ML20237A624
| ML20237A624 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 12/03/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237A621 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712150135 | |
| Download: ML20237A624 (3) | |
Text
1 n REC e
/ja
'o, UNITED STATES l
8ji
'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.E WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 I
N s..f[p
+
i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMEN 0 MENT N05,10%ND 112TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-24 AND DPR-27 WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION l
l In a letter dated August 26, 1987, Wisconsin Electric Power Company (the l
licensee) submitted an application for amendment of the Point Beach 1 and 2 licenses.
The purpose of the amendments is to incorporate a change to Technical Specification 15.4.11, " Control Room Emergency Filtration", and to make administrative changes to Technical Specifications 16.1 and 16.5.
Specifically, the proposed change to Technical Specification 15.4.11 modifies the laboratory sample analysis parameters required for the periodic iodine-removal efficiency testing of in place charcoal adsorbent.
The temperature and iodide concentration parameters for this analysis are currently 12g)Fand0.05milligramsofI-131labeledCHlpercubicmeter q
of air (mg/m
, respectively.
The proposed changes to the Technical Specifi-cations would modify those values to 30 C (86 F) and 1.75 mg/m, respectively.
a The proposed change to Technical Specification 16.1, " Definitions", would revise the wording of the definition of "WPDES Permit".
The definition currently identifies the permit number, including the permit revision number, and the date of revision.
The proposed Technical Specification change would revise the wording to eliminate the revision number and date, but will retain the wording "... and as subsequently amended" to imply the most recent permit revision.
Finally, Technical Specification 16.5,
" Reporting Requirements", would be revised to correct an improper reference to another part of the Technical Specifications.
l 2.0 EVALUATION As part of the amendment requests submitted by the licensee, the licensee proposed modifying the laboratory sample analysis parameters specified for the periodic iodine-removal efficiency testing of charcoal adsorbent speci-i fied in Technical Specification 15.4.11.
Specifically, the current temper-l ature and iodide concentrations of 125 F and 0.05 mg/m, respectively, 3
specified in the technical specification would be revised to 30 C (86 F) and 3
1.75 mg/m, respectively.
l l
l 8712150135 871203 PDR ADOCK 05000266 P
s.
Cn At. gust 28,198f., the NRC Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement issued IE
)
Information Notice E6-76, "Preblems Netec in Control Room Emergency Venti-lction Systems". An attachtrent to that Notice, "Sunmary of Control Roorr Habitability fieviews", lists cenecn problems roted in control room errergency ver:tilation systems during NRC plant visits to gather information on control room habitability. Cne problem noted was that laboratory testing cf charcoal adsorber efficitrcy is being performed ct temperatures much higher than any temperature expected during the course of an accident, resultino in erroneously high efficiency measuremerits, as comparec to testing conducted at 30 C.
l The licensee's prcposed change would adept 30*C as the specified temperature 3
l parameter and 1.75 mg/m as the specified iodide concentration under which l
laboratory testing would be dene. This temperature anc concentration
)
l confirm ASTM Standard D3803-79, "Radiciodine Testing of Nuclear-Grade Gas-phase Adscrbents", es the standard method for testing iodine-removal ef ficier.cy of activatui charcoal beds. This temperature and concentration are specified for the test methcd measuring iodine removal under norrral plant operating conditions. While the purpose of the emergency filtration systen is to provide a safe control room atmosphere in a post-design basis accident environrrent, that environment will not be different in terms of temperature from normal conditions. Addi}ionally, raising the iodide concentration from.05 mg/m to 1.75 mg/m will tend to make the testing conservative, because at higher iodide concentrations, the probability that the challenge gas will leak past the filter being tested is increased.
This results in a reduced calculated efficiency for the tested filter.
Stancard Review Plan Section 6.5.1, "ESF Atnosphere Cleanup Systems", and Regulatory Guide 1.52 delineate that laboratory testing of activated carbon adsorbent should confcrn with ANSI N509-1975 or ANSI N509-1980. These ANSI Standards, in turn specify ASTM-3803-79 as the acceptable standard method.
l Therefore, the licensee's proposed modification of the temperature parageter from 125'@ to 30 C (86 F) and the concentration parameter from.05 mg/m to 1.75 mg/m is acceptable.
The licensee also proposed administrative changes to two non-radiological lechnical Specifications. The licensee proposed that specification 16.1,
" Definitions", be revised to include a trore generic wording of the defini-tion of "WFDES Fermit".
Presently, the definition spells out the pennit nurrber, incluoing the permit revision number and date of revision. The licensee's proposed rewording will eliminate the revision number and date, but will retain the wording "... and as subsequently amenaed" to imply the i
lacst current permit revision. The change would not require that the Technical Specifications be changed whenever a new revision of the WPDES permit is issued. Additionally, this change will not relieve the licensee frorn its previous commitment to report changes to its WPDES permit. This proposed change is administrative in nature, and is acceptable, Finally, the licensee proposed that specification 10.5 be modified to correct an improper reference to another part of the Technical Specifications. The specification currently refers to Secticn 15.6.9.2.C of Appendix A, whereas the correct reference should be to Section 15.7.8.4.A of Appendix A.
This proposed change is administrative in nature, and is acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and in a surveillance requirement.
The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously published a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant nazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
These amendments also involve changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, with respect to these items, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22 (c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
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 the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: December 3, 1987 Principal Contributor:
David H. Wagner, NRR l
l L_____________________
_