ML20059C247
| ML20059C247 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059C244 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9008310131 | |
| Download: ML20059C247 (2) | |
Text
- ,%'g UNITED STATES g
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s
wAsmwoTow,p.c noss
- ..+.
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 44 - TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. "IPF-62 ILLIN0IS DOWER COMPANY, ET AL.
CLINTON POWER STATION, UNIT NO.-1 DOCKET NO. 50-461
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The proposed amendment would revise the operational conditions for the containment building fuel pool ventilation plenum radiation monitor. The current wording in Technical Specification 3.3.2 requires the containment building fuel transfer pool ventilation plenum radiation monitors (there are four monitors located radially around one location on the flow path) to be operable when handling irradiated fuel in the primary or secondary containment, during core alterations and operations with a potential for draining the reactor vessel, and during operational conditions 1, 2, and 3.
The licensee has requested that the Technical Specification be changed to reflect the operational purpose of the monitor.
2.0 EVALUATION The containment building fuel pool ventilation plenum radiation monitor (fuelpoolplenummonitor)monitorsanairflowthatisdrawnfromjust above and surrounding the perimeter of the upper refueling pool inside containment. This flow path is used only during operation of the containment vent system, not during operation of the containment continuous purge system. The containment vent system is a high volume (16,270 cfm) ventilation system intended for use primarily durirg modes 4 and 5 (cold shutdownandrefueling). Use of the containment vent system is limited by technical specifications to 500 hours0.00579 days <br />0.139 hours <br />8.267196e-4 weeks <br />1.9025e-4 months <br /> annually while in modes 1, 2 or 3.
Thecontainmentcontinuouspurgesystemprovides8,000cfmofventIlation to the containment during modes 1,2, and 3 (power operation, startup, and hotshutdown). Both of the containment ventilation systems have safety-grade radiation monitoring systems to provide containment isolation if required.
The licensee has proposed to modify the operability requirements for the fuel pool plenum monitor to delete the required operability when handling fuel in the secondary containment, and during modes 1, 2, and 3.
The fuel pool plenum monitor is located in a flow path which cannot see flow from the secondary containment. Therefore, operability when handling fuel in the secondary containment is an unnecessary condition and the deletion is 9008310131 900323 PDR ADOCK 05000461 P
. ~ -
s
. acceptable. During modes 1, 2, and 3 the fuel pool plenum monitor will see flow during the limited operation of the containment vent system; however, the containment vent system already has a full flow monitor for containment isolation purposes. The containment continuous purge system, which is used primarily during modes 1, 2, and 3, has only one flow monitor for containment isolation purposes. There is no necessity for the vent system, which has more limited operation, to have two monitors in operation.
Based on the above, the deletion of required operability during modes 1 2 and 3 is acceptable. The licensee has also proposed to delete theActIon, required (Action 29)whenthefuelpool11enummonitorisoutof service in modes 1, 2, and 3.
Action 29 requires tiat certain valves be closed or initiate a shutdown. The monitor is now required to be operable only when shutdown and not in modes 1, 2, and 3 so an Action for this condition is unnecessary and if the unit is already shutdown, the action is inapprcpriate. Therefore, the deletion is acceptable.,
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL C01451 DERAT 10N This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the instal-lation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or a change to a surveillance requirement. The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 occupationel radiation exp0sure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forthin10CFR51.22(c)(9).
Pursuantto10CFR51.22(b),noenvironmental impact statement or environmental assessment need'be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 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, and (2) 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.
Prinicipal Contributor: Jchn Hickman, NRR Dated: August 23, 1990 I
I
_ - - - - - - -. - - _ - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - -