ML20217N449
| ML20217N449 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1999 |
| From: | Pamela Lee NRC |
| To: | Brown S NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20217N429 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9910290036 | |
| Download: ML20217N449 (8) | |
Text
~ ~~ ~
j [ St'wf rt Brown - Re: Firml1Icence c mendment # 17 _ P gs 1_l 4
- From: Peter Lee .
To: Stewart Brown .
Date: . Tue, Sep 28,199911:13 AM
Subject:
. Re: Fermi 1 licence amendment # 17 Stewart, I concur the amendment # 17. ' peter -
>>> Stewart Brown 09/2211:39 AM >>>
- Request for Rlli concurrence on the attached amendment package.
)
j l
i l
l l
l l
j 9910290036 991025
- PDR ADOC
$. .,..... K 05000016 PDR
J[Stewr.rt Brown - Rei Formi 1 ticence amendmElt # 17 ,
Pags1]:
1 From: Peter Lee !
To: Stewart Brown Date: .Tue, Sep 28,199911:13 AM ,
Subject:
Re: Fermi 1 licence ame.ndment # 17 '
Stewart, I concur the amendrnent #.17. peter
>>> Stewart Brown 09/2211:39 AM >>> !
Request for Rlli concurrence on the attached amendment' package, i l
i i
i l
I l
l
~~ ~
j l Stew:rt Brown - _R m: Fermi 1 licenca g mendment717___ ._ ~ p~ {g]
From: Peter Lee ~-
To: Stewart Brown '
Date: Tue. Sep 28,199911:13 AM
Subject:
Re: Fermi 1 licence amendment # 17--
Stewart, I concur the amendment # 17, poter a n Stewart Brown 09/2211:39 AM >n Request for Alli concurrence on the attached amendment package.
I i
1 1
i i
L 4 i
l
\
1: ;
+
i, A-
\
W 9
ENCLOSURE 2 l
I 1
l
c-
- *l o.
. Douglas K. Gipson
. .e Senu r Vice President, Nuclear Generati-.n Fermi:
4:W bra lie thg %.w1.. r. W ima. 4W Tu ~:(4 M1A1 Fat "a1 - U Detroit Edison 4
- April 20,1999 ,
NRC-99-0035 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn.: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555
References:
- 1) Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit No. I NRC Docket No. 50-16 NRC License Number DPR-9
- 2) NRC Letter," Issuance of Amendment No. 9 to renew Possession-Only License No. DPR-9 for /ermi, Unit 1",
dated April 28,1989
Subject:
Proposed Technical Specification Chr: age (License Amendment)-
Primary Sodium Storage Tanks Pnrsuant to 10 CFR 50.90, Detroit Edison hereby proposes to amend Possession Only License No. DPR-9 for the Fermi i plant by modifying Technical Specification Section D.3, Surveillance Requireraents..
This application proposes to eliminate the Technical Specification surveillance requirement
' for nitrogen cover gas'on the nearly empty primary sodium storage tanks in the Sodium Building Complex. Deletion of the cover gas is proposed to prepare for the removal of the primary sodium from the storage tanks. This application also addresses opening these tanks as needed for access. The current Fermi i Safety Analysis Report (FISA.R) mentions the tanks were w'elded shut during earlier decommissioning activities.
The description and evaluation of the changes are included in Enclosure 1 to this letter. !
Enclosure 2 provides the marked up pages of the existing Technical Specification to show I~,
. the proposed change and a typed version of the affected Technical Specification with the j{
proposed change incorporated.
- Detroit Edison requests that this amendment be approved with an implementation time period of"within 60 days." e 4lfo6x Q PDR
// ,
'. s k
ununerec. -
. . . , i USNRC NRC-99-0035 Page 2 l
Detroit Edison has evaluated the proposed Technical Specification change against the i criteria of 10 CFR 60.92 and determined that no significant hazards consideration is !
involved. The Fermi 1 Review Committee has approved the proposed Technical l Specification changes and concurs with the enclosed determinations. In accordance with i 10 CFR 50.91, Detroit Edison is providing a copy of this letter to the State of Michigan.
If you have any questions, please contact Lynne S. Goodman, Director Fermi 1 at 734-586-1205. j I
Sincerely, i Enclosures (2) cc: NRC Regional Administrator, Region III S.W. Brown S. Campbell l P. Lee, NRC Region Ill D. Minaar (State of Michigan) !
l
.s USNRC NRC-99-0035 Page 3 I, DOUGLAS R. GIPSON, do hereby affirm that the foregoing statements are based on facts and circumstances which are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.
