ST-HL-AE-3542, Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-76 & NPF-80,changing Tech Spec 3.3.3.6 to Eliminate Requirement to Shut Down Plant If One of Four Channels Inoperable

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-76 & NPF-80,changing Tech Spec 3.3.3.6 to Eliminate Requirement to Shut Down Plant If One of Four Channels Inoperable
ML20065G955
Person / Time
Site: South Texas  STP Nuclear Operating Company icon.png
Issue date: 08/22/1990
From: Kinsey W
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML20065G956 List:
References
ST-HL-AE-3542, NUDOCS 9010240300
Download: ML20065G955 (9)
v • d • e


Text

- . .

'v I {

-;p . - ..; ,

y The Light J i Houston c o mLighting p a nky5 uth Texas Projec Electric Generating Station P. O. Bos 289,, Wadsworth, Tenas 77483 Power ,

m August 22, 1990-N ST HL AE 3542.. '

File No.: 09.06, C20.01'

'10CPR50.90

  1. ,' 10CFR50.92

.' 10CFR$1-

~

+ ,.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control-Desk Washington, DC= '20555 -

% South Texas Project Electric Generating Station l Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50 498, STN 50 499 e i

' Proposed Amendment to the Unit.1 and. Unit 2 3

, Technical Soecification 3.3.3.6 for Containment Pressure Instrumenta @ !

c ,

Pursuant;to 10CFR50.90, Houston Lighting & Power Company (HLC/) hereby-

. proposes to.~ amend'its Operating Licenses NPF 76 and NPF 80.' The proposed' 4

L ~amenament would change. Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.3.6 regarding.the action to be taken in' the event' of one of the four containment pressure post-

~

accident monitoring channels becoming inoperable.- The change would eliminate the : requirement to . shutdown tht: plant if one of the four channels is-inoperable. The shutdown? requirement would.be retained for'the condi; ion of; '

two inoperable channels. The proposed change wi11' maintain ~a conservative ,

~

7 .!

design and reduce the potential for-unnecessary unplanned shutdowns, therebyf

-- v ' ,

increasing plant safety and-reliability. >This proposed change is to thet Technical Specifications for the South-Texas Project ElectricL Cenerating  ; >

iM 1 Station (STPEGS) UnitsE1:and 2. A"similar Technica1rSpecification change was

  • 1 approved and incorporatedLinto Table 3.10 l'of Technical;Specificatien 3.3'.3.6 Lin Amendm'ent Nos'14 and 4 to Facility Operating. License Nos NPF 76 and NPF 80 -

o .

- HL&P has reviewed the attached proposed amendment' pursuant' to 10CFR50.92

- and' determined that it 'does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

~

4

~The basis for.this determination is provided in the' attachments.

based on the information contained in this submittal and-in the NRC Finali In' addition,

. ] I Environmental-Statement related to the operation of STPEGS Units 1 and.2 H1AP.

has- concluded that, pursuant: to 10CFR51, there are' no significant radiological -  !

.or non-radiological impacts associated with the proposed action'and the=

proposed' license amendment will not have a significant.effect on.the quality: )

j,a

'of the environment. t ge.d

e. S- g 1

[1dDsgu@j 8 9ef '

lL : Q' L A1/040.N14 A Subsidiar) ot' Houston Industries incorporated h

P K

hg. '

Houstan Lighting & Power C:mpany -

- South Texas Project Electric Generating Station ST-HL AE-3542

.,. File No.: C9.06, C20.01

, , Page 2  ;

The STPECS Nuclear Safety Review Board has reviewed and approved the f . proposed changes.

l j

1 In accordance with'10CTR50.91(b),.HL&P is providing the State of Texas

=

.vith a copy of this proposed amendment.  ;

i' u . If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please contact L Mr. A. W. Harrison at (512) 972 7298 or myself at (512) 972 7921..

l l

hh L W. H. Kinse L- Vice Presid s Nuclear Generation- i SDP/ amp  ;

I Attachments: 1. Significant Hazards Evaluation for

! . Eliminating from Technical Specification E 3.3.3,6 the Shutdown Requirement for. Loss -

l of:One of Four Channels of Containment 4 I Pressure Instrumentation .,

l'

~

2. Proposed Technical Specification Change s 3.3.3.6, Table 3.'3 10 .

i

(

1 I

n t.

!s A1/040.N14 n <

  • -1

~

ST.HL.AE-3542 ,

. 'lienston Lighting & Power Company File No.:G9.06, G20.01 South Tesas Project Electric Generating Station -Page 3-cc:

Regional Administrator, Region IV Rufus S. Scott Nuclear Regulatory Commission Associate General Counsel .

