ML20056E997
| ML20056E997 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20056E990 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9308250387 | |
| Download: ML20056E997 (4) | |
Text
-
e
[pm Rf C o
UNITED STATES l'
7,%
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
E W ASHINGTON. D. C. 205SS
- ' nh w,
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 82 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-62 ILLINDIS POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
CLINTON POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-461 9
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 27, 1991, the Illinois Power Company (IP, the licensee) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-62 for the Clinton Power Station (CPS).
The proposed amendment would modify Clinton Power Station Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.7.2, " Control Room Ventilation i
System," by revising Action Statement b.1 to provide an alternative where the operable Control Room Ventilation System does not have to be operated in the high radiation mode. Also, Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.7.2.e.5 would be revised to reference the control room pressure relative to the adjacent areas as opposed to the outside atmosphere as currently identified.
2.0 EVALUATION Technical Specification 3.7.2.b.)
During Operational Conditions 4, 5, or * (when irradiated fuel is being handled in the secondary containment), TS 3.7.2.b.) currently requires, in part, that "With oile Control Room Ventilation System inoperable, restore the inoperable system to OPERABLE status within 7 days or initiate and maintain operation of the OPERABLE system in the high radiation mode of operation."
This requirement ensures that the control room will remain habitable for operations personnel during and following all design basis accident conditions.
In addition, requiring the operable system to be in the high radiation mode of operation ensures compliance with General Design Criterion 19 of Appendix A to 10 CFR 50.
Activities performed during Operational Conditions 4, 5, or
- that could lead to high radiation conditions in the control room include core alterations, handling of irradiated fuel within the secondary containment, and activities which could potentially drain the reactor vessel. However, as stated by the licensee, by precluding these activities, the need for the control room ventilation system to operate in the high radiation mode to maintain compliance with the design criterion is eliminated.
Therefore, the licensee has proposed an option to TS 3.7.2.b.l.
With one Control Room Ventilation System inoperable in Operational Conditions 4, 5, or *, the licensee has proposed the option of either operating the OPERABLE system in the high 9308250387 930905 PDR ADOCK 05000461 P
i j
. radiation mode, or suspending core alterations, handling of irradiated fuel in the secondary containment, and operations with the potential for draining the reactor vessel.
This proposed 15 change will provide the licensee an alternative action which will increase the useable life of the system filters, and reduce the costs associated with both testing the sample canisters and replacing the adsorber charcoal due to unnecessary accumulated hours of operation.
The proposed change will also reduce the potential radiation exposure to test and maintenance personnel incurred during these activities.
Finally, the proposed i
TS change will provide the licensee more flexibility in scheduling work during refueling outages.
The licensee's proposal is consistent with the actions currently specified for the situation when both trains in the system are inoperable.
Eliminating the requirement to run the OPERABLE train in the high radiation mode does not affect the operability of that train.
The staff concurs with the licensee's justification to allow the option of either running the OPERABLE control room ventilation system in the high radiation mode or suspending operations that could lead to high radiation conditions in the control room.
The staff agrees that while in OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 4, 5, or *, by suspending core alterations, the handling of s
irradiated fuel within primary or secondary containment, and activities which i
could potentially drain the reactor vessel, the need to operate the control room ventilation system in the high radiation mode has been eliminated.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
While the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable, the staff approached i
the licensee regarding the incorporation of some minor, editorial changes that would more closely resemble the staff's improved Standard Technical l
Specifications (ISTS) for.BWR/6 facilities found in NUREG-1434 The licensee concurred in the staff's suggestions and they have been incorporated as follows.
4 1)
The APPLICABILITY of specification 3.7.2 has been revised from "All l'
OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS and *" to "0PERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1, 2, 3, and While this reflects the APPLICABILITY statement of the ISTS, it also envelopes those conditions when the control room atmosphere needs to be protected against high radiation conditions (i.e., OPERATIONAL i
CONDITIONS 1, 2, and 3 envelopes loss-of-coolant accidents while
]
OPERATIONAL CONDITION
- envelopes fuel handling accidents).
l 2)
ACTION 3.7.2.b has been revised from "In OPERATIONAL CONDITION 4, 5, or
- " to "In OPERATIONAL CONDITION *." ACTION 3.7.2.b is only applicable for fuel handling accidents and OPERATIONAL CONDITION
- envelopes these conditions.
?
I f
- t 3)
The staff suggested insertion of the word "immediately" in ACTIONS 3.7.2.b.1 and 3.7.2.b.2 for clarification as the existing technical specifications do not provide time constraints.
4)
Previous ACTION 3.7.2.c was revised to become ACTION 3.7.2.b.3.
This change is intended to clarify that the referanca to Specification 3.0.3 j
is only applicable to fuel handling accidents under ACTION 3.7.2.b.
5)
The definition of
- was modified to more closely represent the definition found in the ISTS.
I Technical Specification 4.7.2.e.5 Surveillance Requirement 4.7.2.e.5 currently states that at least once every l
18 months each Control Room Ventilation System shall be demonstrated operable l
by verifying the system automatically switches to the high radiation mode of operation following a high radiation actuation test signal and the control room is maintained at a positive pressure of at least 1/8-inch water gauge (W.G.) relative to the outside atmosphere.
The licensee's proposal changes j
the wording of SR 4.7.2.e.5 to reference the control room pressure "with
.i respect to the adjacent areas" as opposed to the outside atmosphere as currently identified.
l i
As currently worded, SR 4.7.2.e.5 has generated confusion since it is not clear what is meant by "outside atmosphere".
The proposed change will clarify this SR and make it consistent with SR 4.7.2.e.3 which references control room leakage *with respect to adjacent areas."
l 1
The staff concurs with the licensee's justification in that the proposed change will provide clarification of the intent of the surveillance l
4 requirement. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed change acceptable. The proposed change is also similar to that found in the staff's ISTS.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of. the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
1 I
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted _ area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the' amounts, and no j
significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released J
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 amendment involves no significant hazards
]
consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding i
i
~
s 1 (57 FR 40213).
Accordingly, the amendment meets 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 amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contri')utor:
R. Laufer D. Pickett Date:
August 5, 1993 b
l 1
h
?
P k
h
-