DOUGLAS R. GIPSON Senior Vice President On this MO day of db ,1999 before me personally appeared Douglas R. Gipson, being first duly sworn and says that he executed the foregoing as his free act and deed.
l JJJ'W LW Notary Public POSAUE A. ARMETTA NOTARY PUBUC.P?NROE COUNTY M; MYCOMMISS10N S.XPiriES1M j gg i
L-
- ' USNRC.
NRC-99-0035 Page 4 bc: G. Cerullo -
P. - Fessler .
D.R.' Gipson L.S. Goodman
' P. Marquardt
. J.E. Conen
- L. Craine -
J. Couillard R.R. Eberhardt, Jr.
i D. Ferencz W.D. Gilbert R.A. Jaassens -
' E.F. Kokosky
' R. Laubenstein .
E.F. Madsen R.H. McLenon J.E. Meyers B. Michelbacher
' W. O'Connor, Jr.
l E.M Wilds :
' D.R. Williams Information Management (116 NOC) - Fermi 1 Records NRR Chron File.(Licensing)
NRC Notebook (Fermi 1)-
t.
l l.
I l1
(.
k e
y,
w .e '
Enclosure 1
..' - NRC-99-0035 PageI l
I 1
l 1
ENCLOSUREI DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION OF PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CIIANGE Enrico Fermi Atonnie Power Plant, Unit 1 NRC Docket No. 50-16 NRC License No. DPR-9 i
Enclosure 1 NRC-99-0035 Page 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CIIANGE The purpose of this proposed amendment is to modify the Technical Specifications to delete the requirement for surveillance of the nitrogen cover gas pressure over the nearly empty primary sodium storage tanks in the Sodium Building complex. The revision to the specific article is described as follows:
Section D.3.c is being revised to delete the requirement to check the nitrogen cover gas pressure over the three primary sodium (Na) s cmge tanks in the Sodium Building complex. Section D.3.c of the Technical Speci6 cations states: " Observations of the nitrogen cover gas pressure over esstatially empty sodium storage taks in the Sodium Building Complex shall be performed weekly" Since the requirement to check the pressure over the sodium storage tanks is being deleted, the title of Section D is revised to delete " Storage Tank" from the section title. Other subrections in Section D are for the primary system cover gas. The revised title will be " Primary System Cover G as".
Also, this amendment request evaluates opening up the sealed primary Na storage tanks to allow access. The Fermi 1 bafety Analysis mentions that the tanks were welded shut in the description of previous decommissioning activities.
During the decommissioning of Fermi 1, the primary Na was drained into the three 15,000-gallon storage tanks and 55-gallon steel drums from four major systems: the primary system, the service system, the transfer tank, and the FARB service system. Only 45,000 gallons of the total estimated inventory of primary sodium, about 77,000 gallons, was stored in the storage tanks. Ia 1983, the contents of the primary Na storage tanks were drained and placed in 55-gallon steel dmms. The drums were shipped to Argonne National Laboratory - West in Idaho in 1984. The sodium residue in the tanks was then passivated with a carbon dioxide (CO2 ) cover gas. The tank openings were welded shut and the tanks sealed in the shielded storage room by locking the access door. Carbon dioxide was used because it would react slowly with residual metallic sodium, forming sodium carbonate. The use of carbon dioxide also prevented moisture from the air from reacting with sodium and releasing hydrogen gas. Later, the CO was replaced with a 2
nitrogen (N 2) cover gas.
Currently, the N 2gas pressure is normally maintained between 1 psig and 5 psig. There is '
expected to be a combined total of approximatdy 50 gallons of residual Na remaining in the three primary Na storage tanks.
The N 2gas is contained in an isolated bnttle connected to pipes leading to the three storage tanks.
The weekly surveillar.ce involves checkmg the three storage tank pressure gauges. When the pressure falls outside the surveillance limits, N 2is manually added to the storage tanks to maintain the pressure.
Enclosure 1
... NRC-99-0033 Page 3
~ Approval of this proposed amendment will allow the cover gas to be maintained, discontinued, or changed, and pemiit opening of these tanks for access. This will provide Detroit Edison more flexibility to support project activities leading to cleanup of the residual primary sodium. This proposed amendment is evaluated as if the cover gas will be discontinued after the amendment is
- approved.
EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE The purpose of this evaluation is to consider the consequence of deleting the Technical Specification requirement for observing the cover gas pressure on the printary Na storage tanks in preparation for removal of the primary Na in the future. Also, the evaluation addresses opening up the primary Na storage tanks for future work activities.
The NRC reviewed and approved the Technical Specification requirement to check for N2 cover gas pressure on the " essentially empty" Na tanks through the issuance of Amendment No. 9, April 28,1989 (Reference 2). The NRC Safety Evaluation states that a temporary loss of cover gas pressure will not cause "significant water reactions" with the residual sodium since the tanks '
were passivated with CO 2and water is not likely to enter the tanks because of cover gas pressure loss.
The Technical Specifications do not specifically require the N2cover gas system to be continuously in service. The only requirement is to observe the pressure weekly. Action is required thould the N 2cover gas pressure not meet proceduralized criteria. Also, the Technical Specifications do not othenvise address the primary Na storage tanks status, except that they are _j essentially empty.-
Deletion of the N 2cover gas system may bejustified by the following examples:
- 1. During the decommissioning of Fermi 1, the secondary Na storage tanks located in the basement of the Steam Generator Building were purged with 7-8 psig CO2 to passivate the residual Na and sealed closed. The atmosphere inside one of the tanks was sampled and
[ f4 9p analyzed in 1997 and the results showed a 10% by volume concentration of CO2 . The other jf 'Mq sample constituents by volume were 0.04% hydrogen,13% oxygen,78% nitrogen,0.2% b argon, and < 0.05% carbon monoxide. A visual inspection inside the secondary tanks M ;//r j showed a white layer of sodium carbonate on the pipe and v The bottom of the tank was a dull metallic gray, revealing approximately 34 to 70 gallons of solid residual Na, a total of 200 gallons or less in the three secondary Na storage tanks combined. These storage tanks have remained in this condition for over 20 years.
The Technical Specifications characterize the primary Na storage tanks as " essentially empty". The quantity of primary Na in each storage tank is expected to be less than the quantity of secondary Na in each storage tank. The condition of the Na in the secondary tanks showed that the absence of a cover gas system did not result in any adverse consequences.
1 l
Enclosure 1 1
.O NRC-99-0035 j Nge 4 l 1
1 The secondary Na storage tanks have been breached for inspection, monitoring, and other work activities on occasions during the past two years. No adverse effects have been noted.
No adverse consequences will be expected if the primary Na storage tanks are similarly opened for work activities. l l
. i
- 2. A comparison between the condition of the primary storage tanks and the secondary storage tanks suppons approval of this change. The secondary Na storage tanks are in a relativ:ly moist atmosphere. Surface corrosion was revealed on the tanks when the asbestos was l removed in 1997. An informational ultrasonic examination performed on two of the I secondary tanks showed no decrease in thickn:ss from the original nominal tank shell thickness, indicating no loss from corrosion. The primary Na storage tanks ace housed in the ;
Sodium Building which has a dryer atmosphere. The primary Na storage tank surfaces )
exhibited little corrosion under a thin coat of paint when the asbestos was removed in 1998. j The nominal tank shell thickness for both primary and secondary Na storage tanks was 3/3 )
inch.
Since the primary Na storage tanks appear to be in good condition and were exposed to a less corrosive atmosphere, their condition should be at least as good as the secondary Na storage tanks. Since the secondary Na storage tanks have contained the residual Na without a cover gas pressure system for over 20 years, the primary Na storage tanks are capable of storing sodium safely without a cover gas system.
- 3. Any potential release of the estimated 50 gallons of residual Na remaining in the primary storage tanks as a result of removing the primary cover gas system is bounded by the Na accident evaluation in the Fermi i Safety Analysis Report. A postulated radiological accident covers an airbome release of all primary residual Na including the entire radionuclide inventory of the Na which was estimated to contain a total of 0.98 mci"Na, 4.84 mci "'Cs, and 70 mci'H. In the event of a fire or other catastrophic event, the release of residual sodium results in concentration levels well below the values in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table II, for releases to unrestricted areas. )
If opening the tanks resulted in releasing the residual sodium, the potential radiological release is the same as addressed above.
Removing the surveillance requirement for the N2 cover gas will enable Detroit Edison to make preparations for cleanup of the primary storage tanks which will eliminate the residual Na and any need for a cover gas over the tanks in the future. Opening the tanks will also facilitate cleanup preparations.
The change in the title for Section D of the Technical Specifications is an editorial change, since the remaining section reqeirements apply only to the primary system cover gas.
