ML18030A918
| ML18030A918 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18030A917 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8512040156 | |
| Download: ML18030A918 (3) | |
Text
.%I S REou
~4
~o Cy nO
~ <y
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAF'ETY EVALUATJON BY THE OFFJCE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATJON SUPPORTJNG AMENDMENT NO. 124 TO FACJLJTY OPERATJNG LJCENSE NO.
DPR-33 AMENDMENT NO. 119 TO FACJLJTY OPERATJNG LJCENSE NO.
DPR-52 AMENDMENT NO.
95 TO FACJLJTY OPERATJNG LJCENSE NO.
DPR-68 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORJTY BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNJTS 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-259, 50-260 AND 50-296 1.0 JNTRODUCTJON By letter dated May 8, 1985 (TVA BNFP TS-209), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA, the licensee) requested amendments to Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-33, DPR-52 and DPR-68 for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 and 3.
The requested changes are related to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the cable tray fixed water spray fire Suppression systems.
Additional water spray systems would be added to the TS and the test requirements are clarified.
The changes are proposed for all three units.
2.0 EVALUATJON Table 3. 11.A, Fire Protection System Hydraulic Requirements, of the existing TS for each unit does not list all of the cable tray fixed water spray systems installed in the plant to provide protection in the event of a fire for the following areas:
high cable tray congestion which reduces
- .... gh~ffectiveness of automatic sprinkler systems and manual fire fighting opei"ations; cable penetrations from the cable spreading room into the reactor and turbine buildings containing congested cable trays which are not readily accessible for manual fire fighting operations; cable tray crossings where the trays of one division cross the trays of another division; and divisional gaps, where two cable tray runs of opposite divisions are within a few feet of each other and nondivisional cable trays are within the boundary zones of both divisions.
These systems are described in the report, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Design Changes for the Recovery from the Fire of March 22, 1975, Part X, Section A.5.2.
The proposed TS have been revised to list all of the systems installed to meet TVA's commitments for protection of the required cable trays.
Table 3.11.A would also be revised to clarify that each cable tray fixed water spray system is to be tested with water flow through the test connection of each fixed spray system simultaneously with water flow through one lk-inch fire hose connection at the hydraulic flow (gpm) and 851204015h 8S1119 PDR ADO'S000aS9'DR pressure (psig) listed in the table.
The licensee has verified that the hydraulic data listed in Table 3. 11.A conforms to the design hydraulic requirements for each spray system and proposed tests meet the inspection, test and maintenance commitments listed in the above-referenced Recovery from Fire Report.
The staff has reviewed these proposed
~S changes and determined they are needed to correct the existing TS to assure appropriate operability and surveillance requirements will be provided for all the required cable tray water spray fire suppression systems.
3.0 ENVJRONMENTAL CONSJD'ERATJONS The amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area 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 the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment 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 or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSJON 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 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'he public.
Principal Contributor:
W.
H. Miller, Jr.
Dated:
November 19, 1985
0 I