ML20062E885
| ML20062E885 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 11/15/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062E882 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9011260131 | |
| Download: ML20062E885 (2) | |
Text
.
.w
_ j,.m un c
'i UNITED STATES P
_[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_ W ASHING TON, D. C, 20665 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMEN 0 MENT NO. 58 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-49 NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY. ET AL.
MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT N0. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-423 INTRODUCTION By application for' license amendment dated July 31, 1990, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et al. (the licensee), requested changes to Millstone Unit 3 Technical-Specifications (TS).
The proposed amendment would change Millstone Unit 3 Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.12.3, "CO,, Systems" to clarify the remedial actions to be_ taken when one or more CO2_fi e Suppression systems become inoperable.
' DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION
' At the present time, Action Statement "a" for TS 3.7.12.3 requires that, With one or more of the above required CO _ Systems inoperable 2
within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> establish a continuous fire watch with backup fire suppression equipment' for those areas-in which redundant systems or components'could be damaged; for other areas, establish an hourly fire watch patrol.
In the case of TS 3.7.12.3, the "... above required C0 systems" is a list of systems which does not distinguish between (1) "...p. areas in which redundant
_ systems or components could be damaged" and-(2) "... other areas." The licensee states in'their July 31, 1990 application that the cable spreading room contains the only CO system which protects redundant systems or components.
Accordingly, the lic,nsee has proposed that Action Statement-"a" be divided as e
f0110ws:
a.
With the cable spreading room C0 system not-0PERABLE, within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> establish a continuous fire watcb with backup fire suppression 7
equipment, b.
With one or more of the above required C0 systems (asindicatedby-2 asterick (*)) not OPERABLE, within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> verify that the. fire barrier-between adjacent areas is OPERABLE, and:
1.
If the fire barrier is OPERABLE, establish an hourly fire watch patrol for the affected area, or 9011260131 901115 PDR ADOCK 05000423; P
PNV 'y
4 A
' 2.
If the fire barrier is not OPERABLE, establish a continuous fire watch for the affected area.
In the case of the above, the systems indicated by an asterick are all 00 2
systems except the CO system in the cable spreading room.
2 The NRC staff has reviewed the Millstone Unit 3 Fire Protection Evaluation Report regarding the fire areas addressed in TS 3.7.12.3.
We concur with the licensee that the cable spreading room is the only area addressed in TS 3.7.12.3 that contains redundant safe shutdown equipment that could be damaged by a fire.
Accordingly, the cable spreading room is the only area that should be subjected to the more stringent requirements of proposed TS 3.7.12.3, Action "a".
Based upon the above, we conclude that the proposed change to TS 3.7.12.3 clarifies the TS requirements, provides at least an equivalent level of protection when' compared to the existing TS and is therefore acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The 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. We have 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 occupational radiation exposure. The staff has previously published a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. 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.
CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations di'scussed 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 (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the c'ommon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: November 15, 1990 Principal Contributor:
D. Jaffe
,