1 __
4 ..
Enclosure 1 i.O NRC-99-0035 Page5 SIGNIFICANT IIAZARDS CONSIDERATION In accordance with 10 CFR 50.92, Detroit Edison has made a determination that the proposed amendment involves no significant hazards considerations. To make this determination, Detroit Edison must establish that conduct of activities in accordance with the proposed amendment would not: (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
- 1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probabilit y or consequences of an accident.
Removing the primary cover gas supply from the storage tanks will not significantly increase the probability of an accident occurring as long as the probability of an uncontrolled water reaction with residual sodium is not significantly increased. This is ensured by sealing the storage tanks after the nitrogen cover gas system is removed except when controlled I
activities such as sampling are performed. The consequences of an accident would not be affected by removing the N 2cover gas supply from service as the previously analyzed .
primary Na accident already involves release of all the radioactive material in the primary Na. Removing the cover gas will not increase the amount of radioactive material available to ,
be released. 4
- 2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different accident from any previously evaluated.
A sodium accident has been previously evaluated. No other type of accident could be caused by removing the primary sodium storage tanks cover gas or opening the tanks since no other system or mode of operation of any other system will be affected.
- 3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Only a small amount of sodium remains in the primary sodium storage tanks. Some of this residual may have been converted to sodium carbonate, leaving even less sodium remaining.
The co~ver gas is a good precaution, especially for tanks sitting unattended for many years. It l prevents moisture from intruding into the tanks and reacting with the sodium residues It prevents oxygen from entering and reacting with any hydrogen formed from reactiens of water with sodium. Discontinuing the use cf cover gas slightly reduces the margin of safety, but not significantly. Removing the cover gas does not, in itself, introduce water into the tank in an uncontrolled manner. Even if slight amounts ofmoisture from humidity in the air l enter over the next year or two until the sodium is removed while the tank is opened or sealed, the tank volume (15,000 gallons) is large enough that the tank should be able to 1 dissipate any small reactions that occur. The design pressure for the primary Na storage tanks is vacuum to 50 psi per the vendor drawing. l i
)
n Enclosure 1
- ,. NP.C-99.0035 Page 6 Even if sufficient water entered the tank, generated hydrogen, and sufficient oxygen entered the tank to cause a reaction that released the contents of the tank, there would be no
. significant release of radioactivity from the tank. The release of all residual primary sodium would result in concentration levels well below the values in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table Il for releases to unrestricted areas. Since there is less sodium in the primary Na storage tuks than in the secondary Na storage tanks, potential chemietd had consequences
. of releasing the contents of a primary Na storage tank are bounded by the hypothetical secondary sodium scenario evaluated in the Fermi 1 Safety Analysis Report. For these reasons, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT Detroit Edison has reviewed the proposed Technical Specification changes against the criteria of 10 CFR 51.22 for environmental considerations. The proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration, nor significantly change the types or increase the amounts of effinents that may be released offsite, nor increase individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposures. Based on the foregoing, Detroit Edison concludes that the proposed Technical Specifications meet the criteria given in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) for a categorical -
exclusion from the requirements for an Environmental!mpact Statement.
CDNCLUSIDE Based on the evaluations above: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by conduct of activities in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the proposed amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or the health and safety of 4 the public. l Detroit Edison reque'sts that the proposed license amendment be effective within 60 days of 3
. approval by the Commission. I 1
i I
i l
I l
l i
i i
i
. Enclosure 2 , j
! 6 .' NRC-99-0035 l
'Page1 i s
1 ENCLOSURE 2 PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE Marked-up Technical Specification (2 Pages)
Typed Revised Technk al Specification (2 Pages)
Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 1 NRC Docket No. 50-16 NRC License No. DPR-9 i
. Enclosure 2 i J- : NRC-99-0035 Page 2 Access to the facility shall be through locked gates in the fencing or locked doors. Doors in the building walls making up part of the perimeter shall be locked, secured from the inside, or permanently closed. The gates and doors may be unlocked and/or open when work is in progress 1 in the Protected Area or personnel are within. Security shall be maintained by 24-hour guard ,
service within the owner controlled area boundary. l The Custodian (or Delegate) and the Fermi 2 Radiation Protection control point shall be l responsible for keys to the facility. The Custodian and Fermi 2 Radiation Protection personnel shall only permit key use by authorized persons. Unescorted access to the Protected Area must be approved by the Custodian or Delegate. Records shall be kept of key issuance. j Temporary modifications may be made to the Protected Area boundary shown in Figure B-1, l provided the boundary continues to meet the requirements of a Physical Barrier, as defined in i
. Section A, and any access points meet the requirements in this Section.
l If work needs to be perfomied on the Protected Area fence or building walls making up part of the perimeter, such that the requirements for the boundary will temporarily not be met, an individual shall be po.sted in the vicinity or observe the area remotely using a camera capable of l viewing the affected area, during periods when there is no ongoing work in progress or personnel !
within the Protected Area.