611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite.1000 Houston Lighting & Power Company "

Arlington,-TX 76011 P. O. Box 61867 Houston, TX- 77208 George Dick, Project Manager

-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission INPO Vashington, DC 20555 Records Center 1100 circle 75 Parkway J. I. Tapia Atlanta, GA 30339 3064 Senior Resident. Inspector 1 c/o U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Dr. Joseph M. Hendrie Commission. 50 Be11 port Lane P. O. Box 910- Be11 port, NY ~11713 '

Bay City, TX 77414

, . D. K.' Lacker-L J. R. Newman, Esquire Bureau of Radiation control

! Newman & Holtzinger', P.C. Texas Department of Health r> 1615 L Street, N.W. 1100 West 49th Street Washington, DC 20036 Austin, TX 78704 g D. E. Ward /R. P. Verret

i. Central, Power & Light Company L i-P. 0.' Box 2121 .

i Corpus Christi, TX 78403 i p J.'C. Lanier Director of Generation b City of' Austin Electric Utility 721 Barton-Springs Road l

-Austin.'TX 78704 ,

,e '

R. J. Costello/M. T. Hardt- '

City Public Service Board P. O. Box 1771 San Antonio, TX 78296 4

l

. t' ~

l Revised 12/15/89 r

L4/NRC/

L

I

,: e . g, i P_;" (

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGU1ATORY COMMISSION

- In the Matter )

)

Houston Li5hting & Power )

' Docket Nos. 50 498 Company, et al'., ) 50 499

)

South Texas Project )

Units.1 and 2- )

AFFIDAVIT '

.y V.-'H. Kinsey being duly sworn, hereby deposes.and says that he is Vice President, Nuclear Generation, of Houston Li 5hting.& Power Company;-that he is duly authorized to sign'and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the

- attached proposed change to' the South Texas Project Electric Generating .

Station Technical Specification 3.3.3.6; is familiar with the content'.thereof; and that the matters set forth therein are true and. correct to the best'of his' kncviedge and belief.

-W. H. Kinsey Vice Presiden Nuclear Generation-

o Subscribed and sworn to before me,La Notary Public in and for The h , . State of Texas this MGday of (, tuna.4r , 1990

I .

t

'kt b"^ha c @t #%'  %

.

  • STATE OF TEXAS Notary Public in and for thdi j

State of Texas

$,y..

~ .g uf comm. Exo. Apr.e.1991 ,

a

r. .

Ii?

A1/040.N14 f

v,' _ s  !

. - '" 7

, m; ; ~' r l [ F: f , ') '*

-p

,%), > e

,y .

r ,

o. >

3 '

' t ', i y,

i A

r  ?

i I

t < '

I,=

'r

.I i .

1 y

ATTACHMENT 1-SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS EVALUATION-FOR ELIMINATING FROM THE~ 'u TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 3.3.3,6 THE' SHUTDOWN REQUIREMENT FOR (

1 LOSS OF-ONE OF FOUR-CHANNELS OF CONTAINMENT PRESSURE INSTRUMENTATION .

i m 4

, h s

1

,i

,3

+

o.. o?r

y .[

C

+

9 A1/040.N14  !

in.

d

... f ,

SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS EVALUATION FOR ELIMINATING 71t0M THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 3.3.3.6 THE SHUTDOWN REQUIREMENT FOR IDSS OF ONE OF FOUR CHANNELS i CONTAINMENT PRESSURE INSTRUMENTATION Background  ;

  • The Post Accident Monitoring (PAMS) instrumentation involved.in the proposed change is containment pressure. These are Regulatory Ouide 1.97 Rev. 2 category 1 instruments, as shown in STPECS UFSAR Table 7.5 1. For this.

function there are four safety grade channels that input into the Qualified  ;

' Display Processing System (QDPS). The.QDPS post accident monitoring function for the subject parameter will remain operable as long as there is at least

.one valid input. This provides STPEGS a degree of redundancy ar.d consnvatism when compared to the requirements of Westinghouse Standard Technical Specifications.. Requiring plant shutdown in the.acti,6 statement with the a loss of only one channel is overly restrictive to plemt operation and unnecessarily creates the potential for unplanned plemt shutdowns. HMP' ..!

belf eyes that- eliminatig this requirement will resu'it in more reliable and safer operation.

L . .

