seven days thereafter. This wording could be misinterpreted to imply that a channel check must be perfonned each time the plant computer is removed from service, even though this does not make the incore detection system operable.
Because the plant computer may be removed from service several times during a week, surveillance requirement 4.3.3.2.a,.if misinterpreted, could result in an incore detection system channel check being perfonned several times within a week. The proposed change would amend surveillance require-ment 4.3.3.2.a to require demonstration of incore detection system opera-bility by performance of a channel check within twenty-four hours prior to its use if seven or more days have elapsed since the previous channel check and at least once each seven days thereafter. This proposed change would prevent unnecessary channel checks from being performed on the in-core detection system each time the plant computer is removed from and returned to service.
Since the proposed change is strictly an administrative change and is being proposed to clarify rather than change existing requirements, we find proposed change PCN-110 to be acceptable.
Contact with State Official The NRC staff has advised the Chief of the Radiological Health Branch, State Department of Health Services, State of California, of the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration. No comments were received.
Environmental Consideration These amendments involve changes in the installation or use of facility components located with the restricted area.
The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupation radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued proposed findings that the amendments involve no signifi-cant-hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such findings.
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec. 51.22(c)(9) or 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need to be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
Conclusion.
Based upon our evaluation of the proposed changes to the San Onofre Units 2 and 3 Technical Specifications, we have concluded that:
there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and 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. We, therefore, conclude that the proposed changes are acceptable, and are hereby incorporated in to the San,0nofre 2 and 3 Technical Specifications.
Dated: JUN 2 0 ES6 I
i m
June.20,1686 ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NO. 49 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-10 AND AMENDMENT NO. :,8 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-15 SAN ON0FRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 DISTRIBUTION DockeL File:50-361/362' ':-
NRC PDR Local PDR PRC System NSIC PBD7 Reading JLee (8)
HRood OELD EJordan BGrimes JPartlow W. Jones LChandler CMiles HRDenton DGEisenhut JRutberg RDiggs LHarmon MVirgilo TBarnhart(8)
EButcher NThompson