- C. REACTOR BUILDING
- 1. Access - Doors into the Reactor Building shall remain locked (or not operable from outside the building) except for authorized entry,
[
i
- 2. Drains - There shall be no drains within the Reactor Building. Surrounding the Reactor Building below grade is the biological shield which forms an annulus around the Reactor i Building. Drains from this annulus shall flow to a sump pump located outside the Protected Area.
l l
D. PRIMARY SYSTEMS? ' TE T.4NK COVER G AS l
- 1. Supply - The Primary System shall be connected to reserve and backup supplies of g carbon dioxide (CO 2). The pressure of the cover gas shall be -maintained above atmospheric pressure (see Table H-1). The supply system piping shall be fitted with a i pressure relief valve set for approximately 5 psig.
2, Backup Sunnly - The Primary System cover gas backup supply shall be sufficient to ;
sunply the system for eight days under normal conditions. j 3' Surveillances
- a. Cover gas (CO 2) pressure in the Primary System shall be checked and recorded weekly. ;
i l
- b. ' The Primary System (CO,) cover gas pressure relief valve shall be tested annually. !
,. 9904270a;rs. 990420, DR- ADOCK 050000 6 Lf "
p 4 Amendment No. If )
L, s l
. Enclosure 2 5?' NRC-99-0035 -
Page 3 '
L
- c. Ob=rc :ic= cf'he H::g= cerr g= pr:=ure cre :==ti;!!y :mp:y cediuc-
- ccg::=he i- *he Sedium SuYng Ccmp!= &'! be prfc= d c=h!y.
4, The Primary System cover gas supply system may be out of service for up to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
- 5. The Primary System cover gas pressure may be interrupted for no more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> in any 30 day period.
l.
~ E. FUEL AND REPAIR BUILDING
.l. Access - Normal access to the Fuel and Repair Building shall be limited to the door at the southwest corner of the building. At least one other door shall be operable from the inside. Other external doors may be used, if needed, for work being carried out.
- 2. Drains - All drains are connected to sumps. The sump pumps discharge to the liquid waste holdup system. The pumps may be disconnected or decommissioned when no longer needed for disposing of radioactive waste.
F. WASTE DISPOSAL AND RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENTS Prior to commencing planned discharge of any radioactive liquid or gaseous efuuent, a waste disposal system shall be functional and operating procedures developed.
.1 discharges ofliquid radioactive efnuents from Fermi l shall be sampled and analyzed by
, gamma spectral analysis and for tritium prior to release. Liquid radioactive efnuents which have not been processed to remove paniculates shall be monitored by a radiation monitor during discharges. If the radiation detection instrument is out of service such that the ef0uent cannot properly be monitored, discharge of the efnuent shall be discontinued. During
. periods of use, the discharge radiation monitor shall be checked for response once a week
- with a radioactive source and shall be calibrated at least once every six months or before each i
- discharge batch.
Radioactive gaseous effluents shall be monitored or sampled and analyzed for tritium during evolutions involving the cutting of pipe containing sodium and during sodium processing.
Gaseous efnuents from cutting pipe containing primary sodium or processing primary sodium shall also be monitored or sampled and analyzed for particulates. During other evolutions resulting in radioactive gaseous effluents, the effluents shall be monitored or sampled and analyzed for tritium and particulates.
The calculational method of performing dose calculations to show adherence to the following requirements shall be developed and documented prior to commencing planned discharges.
Calculations shall be perfonned for any year in which a discharge of radioactive effluents occurs.
- 1. Liauid Ef0uents - Radioactive waste discharges to offsite locations sh all not exceed the limits given in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, on an insiantaneous basis,
- a. Dose Due to Release of Liauid Ef0uents - The calculated annual total quantity of I . radioactive material in liquid effluents from the facility shall not result in an annual f Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) in an unrestricted area from all pathways of exposure in excess of 5 mrem.
