ML20247J190
| ML20247J190 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247J180 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906010064 | |
| Download: ML20247J190 (2) | |
Text
_ - _ _ _ _.
a nag'o UNITED STATES 8
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
r, t
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20665
(.....
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.122 TO PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-20 I
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PALISADES PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-255
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 21, 1985, Consumers Power Company (licensee) proposes to amend Appendix A Technical Specifications (TSs) to Provisional Operating License No. DPR-20 for the Palisades Plant.
The proposed amendment would change the TSs relating to the alternate shutdown system and to the emergency lighting systems requirements.
This amendment addresses only the propored changes to the alternate shutdown system. The proposed changes relating to the emergency lighting systems are being denied at this time because it is our understanding that Consumers Power Company will soon commit to a schedule for including fire protection requirements in the FSAR.
This amendment revises the TSs to require specific alternate shutdown systerr equipment and instrumentation to be operable whenever the reactor coolant temperature is at or above 325 F and imposes periodic surveillance requirements to demonstrate operability of the system.
The changes add Specification 3.25, including Table 3.25.1 and Specification 4.20, including Table 4.20.1.
' 2.0 EVALUATION On May 26, 1983, the Commission issued a Safety Evaluation documenting our review of Consumers Power Company's proposed modifications and alternate capability for achieving safe shutdown in the event of fire in certain areas of the Palisades Plant.
Those proposed modifications were reviewed against the requirements of Sections III.G and III.L of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50. Our review concluded that the Palisades plant <ould be in compliance with Sections III.G and III.L upon implementation of the modifications.
Consumers Power Company has verified that the modifications were completed and the alternate shutdown system was declared operable by February 1, 1986.
l We have reviewed Consumers Power Company's November 21, 1985, application for amendment. We have determined that the proposed changes to add operability l
requirements for the altF native shutdown system, to specify the minimum i.
associated equipment required to be operable, and to specify surveillance requirements are consistent with our Safety Evaluation dated May 26, 1983.
. We have compared the list of instrumentation and equipment associated with the alternate shutdown system upon which we based our earlier evaluation to the l
8906010064 890519 i
PDR ADOCK 05000255 i
P PDC
4 l
- list of minimum equipment required to be operable (Table 3.25.1) as proposed in the application. Our review revealed no omissions in the proposed changes.
The proposed action required in the event the minimum equipment specified is not operable would be to either restore the equipment to operable status or to provide equivalent shutdown capability within 7 days; otherwise hot and cold l
shutdown would be required in the next 2 and 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, respectively.
I Furthermore, within 60 days the equipment would have to be restored to operable status even if equivalent protection is provided. We believe that the time specified to take compensatory or corrective actions is reasonable and commensurate to the risk of a fire in one of those fire areas for which the alternate shutdown system is required.
Based on the considerations discussed above, we conclude that the TS requirement for operability will provide additional assurance that a fire at the Palisades Plant will not prevent safe shutdown of the facility.
We have reviewed the proposed list of equipment (Table 4.20.1) that would be subject to periodic surveillance testo to demonstrate alternate shutdown system operability. Our review shows the list to be consistent with the minimum equipment required to be operable. We, therefore, conclude that the proposed surveillance requirements are adequate to demonstrate the required operability of the alternate shutdown system
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and r.hanges to the surveillance requirements. We have determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant ciange 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 been no public comment on such firiding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impaci statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with ta.a issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: May 19, 1989 Principal Contributor: Albert W. De Agazio
._____________________ _ ___ _ ____ ______ - __ -