ML17324A978
| ML17324A978 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17324A977 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8607100099 | |
| Download: ML17324A978 (2) | |
Text
t gDR REOI7
~
(4 ca a
csO ns cs
+~
~O
+**++
t UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 97 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N.
DPR-58 AND AMENDMENT NO.
84 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-74 INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY DONALD C.
COOK NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS.
1 AND 2
~ DOCKET NOS. 50-315 AND 50-316 Introduction In a March 14, 1986, letter from Mr. M. P. Alexich of Indiana
& Michigan Electric
.Company to Mr. H.
R. Denton, Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, a change was requested to the D.
C.
Cook Unit 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (TS).
This change involved a change in the mode of operation of the HVAC charcoal filter fire suppression system from automatic to manual (Table 3.7-5).
The change was requested because of past problems experienced in charcoal adsorber units; in one instance the spray header was inadvertently pressurized and in another instance a
suppression system isolation valve leaked.
In both instances, water damaged the charcoal and had the adsorber unit been called upon to mitigate the consequences of an accident, it would not have performed as intended.
To alleviate this problem Indiana and Michigan Electric Company is proposing to close the system gate valve upstream of the automatically operated three-way valve.
This would preclude inadvertent system actuation or suppression water leakage.
The fire protection for this unit would still include a two-point heat detection system.
This system utilizes thermistor sensors in the charcoal units to pre-alarm the control room when an adsorber fire may be imminent.
Administrative controls will be implemented to have the system gate valve opened upon receipt of the pre-alarm signal.
Should the temperatur e continue to rise',
a second alarm occurs locally and in the control room and the three-way valve would automatically open and allow the water to reach the spray nozzles which protect the charcoal.
Evaluation The staff finds the licensee's proposal to change the mode of operation of the suppression system for the charcoal adsorbers from automatic to manual acceptable.
Present problems with these systems involve wetting of the adsorber material all too frequently.
With the adsorbers wet, they are less likely to perform their intended function if called upon.
- Thus, any actions which can be taken to preclude inadvertent actuation of the fire suppression systems or leaking of the system valves, while still assuring the availability of the fire protection system associated with the charcoal, are appropriate.
While'he proposed change will require manual action prior to the automatic actuation of the fire protection system associated with the charcoal filters, operators will be alerted by the pre-alarm signal to take the required manual action on a timely basis.
On the above basis, we find the-proposed technical specification change for D.
C.
Cook Units 1 and 2 acceptab1e.
8ap71pppee 8apapp PDR ADOCK,050003i5 p
. PDR Environmental Consideration These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of the facilities'omponents located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFZ 20.
The staff has determined that these 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.
Accord-ingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environ-mental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in con-nection with the issuance of these amendments.
Conclusion The Comission made a proposed determination that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Re ister (51 FR 16929) on May 7, 1986, and consulted with the state o~icCCgan.
o public comments were received, and the state of Michigan did not have any comments.
We have concluded, 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 Comnission'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.
Princi al Contributors:
J.
Hayes Dated:
Dune 30, 1986