ML20034H218
| ML20034H218 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034H215 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9303160191 | |
| Download: ML20034H218 (3) | |
Text
-
gn A
UNITED STATES n
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- ,E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGI)LATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.143 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-32 AND AMENDMENT NO.13P TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO DPR-48 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ZION NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-295 AND 50-304
1.0 INTRODUCTION
i By letter dated April 1, 1991, as supplemented on October 26, 1992, Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO, the licensee) requested a change to its Technical Specifica+ ions (TS) to allow alternative methods of controlling high radiation areas pt. Jant to 10 CFR 20.203(c)(5) in lieu of methods specified by 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2) and (4). The October 26, 1992, submittal provided additional clarifying information that did not change the initial proposed no i
significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The Westinghouse Standard Technical Specifications (STS) require the control of access to high radiation areas (HRAs) by barricading, posting, and the issuance of a radiation work permit (RWP).
In addition, those entering an HRA are required to have a radiation detection instrument, an alarming dosimeter or be accompanied by a hei th physics technician (HPT). Also, for HRAs with radiation levels in excess of I rem / hour (locked high radiation areas or LHRAs), access to each such area is to be controlled by locked doors with work in the area subject to an RWP that specifies radiation levels and allowable stay time in the area.
For such areas that are inside larger areas where it is not practical to provide locked doors, access may be controlled by the provision of a barrier, a flashing light and posting.
The licensee's prorosal for controlling access to HRAs at the lion plant differs from the STS in that the missile barrier which encloses LHRAs would be treated as a single LHRA with access controlled by lock and key and posting or, at the licensee's option, by posting and direct or electronic surveillance capable of preventing unauthorized entry. The licensee has further stated that it will utilize the direct method of surveillance at this time and in the future when a plausible electronic surveillance method which is capable of preventing unauthorized entry becomes available, the station may evaluate it for use. The licensee has pointed out that controlling access to each individual LHRA within the missile barrier by means of barricades and flashing lights has the potential for contributing to accidents, especially where ladders or scaffolding are involved, and increasing radiation dose to workers i
p 'Mu Mb
, in these areas. The licensee, therefore, proposes that individual LHRAs inside the missilt barrier not be barricaded or marked by a flashing light as specified in the STS, but be posted to warn personnel of radiation levels in excess of I rem / hour.
In accordance with TS paragraphs 6.2.2.B.2.c.1 and 2, the posting of LHRAs within the missile barrier would not be required when the missile barrier access points are all secured by locks preventing access, i.e., when the plant is at power; but would be required when access to the missile barrier is controlled by surveillance.
The licensee has also proposed that RWPs covering access to LHRAs not include a stay time specification and that each and every individual entering an LHRA be equipped with an alarming dosimeter.
The missile barrier has only three access points, all of which are capable of being locked.
It is the practice of the licensee to allow access to the missile barrier through only one of these portals, keeping the other two locked.
It is also the licensee's practice to have a radiation protection control point at the open portal.
The purpose of 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2) is to protect workers against relatively high radiation levels by preventing inadvertent and unauthorized entries to HRAs. The staff has reviewed the licensee's proposal and finds that the licensee's RWP program, its access control to the missile barrier interior, its posting of individual HRAs exceeding I rem / hour inside the missile barrier, and its use of alarming dosimeters to warn workers of high radiation levels and high doses is consistent with good radiological safety practice and will provide an adequate level of radiation protection consistent with the intent of 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2).
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area.as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC 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 (56 FR-20030). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set.forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR SI.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
4 l
~
i l
l
- i I
5.0 CONCLUSION
1 The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above,-
L that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such 1
activities will be conducted in compliance with-the Commission's regulations, 1
and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
J. Bell Date: March 11, 1993 l
l 1
l l
b l
i i
'h P
l
+,
-