ML20212A571

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 130 & 123 to Licenses NPF-2 & NPF-8,respectively

ML20212A571
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	10/17/1997
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212A226	List: ML20212A222 ML20212A571
References
NUDOCS 9710240043
Download: ML20212A571 (3)

Text

..-.

= __.

_ =. --

y o

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.c. 206064001

~

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.130 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF 2 AND AMENDMENT NO.123 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPf R SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY. INC. ET AL.

JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 QQCXET NOS. 50-348 AND 50 364 i

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated March 7,1997, the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC) et al.,

submitted a request for changes to the Joseph M. Farley Nucleat Plant, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS). The requested changes would revise the Surveillance i

Requirements (SR) associated with certain cmtainment isolation valves (CIV). The proposed TS amendments add the defueled condition to operating modes listed in TS SR 4.6.3.:. where CIV operability testing is allowed, i

2.0 EVALUATION The proposed Farley TS amendments revise, for both Units 1 and 2, SR 4.6.3.2. The current SR 4.6.3.2 states:

4.6.3.2 Each isolation valve specified in Table 3.61 shall be demonstrated OPERABLE during the COLD SHUTDOWN or REFUELING MODE at least once per 18 months by:

a. Verifying that on a Phase A containment isolation test signal, each Phase A isolation valve actuates to its isolation position, b Verifying that on a Phase B containment isolation test signal, each Phase B isolation valve actuates to its isolation position.

The proposed Farley TS amendments revise, for both Units 1 and 2, SR 4.6.3.2 to read:

4.6.3.2. Each isolation valve specified in Table 3.61 shall be demonstrated OPERABLE during the COLD SHUTDOWN or REFUELING MODES or defueled at least once per 18 months by:

a. Verifying that on a Phase A containment isolation test signal, each Phase A isolation valve actuates to its isolation position.

9710240043 971017 PDR ADOCK 05000348 P

PDR

o 5.

2

b. Verifying that on a Phase 8 containment isolation test signal, each Phase B isolation valve actuates to its isolation position.

Testing of the CIVs is intended to ensure that all CIVs are operable so the containment atmosphere can be isolated from the outside environment in the event of a release of radioactive material in the containment building, in this amendment request, the licensee proposes to add the defueled condition to the periods in which these valves can be tested.

The defueled condition is an extension of the refueling mode.: The condition exists when all reactor fuelis removed from the reactor core. In this state, containment integrity and the containment isolation functions are not necessary to limit the release of radioactive material in the containment atmosphere, since the reactor fuel would no longer be in the containment building.

The :taff has reviewed the proposed TS amendments and concurs with SNC that the containment isolation function is not required to limit the release of radioactive material in -

the contalment atmosphere postulated to occur during a design basis accident when the reactor is defueled. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed testing, in the defueled condition, of the containment isolation valves as specified in SRs 4.6.3.2(a) and 4.6.3.2(b) for both Farley Unit 1 and Unit 2 to be acceptable.

3.0 STATE r'ONSULTATION in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the State of Alabama' official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendments change the surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no siqnificant 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 exposurs. Th a Com'Wjn has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve,o gnificant hs?scds consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding id2 FR 19tiit dated April 23,1997). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for rategorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). - Pursuant to _10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental -

impact statement or environ' mental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.

1

o 3-

5.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission has concluded, based on tt.e 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 w!!b the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimica to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the pubile.

Principal Contributor: W. Gleaves Date: October 17, 1997