ML20246K676
| ML20246K676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 05/05/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246K229 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905180123 | |
| Download: ML20246K676 (6) | |
Text
%,
UNITED STATES -
[
g-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/
' :a '
5 8
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20656 ENCLOSURE 3 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 114 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-77 i
AND AMENDMENT NO. 104 TO FACILITY'0PERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-79 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 5&327 AND 50-328
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated June 21, 1987, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) proposed 31 separate changes to the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS). These changes are throughout the TS to correct inconsistencies, minor discrepancies, factual errors and typographical errors.
There are twelve changes that would correct typographical errors, one change that would correct the alphabetical listing of the definit 4ns, one change would correct an error from a previous amendment, four cha..ges that would correct references to figures or the figure itself, eight changes that would correct inconsistencies between the Unit I and Unit 2 TS and five changes that would correct factual errors in the TS. These corrections will eliminate confusion over applicable requirements and the potential for error in reading the TS.
2.0 EVALUATION There are 31 separate items that TVA proposes to change in the TS. There are changes that affect both Unit I and Unit 2, changes that affect only Unit 1 and changes that affect only Unit 2.
These changes are listed in the enclosed table.
The change to correct the alphabetical listing of the definitions in the index (i.e., item 1) was approved in Amendment 71 for Unit 1 and Amendment 63 for Unit 2.
These amendments were issued by letter dated May 18, 1988.
The proposed changes have been reviewed by the staff.
The changes are consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors, Revision 4a, and the TS, and are correct.
Sequoyah is a Westinghouse pressurized water reactor.
Therefore, the staff concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable.
89051 Boj,7-890505 DR ADOCK 050003p7 p
PNU
. In the Unit 1 TS, there are the following two additional inconsistency errors:
(1) page B3/4 6-3a duplicates the top of page 3/4 6-4 of the Unit 1 Bases on combustible gas control and (2) the dimension " inch" was not included in the phrase "21.0 center-to-center distance between new fuel assemt, lies" for the new fuel pit storage racks in the Unit 1 TS Section 5.6.1.2.
Deleting page B 3/4 6-3a and adding the word inch to have the expression "21.0 inch center-to-center distance" will make the Unit 1 TS consistent with the Unit 2 TS. The new fuel pit storage racks are shared by both units.
This was discussed with TVA by telephone on April 18, 1989 and TVA agreed to the changes.
The staff concludes that these two corrections are acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments involve a change to a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to the surveillance requirements.
The 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 significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding.
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 nor environmental assessment need to be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (53 FR 13021) on April 20, 1988 and consulted with the State of Tennessee.
No public comments were received and the State of Tennessee did not have any coments.
The staff has cuncluded, 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, and (2) 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 nor to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J. Donohew Dated: May 5, 1989
a 3
TABLE H
l j
DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE TO THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TS) 1 I
Item TS Page Description of Proposed Change
)
-l Changes That Affect Unit 1 (U1) and Unit 2 (U2) 1.
I Correct alphabetical listing of II definition section index.
1 2.
2-7 Add Laplace variable to the lag compensation and correct typographical error in definition of the time constant.
3.
2-9 Correct typographical errors in definition of K.4 4.
B2-1 Delete references to nonexistent Figure 2.1-2.(a) 5.
3/4 1-14 Delete references to nonexistent Figure 3.1-2.(a) 6.
3/4 1-21 Delete references to nonexistent Figure 3.1-2.(a) 7.
3/4 3-13 Correct typographical errors in Table 4.3-1 notation. The words being capitalized are words defined in the definition section of the TS, and, therefore, should be capitalized.
8.
3/43-56(U1)
Correctly identify the required number 3/43-57(U2) of channels and minimum number of channels operable for auxiliary feedwater flow in the list of accident monitoring instruraentation to be consistent with plant design.
9.
3/4 7-1 Correct an inconsistency between action b. and Specification 3.4.1.1 for operation with less than four reactor coolant pumps running.
10.
3/4 7-6 Correct an error from a previous amendment that inadvertently omitted the surveillance frequency for verification of control valve operability.(b)
The correction is consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications for Westinghouse Pressurizer Water Reactors, Revision 4a.
