ML20028A672
| ML20028A672 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028A673 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-48974, TAC-48975, NUDOCS 8211240207 | |
| Download: ML20028A672 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. j/," %g UNITED STATES P ' 3, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E j ,e WASHINGTON. o. C. 20555 8 SAFETY' EVALUATION REPORT j BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NOS. 68. AND 73 TO OPRATING ' ICENSES NO. DPR-24 AND DPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT DOCKET NOS. 50-255 AND 50-301 INTRODUCTION By application dated October 19, 1982 as modified November 5,1982, Wis'consin Electric Power Company requested an amendment to Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27. The proposed Technical Specification changes relate to the control of access to high radiation areas. DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION 09t t i on 203. C. (2) of the code of Federal Regulations Title 10, Part 20 provides f or control of personnel access to high r'adiation areas. To assist licensees of nuclear power reactors in meeting the requirements of 203.C.(2) the NRC has established s p e c i f it;- ations for the control of access to high radiation areas in Section 6.12 of the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) NUREG-0452 Rev. 4. It is the staffs position that the proposed technical specific-ations for Point Beach provide control of personr.el access to high radiation areas that is equivalent to that provided in the Standard Technical Specifications. The proposed technical specifications theref ore comply with the positive control over access to high radiation areas required in 10 CFR 2 0. 2 0 3. C. ( 2) sad are acceptable to the staff. 821124 0D'J ' 821112 PDFs W.;K 05000266 FP FM M
The Technical Specification,s revision proposed by Pos.n Beach consists of three changes from their current tech.iical specific-ations. These are the addition of a provision from the STS for entering areas where the dose rate greater than 1000 mrem / hrs and two deviations from the STS concerning exemptions from RWP issuance requirements. These changes are discussed in more de-tait below. EVALUATION Control Of Entries In Areas Of Greater Than 1000 mrem /hr: The proposed revision to P6 int Ocach's Technical Specifications adds the provision that in areas of greater than 1000 mrem /hr. where no enclosure exists for purposes of Locking, and no we - enclosures can be reasonably constructed around the in'd iv idu a l arease then that area shall be reped off, conspicuously postede and a flashing light shall be used as a warning device. This provision is consistent with the provisions in the Standard Technical Specifications and is acceptable to the staff. Exemption From RWP Requirements In Areas Less Than 1000 mrem /hr: The proposed Technical Specifications make provision for the exemption from RWP issuance requirements by health physics qualified personnel. This is a deviation from the Standard Technical Specifications which provides an exemption for the health physics staff. 6 G
An individual'is considered' to be health physics qualified when a licensee certifies that each designated individual is capable of successfutty accomplishing the following activities as required by federal regulationse license conditionsi: and f acility procedures pertaining to radiation protection. 1. Conduct special and routine radiationi contamination and airborne radioactivity surveys and ev&tuate the results. 2. Establish protective barriers and post appropriate radio-togical signs. 3. Establish means of limiting exposure rates and accumulated so-radiation doses, including the use of protective clothing and respiratory protection equipment. t 4. Perform operability checks of radiation monitors and survey meters. 5. Recommend appropriate immediate acticos in the event of a radiological problem and perform necessary activities until the arrival of health physics staff. l Thereforer any member of the plant staff, auxiliary operatorse licensed operatorsi etc.i who meets these qualification standards should be sufficiently knowledgeable to make safe entries into high radiation areas for short periods under the conditions of 11 -
these technical specifications. It is the staffs positions that this provision in the Point Beach Technical Specifications pro-vides control of entry into high radiation areas equivalent to that provided in the Standard Technical Specifications, and is therefore acceptable. Exemption From RWP Requirements In Areas Greater Than 1000 mrem /hr: In addition to the measures for the control of access to areas with greater than 100 mrem /hr dose ratesi Section 6.12.2 of the STS specify additional requirements for access into areas of ~ greater than 1000 mrem /hr. Among these include the requirement for issuance of RWPs to anyone entering the area. The proposed Point Beach Technical Specification deviates from the Standard so-Technical Specifications by providing that health physics qualified personnet or personnet escorted by health physics personnet shall be exempt from RWP issuance requirements. Point Deach proposes additional control over access to areas greater i than 1000 mrem /hre however, by requiring these exemot individuals to obtain direct authorization from the Duty Shif t Supervisor (DSS) or the HP Supervisor just prior to entry, limit the entry to less than 10 minutesi and notify the DSS or HP Supervisor upon exiting the area. It is the staff's pnsition that this added control in the proposed Point Deach Technical Specifications is equivalent to the RWP requirements of the Standard Technical Specifications and compt,ies with the requirement in 10 CFR 20.203.C.(2) for positive control over access to high radiation e ..y,,
Areas. The proposed Techn'ical Specifications are therefore acceptable to the staff. Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do 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 conciuded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an ~ environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments. Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an a-dent previously evaluated, do not create the possibility of an ac dent of a type different from sny evaluated previously, and do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendments do not involve a significant hazacds consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and 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 the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. Date: UUV 1 ' N E ~ Principal Contributor: T. G. Colburn R. Pedersen =}}