Access to the facility shall be through locked gates in the fencing or locked doors. Doors in the building walls making up part of the perimeter shall be locked, secured from the inside, or permanently closed. The gates and doors may be unlocked and/or open when work is in progress in the Protected Area or personnel are within. Security shall be maintained by 24-hour guard service within the owner controlled area boundary.
The Custodian (or Delegate) and the Fermi 2 Radiation Protection control point shall be l responsible for keys to the facility. The Custodian and Fermi 2 Radiation Protection personnel shall only permit key use by authorized persons. Unescorted access to the Protected Area must l be approved by the Custodian or Delegate. Records shall be kept of key issuance.
l l
Temporary modifications may be made to th: Protected Area boundary shown in Figure B-1, l provided the boundary continues to meet the requirements of a Physicci Barrier, as dermed in j 4
Section A, and any access points meet the requirements in this Section.
If work needs to be performed on the Protected Area fence or building walls making up part of )
the perimeter, such that the requirements for the boundary will temporarily not be met, an I individual shall be posted in the vicinity or observe the area remotely using a camera capable of )
viewing the affected area, during periods when there is no ongoing work in progress or personnel l within the Protected Area.
C. REACTOR BUILDING l l
- 1. Access - Doors into the Reactor Building shall remain locked (or not operable from outside the building) except for authorized entry.
- 2. Drams - There shall be no drains within the Reactor Building. Surrounding the Reactor Building below grade is the biological shield which forms an annulus around the Reactor Building. Drains from this annulus shall flow to a sump pump located outside the Protected Area.
D. PRIMARY SYSTEM COVER GAS l
- 1. Sunply - The Primary System shall be connected to reserve and backup supplies of carbon dioxide (CO 2). The pressure of the cover gas shall be maintained above atmospheric pressure (see Table H-1). The supply system piping shall be fitted with a pressure relief valve set for approximately 5 psig.
- 2. Backuo Sucolv - The Primary System cover gas backup supply shall be suflicient to supply the system for eight days under normal conditions.
- 3. Surveillances
- a. Cover gas (CO:) pressure in the Primary System shall be checked and recorded weekly.
\
- b. The Primary System (CO )2 cover gas pressure relief valve shall be tested annually.
4 Amendment No.
l
.. 1 i
. .i
- 4. The Primary System cover gas supply system may be out of service for up to 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
s S. The Primary System cover gas pressure may be interrupted for no more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> in l any 30 day period.
E. FUEL AND REPAIR BUILDING I l
- 1. Access - Normal access to the Fuel and Repair Building shall be limited to the door at the southwest corner of the building. At least one other door shall be operable from the ,
inside. Other external doors may be used, if needed, for work being carried out. l l
waste holdup system. The pumps may be disconnected or decommissioned when no longer needed for disposing of radioactive waste. {
1 F. WASTE DISPOSAL AND RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENTS i
Prior to commencing plarmed discharge of any radioactive liquid or gaseous effluent, a waste l
disposal system shall be functional and operating procedures developed. {
All discharges ofliquid radioactive emuents from Fermi 1 shall be sampled and analyzed by gamma spectral analysis and for tritium prior to release. Liquid radioactive emuents which have not been processed to remove particulates shall be monitored by a radiation monitor during discharges. If the radiation detection instrument is out of service such that the effluent i cannot properly be monitored, discharge of the emuent shall be discontinued. During !
periods of use, the discharge radiation monitor shall be checked for response once a wrek l with a radioactive source and shall be calibrated at least once every six months or before each discharge batch.
Radioactive gaseous effluents shall be monitored or sampled and analyzed for tritium during evolutions involving the cutting of pipe containing sodium and during sodium processing.
Gaseous emuents from cutting pipe containing primary sodium or processing primary
- sodium shall also be monitored or sampled and analyzed for particulates. During other evolutions resulting in radioactive gaseous emuents, the emuents shall be monitored or l sampled and analyzed for tritium and particulates. I The calculational method of perfomling dose calculations to show adherence to the following j requirements shall be developed and documented prior to commencing planned discharges.
Calculations shall be performed for any year in which a discharge of radioactive emuents occurs.
) 1. Liould Effluents - Radioactive waste discharges to offsite locations shall not exceed the j limits given in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, on an instantaneous basis.
- a. Dose Due to Release of Liquid Effluents - The calculated annual total quantity of radioactive materialin liquid effluents from the facility shall not result in an annual Total Eff:ctive Dose Equivalent (TEDE) in an unrestricted area from all pathways of exposure in excess of 5 mrem.