. Item TS Page Description of Proposed Change Changes That Affect Unit 1 (U1) and Unit 2 (U2) 11.
3/4 7-10 Correct an inconsistency within the action statement for Modes 1 and 3.
12.
3/412-1 (U1 only)
Correctly identify radiological 3/4 12-2 reporting requirements of Specification 3.12.1.c.
13.
3/412-10(U1)
Correctly identify radiological i
3/4 12-9 (U2) reporting requirements of Specifi-cations 3.12.2, action a, and 4.12.2.
14.
5-2 Add the location of the meteorological tower to Figure 5.1-1.
15.
5-6 Correct the hydrostatic test pressures for the reactor coolant system and secondary side in Table 5.7.1.
Changes That Affect Unit 1 Only 16.
B2-1 Correct typographical errors in the enthalpy hot channel factor terms.
17.
3/4 3-73 Correct typographical error in page heading.
18.
3/4 7-37 Correct an incorrect reference in the limiting condition for operation.
19, 3/4 8-4 Correct an inconsistency in surveillance requirement 4.8.1.1.2.d.6.b and the corresponding requirement in the Unit 2 TS and NRC Standard Technical Specifications (STS).
20.
3/4 8-5 Correct an inconsistency in surveillance requirement 4.8.1.1.2.d.7 and the corresponding requirement in the Unit 2 TS and NRC STS.
21.
~/4 11-12 Correct an inconsistency between Table 4.11-2, note a., and the corresponding requirement in the Unit 2 TS and NRC STS.
22.
B3/4 6-3 Correct a typographical error in Item 3/4.6.1.8.
e'
. Item TS Page Description of Proposed Change Changes That Affect Unit 2 Only 23.
3/4 3-4 Correct an inconsistency between Table 3.3-1. Item 22, and the corresponding item in the Unit 1 TS and the NRC STS.
24.
3/4 3-7 Correct an inconsistency between Table 3.3-1, Action 8, and the corresponding item in the Unit 1 l
TS.
25.
3/4 6-4 Correct a typographical error in i
Item e.
t 26.
3/4 6-18 Correct a typographical error in Specification 4.6.3.4.
27.
3/4 7-25 Currect a typographical error in Item 1.
28.
3/4 7-50 Correct a typographical error in one valve number.
29.
3/4 9-1 Correct a typographical error in the footnote.
30.
3/4 11-9 Correct inconsistencies in Table 4.11-2 and the corresponding requirement in the Unit 1 TS and NRC STS.
31.
3/4 12-2 Correct typographical error in Specification 3.12.1.c.
i (a) Amendment 41 for Unit 1 and Amendment 33 for Unit 2, issued September 3, 1985, deleted Figures 2.1-2 and 3.1-2.
(b) Amendment 12 for Unit 1 issued March 25, 1982, did not include the phrase, "At least once per 31 days by verifying that," to Surveillance Requirement 4.7.1.2.a.
1
(__-
. Item TS Page Description _of Proposed Change Changes That Affect Unit 2 Only 23.
3/4 3-4 Correct an inconsistency between Table 3.3-1 Item 22, and the corresponding item in the Unit 1 TS and the NRC STS.
24, 3/4 3-7 Correct an inconsistency between Table 3.3-1, Action 8, and the corresponding item in the Unit 1 TS.
25.
3/4 6-4 Correct a typographical error in Item e.
26.
3/4 6-18 Correct a typographical error in Specification 4.6.3.4.
27.
3/4 7-25 Correct a typographical error in Item 1.
28.
3/4 7-50 Correct a typographical error in one valve number.
29.
3/4 9-1 Correct a typographical error in the footnote.
l 30.
3/4 11-9 Correct inconsistencies in Table 4.11-2 and the corresponding req.11rement in the Unit 1 TS and NPC STS.
31.
3/4 12-2 Correct typographical error in Specification 3.12.1.c.
i (a) Amendment 41 for Unit I and Amendment 33 for Unit 2, issued September 3, 1985, deleted Figures 2.1-2 and 3.1-2.
(b) Amendment 12 for Unit 1 issued March 25, 1982, did not include the phrase, "At least once per 31 days by verifying that," to Surveillance Requirement 4.7.1.2.a.
l l
[
____--__ ___ ___ _ 9