ML20137J938

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 118 to License DPR-6

ML20137J938
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	04/02/1997
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20137J914	List: ML20137J912 ML20137J932 ML20137J938
References
NUDOCS 9704040191
Download: ML20137J938 (2)

Text

e -

c ua

~  % UNITED STATES

[

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 30666-0001 9

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.118 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-6 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY BIG ROCK POINT PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-155 i

1.0 INTRODUCTION

, By letter dated November 7, 1996, the Consumers Power Company (CPCo, the licensee) requested an amendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6 for the Big Rock Point Plant. The 1 proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification 4.2.9, Service and Instrument Air System, to add an additional air compressor.

2.0 EVALUATION In part, TS 4.2.9 specifies that " Instrument and service air shall be supplied by three, nonlubricated air compressors, each rated at 70 scfm [ standard cubic feet per minute]." The licensee proposed to revise TS 4.2.9 to add an additional air compressor. The revised TS would read " Service and Instrument air shall be supplied by three, nonlubricated air compressors, each rated at 70 scfm and one, nonlubricated air compressor rated at 100 scfm. Instrument air shall also pass through a dryer."

A recent modification at Big Rock Point has added a new air compressor to the service air segment of the service and instrument air system. Specifically, a new 100 scfm air compressor has been added to the service air portion of the service and instrument air system. The new air compressor is of similar design (nonlubricated) to the three existing air compressors. The licensee stated that this modification was performed to increase instrument air capacity by eliminating service air demands on the three existing air compressors. The addition also allows the instrument air portion to be completely' isolated from the service air portion. However, in the event of a loss of normal instrument air, the new air compressor can be aligned to provide air to the instrument air system (i.e., both the new and the existing air compressors are capable of supporting either portion of the service and instrument air system.)

The service and instrument air system provides compressed air for service use and moisture-free compressed instrument air for control air demands. i Safety-related equipment supplied by instrument air is designed to fail in its I safe condition upon loss of instrument air. Safety-related equipment  !

(and nonsafety-related equipment determined to be important to safety) that i are required to operate subsequent to instrument air failure are supplied by backup nitrogen accumulators. The additional air compressor increases the i

9704040191 970402 PDR ADOCK 05000155 P PDR

_ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _. . _ ~ _ . _ - - _ _ _ . _

I l l r

~

' l available capacity of compressed air to the service and instrument air system.

Therefore, adding the statement "and one, nonlubricated air compressor rated -

at 100 scfm" to TS 4.2.9. is acceptable.

3.0 STATE CONSULTATION

l

. In accordance with the Comission's regulations, the Michigan State official i

! was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

! The amendment changes 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 staff has determined that the amendment involves no sigr.ificant 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 Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (61 FR 66706). Accordingly, the amendment meets the i

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 i

or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

4

5.0 CONCLUSION

l 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 Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comon j defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor: L. Tran Date: April 2, 1997 i

4 e

I i

)