ML20114C756
| ML20114C756 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 08/21/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20114C754 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9209030179 | |
| Download: ML20114C756 (4) | |
Text
!
p* ** %q'c
,,4
'g UNITED sT ATEs y
,m g,
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.g l
WASHINGTON, D C. 20555
\\,...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATIQN RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.1o TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO, DPR-20 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PAllSADES PLANT 00_CKET NO. 50-250 1.0 INTR _@SCTION By letter dated July 31, 1989 Consumers Power Company (the licensee) proposed that the existing license condition on fire protection be replaced with the standard condition noted in Generic letter 86-10 and also proposed changes to the Appendix A Technical Specifications (TS) for Palisades.
The proposed changes would remove requirements for fire detection systems, fire suppression systems, fire barriers, and fire brigade staffing requirements as recommended by Generic letter 86-10.
The proposed changes would also modify the administrative control requirements of the TS to add requirements for the Fire Protection Program that are similar to requirements for other programs implemented by license condition. Guidance on these proposed changes to TS was provided to all power reactor licensees and applicants by Generic Letter 88-12, dated August 2, 1988.
2.0 BACKGROUND
Following the fire at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Pcwer Plant on March 22, 1975, the Commission undertook a number of actions to ensure that improvements were implemented in the Fire Protection Programs for all power reactor facilities.
Because of the extensive modification of Fire Protectio 1 Programs and the number of open issues resulting from staff evaluation, a number of revisions l
and alterations occurred in these programs over the years. Consequently, licensees were requested by Generic Letter 86-10 to incorporate the final a -
l approved Fire Protection Program in their Final Safety Analysis Reports l
(FSARs).
In this manner, the Fire Protection Program including the systems, j
the administrative and technical _ controls, the organization, and other plant I
features associated with-fire protection would have a status consistent with l
that-of other plant features described in the FSAR.
In addition, the I
Commission concluded that a standard license ccndition, requiring compliance with the provisions of the Fire Protection Program as described in the FSAR, l
j should be used to ensure uniform enforcement of fire protection requirements.
l Finally, the Commission stated that with the requested actions, licensees may request an amendment to delete the fire protection TS that would now be unnecessary.
maa89 M8$r P
I The licensees for the Callaway and Wolf Creek plants submitted lead-plant proposals to remove fire protection requirements from their TS.
This action i
was an industry effort to obtain NRC guidance on an acceptable format for
,, cense amendment requests to remove fire protection requirements from TS.
Additionally, in the licensing review of new plants, the staff has approved applicant requests to remove fire )rotection requirements from TS issued with the operating license.
Thus, on tie basis of the lead-plant proposals and the staff's experience with TS for new licenses, Generic Letter 88-12 was issued to provide guidance on removing fire protection requirements from TS.
3.0 [yALUATION Generic letter 86-10 recommended the removal of fire protection r(quirements from the TS.
Although a comprehensive Fire Protection Program is essential to plant safety, the basis for this recommendation is that many details of this program that are currently addressed in TS can be modified without affecting nuclear safety.
Such modifications can be made provided that there are suitable administrative controls over these changes. _These details, that are presently included in TS and which are removed by this amendment, do not constitute performance recuirements necessary to ensure safe operation of the facility and, therefore, co not warrant being included in TS.
At the same time, suitable administrative controls ensure that there will t,e careful review and analysis by competent individuals of any changes in the Fire Protection Program including those technical and administrative requirements removed from the TS to ensure nuclear safety is not adversely affected. These controls include:
(1) the TS administrative controls that are applicable to the fire Protection Program; (2) the license condition on implementation of, and subsequent change to, the Fire Protection Program; and (3) the 10 CFR 50.59 criteria for evaluating changes to the Fire Protection Program as described in the FSAR.
The specific details relating to fire protection requirements removed from TS by this amendment include those specifications for fire detection systems, fire suppression systems, fire barriers, and fire brigade staffing requirements.
The administrative control requirements have been modified to include fire Protection Program implementation as an element for which written procednes must be established, implemented, and maintained.
In addition, the audit responsibilities of the Plant Review Committee were expanded to include the review of the Fire Protection Program and implementing procedures and submittal of recommended changes to the Nuclear Performance Assessment Department.
I The TS changes proposed by the licensee are in accordance with the guidance i
provided by Generic Letter 88-12, as described in the items below.
l (1) Section 3.22, FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM, Delete entire section to be incorporated into FSAR.
L
(2) Table 4.2.2, Minimum frequencies for Equipment Tests, Delete item 7, renumber remaining items to be incorporated into FSAR, (3) Section 4.17, FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM, Delete entire section to be incorporated into FSAR.
(4) Section 6.2.2, PLANT STAFF, page 6-2, Delete Section "e* to be incorporated into FSAR.
Footnote at the bottom of page 6-1 Delete the words "and the Fire Brigade" (5) Section 6.4, TRAINING, page 6-5, Delete Section 6.4.2 to be incorporated into FSAR.
(6) Section 6.5.2.8.1, REVIEW, page 6-7, Add the following item:
Fire Protection Program and implementing Procedure Changes.
(7) Table of Contents, Delete Section 3.22 and 4.17, " Fire Protection Systems" As required by Generic Letter 86-10, the licensee confirmed that the NRC-approved Fire Protection. Program has been incorporated into the FSAR.
The licensee confirmed that the current license condition on fire protection is the standard condition provided in Generic letter 86-10.
The licensee confirmed that the operational conditions, remedial actions, and test requirements associated with the removed fire protection TS have been included in the Fire Protection Program incorporated into the FSAR.
This is in accordance with the guidance of Generic letter 88-12.
On the basis' of its review of the above items, the st&ff concludes that the licensee has met the guidance of Generic Letter 88-12.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Michigan State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of
.6 facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and a change in a surveillance requirement. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amoants, 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 l
1
occupational radiation exposure.
The Connission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (54 FR 37044).
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria fnr categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Section 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 this amendment.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the pubite 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 Contributors:
T. Dunning B. Holian Dated:
August 21, 1992
t DATED: A gust 21, 1999 AMENDMENT NO.152 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-20-PAllSADES e Docket File-NRC & Local PDRs PDill-1 Reading Palisades Plant file B. Boger r
J. Zwolinski L. Marsh M. Shuttleworth A. Masciantonio OGC-WT D. Hagan, 3302 MNBB G. Hill (4), P-137 Wanda Jones, MNBB-7103 C. Grimes, ll/F/23 T. Dunning II/E/22 D. Notley 8/D/l P. Madden 8/0/1 ACRS (10)
GPA/PA OC/LFMB W. Shafer, R-Ill cc:
Plant Service list 310041 c
Q Fo I LLt
-