ML20244C985
| ML20244C985 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 06/09/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20244C984 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906160016 | |
| Download: ML20244C985 (3) | |
Text
q a no
[.I
, g* [g UNITED STATES g
g
. g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. tj W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Q
I i
SAFETY EVALUATION 8Y THE OFFICE =0F NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMLHI N05. 122 AND 125 TD l
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N05. DPR-24 AND DPR-27 i
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY POINT BEACri I4UCLEAR PLANl, UNII h05.1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-266 AND 50-301 1.0 -INTRODUCTION'
.i By letter dated September 9, 1988,' Wisconsin Electric Power Company (the licensee) submitted an application for amendnents to the Point Beach huclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, licenses. The proposed anendments would revise.
3 portions of Technical Specification (TS) Section 15.3.8, " Refueling," in order to provide more specific and precise requirements regarding the Contain-ment Purge and Vent System. Additionally, minor editorial changes to TS Tab 7es 15.7.3-2, 15.7.4-2, and 15.7.6-2 were requested.
2.0 EVALUATION i
The licensee requested the following items.
(a) Revise TS 15.3.8.7 to reflect more specific requirements.re5arding the Containment Purge and Vent System. The modified specification I
would require demonstration of the operability of the Containment i
Purge and Vent System "within four days prior to the start of and i
at least once per seven days during refueling operations."
(b) Add a new TS 15.3.8.8 which would introduce an exception to the j
operability requirement of TS 15.3.8.7.
It would allow refueling i
operations to continue with the Containment Purge and Vent System inoperable, provided the purge and vent containment penetrations are closed.
(c) Modify the wording of the existing TS 15.3.8.8, which would become new TS 15.3.8.9.
This TS would identify more concisely the conditions under which refueling operations would cease.
This is necessary due to the revision of TS 15.3.8.7 and TS 15.3.8.8 l
(d) Make minor editorial changes to TS Tables 15.7.3-2, 15.7.4-2, and 15.7.6-2.
The changes to these tables are identical in nature, establishing a system name which is consistent throughout the TS, i.e., " Containment Purge and Vent System."
l l
k 6
61 P
l I
b o
l g
The impetus behind the requested amendment is to provide specific and
~
precise requirements during refueling operations, particularly in regards to the Containment Purge and Vent System. :The requested changes are q
designed-to rectify any confusion ~ 1n this regard.
The requested revision to TS 15.3.8.7'and the~new TS 15.3.8.8 are based on the more specific re Specifications (STS)quirements of Section' 3/4.9.4 of the Standard Technical-for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors, NUREG-0452,-
1 Revision-4. The requested specification will require demonstration'of the 1
operability of.the Containment Purge and' Vent System "within four days prior tolthe. start of and at least once per seven days during refueling.
operations."
This change will constitute a more restrictive; interpretation of the specification. With these words, possible misinterpretation is removed without changing the intent of the original specification..,
q Additionally, the new TS 15.3.8.8 introduces an exception to the' operability.'
requirements of TS 15.3.8.7.
It allows refueling' operations to continue I
with the Containment Purge anc Vent System inoperable, provided the. perge i
and vent containment penetrations are closed. While this is a new specification una could be described as an operability exemption, it is not a relaxation of the specifications as they now exist. Since the intent of demonstrating i
operability of the isolation system is to prove that this active system will shut the purge and' vent containment penetration valves when needed, the new j
TS 15.3.8.8 permits refueling operations to continue with the valves already 1
in the safe, closed condition. This provision is consistent with the STS.-
.]
l The requested changes also modified the wording, but not.the intent, cf.the existing TS 15.3.8.8, which becomes the new TS 15.3.8.9.
This identifies more concisely the conditions under which refueling. operations will cease.
This is necessary due to the changes stated above..
Finally, in addition to the changes listed above, minor editorial changes to TS Tables 15.7.3-2, 15.7.4-2, and 15.7.6-2 are requested. The. changes to these tables are identical in nature, establishing a system name which" is consistent throughout the TS, i.e., " Containment Purge and Vent System."
This change constitutes an administrative change since:it is essentially.
i editorici in nature.
The staff has reviewed the aforementioned amendment request and concurs with the licensee that the need for specific and precise requirements regarding the Containment Purge and Vent System operation during refuel operations is necessary and will ccostitute a more restrictive requirement.
The staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments involve a change to a. requirement with respect to the instal-lationi or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or a change to a surveillance requirement. The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be'
i 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 these amendments involve no significant hazards 3
consideration and there has been no public consent on such finding. Accordingly,-
)
these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for. categorical exclusion set j
forthin10CFR51.22(c)(9). These amendments also involve changes-in record-keeping, repor'.ing 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 551.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR-
.)
51.22(b),noenvironmentalimpactstatementorenvironmentalassessmentneedbe l
prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
I
4.0 CONCLUSION
4 Thestaffhasconcluded,basedontheconsiderationsdiscussedabove,that(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of.the public will H
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 anendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
)
J Principal Contributor: Lawrence E. Kokajko Dated: June 9, 1989 I
I i
_-_--.-__-__L_:_______-
_