5 Amendment No.
O ENCLOSURE 3 J
4
1
. 1 (
! l 43770 Feder;.1 Register /Voi, 64. No,154 /W:dn:sd:y, August 11, ~1999 / Notic:s '
from the respective EDGl. and initiate f Specification D.3.c. Specification D.3.c Removing the cover gas does not,in itself. I starting of the Safe Shutdown equipment supphed by the Class 1E bus, requires the licensee to perform weekly introduce waterinto the tank in an -
observations of the nitrogen cover gas uncontrolled manner. Even if slight amounts {
Since the scope of this change does not of m isture from humidity in the air enter a dm operahn d audary nower pressure within thesodium storage these tanks over the next year or two, until system or any actions necessary ta mitigate tanks located in the Sodium Buildin8 the sodium is temoval while the tanks are -
the consequences of accideets or achieve safe Complex. Removing this surveillance either opened or sealed, the volume of each shutdown, the change does not involve a new requirement would allow the licensee to tank (15,000 gallons) is large enough that the 'l or different accident scenario. - t remove the nitrogen cover gas system tank should be able to dissipate any small l Therefore. those propoaed changes do not - from service for these sodium storage . reactions that could occur. The design i crette the possibility of a new or dif'erent - pressure for the primary sodium storage tanks. This action is necessary for the t kind of accident from any accident ,
previously evaluated. I wnsee to begin work on removing the tanks is from vacuum to 50 poun,ds per ,
umaining maiduaI aodlum frma these square inch based on the vendor s drawing.
(3) involve n significant reduction in the Even if sufficient water entered the tank, f margin of safety be.ause: tanks. The licensee also requested an generated hydrogen, and sufficient oxygen The proposed amendment will allow the editorial change to delete the words entered the tank to cause a reactio* that !
degraded voltage set oint to bu - " STORAGE TANK"imm the title of I conservatively estabbished based en new released the contents of the tank. .here would Specification D. be no significant release of radioactivity from I engineering calculations which Wer the Basisforproposedno significarrt the tank. The release of all residual primary lowat expected offsite grid vob p <.ad {
hazards considemtion determinction: sodium would resultin concentration levels operation of required Class 1E equipment As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the well below the values in 10 CFR 20, j under design basis accident loadin8 -
conditions. licensee has provided its analysis of the. Appendix B. Table Il for releases to . t l Issue of no si8nificant hazards unrestricted areas Since there is less sodium 1 The proposed degraded voltage setpoints in the primary sodium storage tanks than in !
will ensure that ad unte Class 1E bus consideration using the standards in 10 the secondary sodium storage tanks, potential t voltage will be aval able to support starting CFR 50.92(c). The licensee's analysis is hazard consequences of releasing the and operation of required Class 1E loads. The Presented below: {
contents of a primary sodium tank are proposed setpoint includes instrument error (1) Depmposed change does not invohu bounded by the hypothetical secondary 3
to ensure that the lowest possible voltage will a significant increase in the pmbability or . soulum smario evaluated in the Fermi 1 L not be lower than the degraded voltage consequences of an accident previously Safety Analysis Report. For these reasons, the 1 analytkallimits. Additionally, the proposed evaluated, prop sed change does not involve a setpoints are low enough to revent spurious significant reductmn in the margin of safety, j
actuations due to expected Ifuctuations in theRemoving the primary cover gas supply grid voltage. The new setpoints are also set from the storage tanks will not significantly NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's j increase the probability of an accident analysis and, based on th(s review, it '
with margin to the minimum Class 1E bus occurring as long as the probability of an voltage, which is based on a minimum grid appears that the three standards of 10 uncontrolled water reaction with rosidual voltage of 352 kV, which is less than the sodium is not significantly increased. This is expected grid voltage of 354 kV. Tae ensured by scaling the storage tanks after the CFRstaff50.92(c)
NRC proposes toare satisfied.
determine that t Therefore I proposed changes will provide an increase in nitrogen cover gas system is removed except amendment r'9uest involves no k i
the le,el of protection that currently exists when controlled activities such as sampling significant hazards consideration. I and will ensure the margin of safety is are performed. The consequences of an LocalPublic Document Room adequately maintained, (
accident would not be affected by removing location: Monroe County Library !
Therefore, these thanges do not involve a the nitrogen cover gas supply from service as System,3700 South Custer Road, :
significant reducticn in the margin of safety. the previously analyred primary sodium Monroe, Michigan 48161. '
accident already myolves release of all the The NRC staff has reviewed the radioactive material in the primary sodium.
