ML17321A140
| ML17321A140 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 08/24/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17321A139 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8409130061 | |
| Download: ML17321A140 (2) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS.
81 AND 65 TO INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY DONALD C.
COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1
AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-315 AND 50-316 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND In November
- 1980, the staff issued NUREG-0737, "Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements",
which included all TMI Action Plan items approved hy the Commission for implementation at nuclear power reactors.
NUREG-0737 identifies those items for which Technical Specifications were scheduled for implementation after December 31, 1981.
The staff provided guidance on the scope of Technical Specifications for all of these items in Generic Letter 83-37.
Generic Letter 83-37 was issued to all Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) licensees on November 1, 1983.
In this Generic Letter, the staff requested licensees to:
1.
review their facility's Technical Specifications to determine if they were consistent with the guidance provided in the Generic
- Letter, and 2.
submit an application for a license amendment where deviations or absence of Technical Specifications were found.
By letters dated January 20, and March 15, 1984, Indiana and Michigan Electric Company (the licensee) responded to Generic Letter 83-37 by submitting Technical Specification change requests for D.
C.
Cook Units I and 2.
This evaluation covers TMI Action Plan Item II.B.1 - Reactor Coolant System Vents.
EVALUATION Our guidance for Reactor Coolant System (RCS) vents identified the need for at least one operable vent path at the reactor vessel head and the pressurizer steam space, for Westinghouse reactors.
Generic Letter 83-37 also provided limiting conditions for operation and the surveillance requirements for the RCS vents.
The licensee has proposed TSs that are consistent with our guidance.
'e find the proposed T5s to be acceptable.
We have further evaluated the vent path as proposed and find that should a
venting of the primary system be required following an accident, the vented gasses would remain inside containment along with other releases from the accident.
The venting inside containment should preclude the possibility of subsequently greater releases to the containment if the voids are allowed to remain in the primary system possibly further damaging the core.
The proposed 84091300&i 840824 l
PDR ADOCK'50003f5 Paw
vent systems are to provide improved operational capability if necessary following an accident, therefore, no significant increases by operation of the vents systems are expected in the occupational radiation exposure.
"'.'!R<'K~EN A!. CQfP ERAT J~Jl S This amendments
'.nvolve a change in the installation or use of a facilities components located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connectioA with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLUS ION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussion above, that
( I) there is reasonable assurance that the health, safety and interest 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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
DATED:
August 24, 1984 PRINCIAL CONTRIBUTORS:
C; Patel D. Migginton