ML20248A130
| ML20248A130 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 05/30/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248A120 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906080063 | |
| Download: ML20248A130 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _
'o UNITED STATES 87 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
l(
q$
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\*****/
f SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.123 TO PROVISIONAL OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-20 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY L
PALISADES PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-255
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 10, 1987, the Consumers Power Company.(the licensee)-
submitted proposed Technical. Specification (TS) changes intended to clarify and editorially correct. errors to the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) implemented by Amendment No. 85 to the Palisades Provisional Operating License.
The proposed changes were committed to by the licensee in Licensee Event Report 86-037, in which the licensee identified two discrepancies in the RETS concerning the Hi Range Noble Gas Monitor annunciation, and the continuous sampling of the service water effluent.
~The proposed TS changes are as follows:
a.
In Table 3.24-1, change Item 4 to read:
"4.
CONTINUOUS COMPOSITE SAMPLERS (Alarm / Trip Setpoint are not applicable) a.
Turbine Building Sumps Effluent Line (1) 30 b.
Service Water System Effluent (1) 30" b.
In Table 4.2.1, delete the sampling test for gas radioactivity by the air ejector gas monitor as listed in Item 7.
Also delete the
. corresponding footnote 5 from the table.
c.
In Table 4.2.1 delete Items 8, 9, and 10.
Also, delete the associated.
footnote 4 frem this table.
d.
.In Table 4.24-1, add Item 5 to read:
CHANNEL CHANNEL SOURCE CHANNEL FUNCTIONAL INSTRUMENT CHECK CHECK CALIBRATION TEST
- 5. SERVICE WATER D(4)
NA NA NA EFFLUENT COMPOSITE SAMPLER
$$600ADOh P
5:
L
]
e.
In Table 4.24-2, change Table Notation (2)a to read:
"a Instrument indicates measured levels above the alarm set point (not applicable for Item 3.d, Hi Range Noble Gas.)"
2.0 DISCUSSION The basis and explanation for the above listed TS changes provided by the licensee is as follows:
Change a. revises TS Table 3.24-1 to add a continuous service water system effluent sampler (continuous sampler) to the list of effluent monitoring instrr* nts in the table. The licensee indicated that addition of the
,itinuous sampler in TS Table 3.24-1 is necessary for consistency wit S Table 4.24-3 which implies that a composite sampler is availaole'in the plant.
(The continuous sampler was installed in the plant subsequent to the submittal of this proposed change; this was confirmed in a telephone conversation with the licensee on April 6, 1989).
Change b. eliminates a redundant requirement from TS Table 4.2.1 and removes the corresponding footnote 5.
The equivalent sample requirement is already provided by Item 2. TS Table 3.24-2.
Change c. deletes the sampling requirements provided by Items 8, 9, and 10 in TS Table 4.2.1 since these requirements are equivalent to those already specified in TS Table 4.24-3 for liquid waste batch releases, and in TS Table 4.24-5 for radioactive gas release and for stack gas particulate samples.
Change d. adds to TS Table 4.24-1 the requirement for periodic checks of the service water system effluent composite sampler (installed and operable July 20,1987) to determine its operating' status.
Change e. adds an exception for the Hi Range Noble Gas M'nitor for o
control room annunciation if the instrument indicates measured levels above the alarm set point. This monitor does not have this capability, nor was the monitor designed or expected to perform the annunciation function. The alarms provided by the Nomal Range Monitor are utilized to signal the need for emergency action.
Effluents are closely monitored once an alam is received so that any additional alams of higher than the rates monitored by the Normal Rwje Monitor would be unnecessary.
2.2 EVALUATION k'e have reviewed each of the TS changes proposed and the basis and explanation provided by the licensee for proposing these changes, and agree with the licerisee that the changes are essentially administrative in nature. The changes clarify the sampling requirements for service water discharge and correct errors in the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications implemented by License Amendment No. 85. We have also confirmed that the
o
" Hi Range Noble Gas Monitor was incorrectly noted in TS Table 4.24-2 as requiring the high alarm control room annunciator to be listed, in that the monitor was never intended to function as such; and agree that the Normal Range Monitor provides an alarm for adequately initiating emergency plan classification and action.
We accordingly conclude that the TS changes are acceptable as proposed.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
k 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, a change to the surveillance requirements. The staft 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 been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eli ibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(g).
9 Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need to 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, (2) such activities will he 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 30, 1989 Principal Contributor: John J. Stefano, NRR l
L