Procosed Chance HMP proposes to revise Table 3.310 Item 1 of Technical Specification 3.3.3.6 to eliminate the shutdown requirement'of ACTION 38.for loss of one of four channels of-containment pressure instrumentation. AL . ,

similar Technical Specification' change was approved in Amendment Nos 14 and 4 to Facility Operating License Nos NPF 76 and NPF 80. A new action statement (ACTION 43), which considers the additional redundancy existing at STPEGS .,l Units 1 and 2 to measure pressurizer level,. was incorporated into Table 3.310 of Technical Specification 3.3.3.6.

Safety Evaluation l The STPEGS Technical Specifications presently require that'the plant-be shutdown if one channel is inoperable and the channel cannot be restored in 90 days. HMP believes that -imposing- a plant shutdown because of. the l unavailability of:one of four channels of post accident monitoring ,

4 l instrumentation is unjustified in view of the degree of redundancy and the i

, undesirability of performin8 an unplanned shutdown with its attendant cycles on plant equipment. The Standard Technical Specifications for Westinghouse  !

Pressurized Water Reacto: s, NUREG-0452, Revision 5 require a total of two channels for the Containment Pressure PAMS. The minimum channels operable t requirement is one and with one channel operable the allowed outage time (A0T) is 7 days. With both channels inoperable, the A0T is'48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />.

The' proposed Technical Specification change provides a 31 day A0T with only two. channels operable which is conservative when compared to the

' - Standard Technical Specifications and reflects the design of STPEGS.

l. .!

l A1/040.N14 l

l

q i

c J Attachment 1~7 Page 2 Safety Evaluation. Cont'd.

The proposed-7 day A0T for only one channel operable _and 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> for no channels operable follows the Standard Technical Specifications.; Note that there are no changes to the existing STPEGS ACTIONS for more than one channel inoperable.- Additionally, the proposed change will not. require a plant

> shutdown with one channel inoperable which will have"a positive effect on plant reliability and reduces potential' challenges to safety systems. , ,

The proposed change, to use existing action statement _(ACTION 43),

,, involves no physical changes-to the' station. The plant design and

-instrumentation configuration and quality classification are unchanged. The "U

proposed change does not in any'way affect the requirements'of Technical.

Specifications =3.3,1 governing the ESFAS function associated with this instrumentation.

Based on'the evaluation above, HL&P concludes that the-change,in no way degrades the reliability or design of the post-accident monitoring instrumentation and further reduces the potential-for unplanned: plant.

shutdowns'and is consequently an overall improvement in station safety and reliability.

Determination of Significant Hazards Pursuant to 10CFR50.91, this analysis provides a determination-that'the-proposed change to the. Technical. Specifications does not' involve ~any significant hazards consideration as defined in 10CFR50.92.

v

1. The proposed change does not involve's significant increase'in the probability ar_ consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

Eliminating the shutdown requirement in the actionLatatement for loss of-one-of four channels of post accident monitoring instrumentation does not effect the probability-of an accident.

because monitoring instrumentation does not contribute to accident' probability. The accident mitigation function of. the subject .

instrumentationLis addressed by-other Technical Specifications,

~

which~ are unaffected by this proposed change. Additionally, three' ,

channels of Containment Pressure Instrumentation can monitor the- ,

containment pressure in a post-accident mode and provides'one more channel than the redundancy specified in Regulatory Guide 1.97.: The consequences of an accident are not affected by the proposed ' change.;

g.

2. The proposed change does not create the possibi','.ity of a new cri different kind of accident from that previously evaluated. The proposed change involves no changes to the station or its design bases nor'does it impose any new accident scenarios, t

A1/040.N14

, 3 c;-  !

j 3 -- . -- ', . - g

w. -

_t

.y . .  ;

i Attachment 1- -i n.g3 Page 3 I Determination of Sirnificant Hazards. Cont'd.

3. The proposed change does not involve a sigt ificant reduction in a

~ margin of safety. There is no change to the margin of safety-

.since there is no change to the-station or its design bases.

1 Conclusion [

\; ,

L Based on the above, HMP concludes that' the proposed change satisfies  !

7, the significant hazards' considerations standards of 10CFR50.92(c) and a no l significant hazards consideration finding is justified.  ;

L i

l,

(

t

..g p .

7 1e '

-j I _t _I y, i \.

6,-

l-te i i '

l'.

n if ll p l'

A1/040.N14

__1__1_ n _______________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ .-- _ _ . . _-- _ . _ _ _ _ - - . . .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ST-HL-AE-3542,_Application_for_Amends_to_Licenses_NPF-76_%26_NPF-80,changing_Tech_Spec_3.3.3.6_to_Eliminate_Requirement_to_Shut_Down_Plant_If_One_of_Four_Channels_Inoperable&oldid=3548909"