ML19331E104
| ML19331E104 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/11/1980 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19331E100 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009050507 | |
| Download: ML19331E104 (2) | |
Text
.
i s
/
h UNITED STATES E
A NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
~
SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 33 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE _NO. DPR-6 C0lpt'MERS POWER COMPANY _
0 BIG ROCK POINT PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-155
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 7,1980, Consumers Power Company (the licensee) requested an amendment to Big Rock Point's Facility Operating License No. DPR-6 that would modify Section ll.4.3.4.B and Table 11.4.3.4 of the Technical Specifications.
The request was made to change the surveillance requirements for verifying the operability of the power-operated valves in the containment spray system from once every six months to once each refueling outage, not to exceed eighteen months.
2.0 DISCUSSION The Big Rock Point plant has redundant containment spray systems.
In the event of a loss-of-coolant accident, the containment spray and the core spray systems are initially supplied with water from the fire water system and later by the core shray recirculation system.
As discussed in Amendment No.15, dated October 17, 1977, the backup containment spray valve (M0-7068) is disabled electrically to preclude opening during a LOCA which could result in inadequate reduced flow to the core spray nozzle.
Fence, this valve is not testable during power operation. Further, testing of the containment spray valves requires draining of the header common to both the core spray and the containment spray systems which would render these safety systems inoperable.
3.0 EVALUATION The licensee has requested relief from having to shut the plant down every six t.onths to perform this surveillance test.
The licensee has stSted that in the past five years, there have been no failures during testing of the containnent spray valves (M0 7064 and M0 7068).
In addition, the Big Rock Point dry containment with a containment spray system more closely approximates the containment design of a pressuri7ed water reactor than a current BWR pressure suppression containment.
The Standard Technical Specifications for Combusuon Engineering PWR's NUREG-0212, specifies that the containment spray system be verified at least once per eipteen months.
l 800905060 %
. 4.0
SUMMARY
We have evaluated the licensee's request to modify the surveillance requirements for the containment spray system valies.
Based on acceptable results of previous tests conducted on these valves and comparable test frequencies for other dry
~
containment designs, we conclude that increasing the test interval from six months to once each refueling outage, not to exceed eighteen months, is acceptable and that this proposed change does not represent a significant change in a safety margin.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4),
that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
6.0 CONCLUSION
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a signifi-cant decrease in a safety) margin, the amendment does not involve a signi hazards consideration, (2 there is reasonable assurance that the health auj safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: August 11, 1980
_