Attorneyforlicensee: John Flynn, j licensee's analvsis and, based on this Esquire. Detroit Edison Company,2000 Removing the cover gas will not increase the rev5w,it s"pum that the three amount of radioactive material available to be Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan standarda t ' W UR 50.92[c) are released. 48226.
satisfied. Them,x, the NRC staff (2) The proposed change does not create NRCBmnch Chid Larry W, Camper. I proposes to determine that the the possibihty of a new or different accident Duke Energy Corpontion, et al., Docket requested amendments luvolve no from anypreviously e~aluated t Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, Catawb.i i significant hazards consideration. A sodium accident has been previously LocalPublic Document Room evalu*'*d N* th"r type of accident could b" Nuclear Station. Units 1 and 2. York j caused by removing the primury sodium County, South Carolina jocation:Jacobs Memorial Libra ',815 q North Orlando Smith Avenue,11 incis tanks mer gas meening om tanks since no Date of mundmevN uest: f July 22, other system or inode of operation of any 1998, supplemente, i fOctober 22.
Valley Community College, Oglesby, onmr iystem will be affected.
Illirois 61348-9692. 1998, January 28, M 9 and June 24, (3) The proposed change does not involve 3999 t
Attorneyforlicensee:Ms. Pamela B. a significant r .Juction in a margin of safety.
Stroebel, Senior Vice President and Description of amerdment request: By General Counsel, Commonwealth currently, only a small amount of residual the reforenced submittels the licensee sodium remains in the prirnary sodium Edison Company, P.O. Box 767, storate tanks. Some of this residucl sodium ested the Cath T&ical !
may i ave been converted to sodium 3I g Sg P l Chicabo NR Section Illinois off MH)767, Chief: Anthony J. . carbonate. This conversion of sodium 4. licensee,a planned use of fuel su plied g
}"' sodium carbonate would have left even less by Westinghouse, which has dif erent sodium remaining in these taaks. The cover design characteristics from the fuel l
Detmit Edison Company, Docict No. gas is a good precaution, a pecially for tanks currently in use.The staff has 1 50-!fi, Enrico Fermi Atomic Power . sitting unattended for many yours. It pn vec previously published ' Notices of Plant, Unit 2, Afonme County, Afichigan moisture imm intruding into the tanks and Consideration of Issuu.e of I' ren ting with the sodium residues. It als Date of amendment mquest:Apu,l 20, pn,% ents oxygen from entering these tanks Amendments and Proposed No $
1999 (Reference NRCr99-0035). and reacting with any hydmgen forrned fmm Si8nificant Hazards Consideration of ,
l Description of amendment request: reactions of water and sodium.Ihcontinuing issuance of Amendments. Tim first The proposed amendment will revise the w,e of cover gas slightly rwiures the notice, dated November 18,1998 (63 FR i the Technical Spaifications by deleting margin of safety, but not sigriiticantly. 64108), corms the submittsis dated July ;
)
(
L f Uh q g' .% UNITED STATES E
'# Ij t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2066tK)001
%**../ -
MEMORANDUM FOR: Sholly Coordinator -
FROM: Larry W. Camper, Chief Decommissioning Bram Division of Waste Mar.cy 9 Office of Nuclear Material X nen and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION IN BlWEEKLY FR NOTICE -
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE (TAC NO. L51887)
)
Detroit Edison Comnany. Docket No. 50-16. Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant. Unit 1. Monroe County. Michiga_n.-
Date of amendment reauest: April 20,1999 (Reference NRC-99-0035).
Briefdescrintion of amendment: This amendment revises the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 1, Technical Specifications by deleting surveillance requirement D.3.c, which required weekly observation of the nitrogen cover gas pressure within the sodium storage tanks located in the e ' im building.
DfLg issuance: October 25 ,1999.
Effective date: On the date ofissuance of this amendment and must be fully implemented no later than 60-calendar days from the date ofissuance.
l l
[
r i-l L
2 Amendment No.: 17.
Facility Operatine I.icense No. DPR-9: Amendment revised the Technical Specifications by deleting surveillance requirement D.3.c.
Date ofinitial notice in Federal Recister: August i1,1999 (64 ER 43770). The NRC's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a safety Evaluation dated October 251999.
tLo sienificant hazards consideration comments received: No.
I.ocal Public Document Room location: Monroe County Library System,3700 South Custer Road, Monroe, Michigan 48161.