ML20211C572
| ML20211C572 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Humboldt Bay |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211C534 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702200133 | |
| Download: ML20211C572 (3) | |
Text
_ __
f Kat 'o,, UNITED STATES g 8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 j g j
~% ...+ /
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 22 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-7 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 3 DOCKET NO. 50-133
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 14, 1986, as revised November 17, 1986, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) proposed to revise the existing Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3, Physical Security Plan to reflect the possess-but-not-operate status of Facility Operating License No. DPR-7.
On July 2, 1976, the facility was shut down for refueling and the required seismic modifications. In 1983, the licensee concluded that the seismic modifications and the modifications necessary to comply with requirements imposed after the accident at the TMI Unit 2 were uneconomical, and i decided to decomission the facility. Facility Operating License No.
DPR-7 was amended to the possess-but-not-operate status on July 16, 1985, as requested by the licensee.
- 2. EVALUATION All spent fuel has now been removed from the reactor vessel and placed in the spent fuel storage pool. There is no new fuel on site. The reactor cooling system and associated tanks and pipes have been drained and sealed. The suppression pool, below the reactor vessel, has been drained. Ion exchange systems were used to remove chemicals and radionuclides from the waste water prior to its discharge. The only water containing radionuclides that remains on site is the water in the spent fuel pool, its associated systems and in the radwaste tanks.
The proposed change does not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because: (1)The security plan only eliminates areas, equipment and systems that are not operating with the facility permanently shutdown and (2) the spent fuel, which is the primary focus of the proposed plan, has a reduced potential for the probability or consequences of an accident because of the
. s.ignificant radioactive decay in the more than 10 years the facility has been shutdown.
8702200133 870211 PDR ADOCK 05000133 '
P PDR
The spent fuel radioactivity has now decayed such that the fuel can coal in air with natural convection. Postulated accidents at Humboldt Bay, Unit 3 involving the spent fuel are evaluated in Section 3.2.3 of the Draft Environmental Statement (NUREG-1166) issued by the NRC in April 1986. The staff concludes in NUREG-1166 that there are no postulated accidents at Humboldt Bay, Unit 3, that would result in offsite exposures which would require protective action by the public.
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, because the method of storage of spent fuel has not changed, and with the reactor defueled, permanently shutdown and the cooling system drained, no reactor accidents are possible.
The proposed change does not involve a reduction in a margin of safety because the security measures described in the plan are commensurate with the risks associated with the storage of fuel which have decreased because of radioactive decay of the fuel in the more than 10 years the facility has been shutdown.
Therefore, based on the above considerations the NRC staff has determined, in accordance with 10 CFR 650.92, that this proposed amendment will .
not involve a significant hazards consideration.
Access to the spent fuel is controlled through a combination of barriers, intrusion detection systems and security guards which are discussed in detail in the licensee's Physical Security Plan (withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 673.21). Pursuant to 10 CFR 673.6, the licensee will not have to comply with the requirements of 4673.70, 73.25, 73.26, 73.27, 73.45, 73.46, 73.70 and 73.72 because the fuel is of low enrichment, is special nuclear material that is not readily separable from other radioactive material and has a total external radiation dose rate in excess 100 rems per hour at a distance of 3 feet from any accessible surface without intervening shielding.
We have concluded that the Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3, Physical Security Plan, when implemented, will adequately protect the fuel aoainst theft and radiological sabotage, and therefore, the proposed amendment will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment relates solely to safeguards matters and does not involve any significant construction impacts. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR
$51.22(c)(12). Pursuant to 10 CFR 951.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
I i
I 4.0 CONCUISION 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 maintenance of the facility in the proposed manner, and (2) licensed 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.
Dated: February 11, 1987 l
Principal Contributors: Charles E. Gaskin and Peter B. Erickson t
j
__ _ - . _ -_ .