ML20214U436
| ML20214U436 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 06/05/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214U423 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8706110186 | |
| Download: ML20214U436 (2) | |
Text
-.
' [
%o UNITED STATES n)
- 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j l
- f,w ;E WASHING TON, D. C. 20655 o
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 3 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-21 NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT N0. 1 DOCKET N0. 50-245
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated January 20, 1987, the Northeast huclear Energy Company, (the licensee) requested approval of an amendment to the plant fire protection technical specifications (TS). The proposed changes concern the addition of six fire suppression systems to Technical Specification 3.12.B.I.,
" Fire Protection Systems - Spray and/or Sprinkler Systems."
2.0 EVALUATION i
In ccnjunction with efforts to conform to the requirements of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 and the guidelines of Appendix A to Standard Review
~
Plan (SRP) BTP CHEB 9.5-1, the licensee installed fire suppression systems in several areas of the plant. These areas are delineated in the above-referenced letter. The licensee now proposes to incorporate these fire suppression systems into the requirements of the technical specifications.
The addition of the new fire suppression systems to the technical specfi-cations is necessary to satisfy previous licensee commitments regarding the requirements of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 and the guidelines of Appendix A to SRP's BTP EMEB 9.5-1.
The changes are consistent with the current standard technical specifications and the indicated fire protection criteria.
Based on its evaluation, the staff concludes that the licensee's proposed amendment to TS Section 3.12.B.1 to incorporate six fire sup-pression systems is acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves changes in the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
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 occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has 8706110186 870605 PDR ADOCK 05000245 P
been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the elig)ibility 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 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.
Principal Contributor:
D. J. Kubicki Dated: June 5, 1987 i
l i
1 a
4 l
f I
i
,_..,..,__._,...m.,
m.--.--
-