ML20136B425

Application to Amend License NPF-36,consisting of License Change Application 2,increasing & Relocating Fire Detectors & Modifying Reactor Coolant Leakage Surveillance Requirement

ML20136B425
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	11/16/1985
From:	Leonard J LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20136B414	List: ML20136B425 ML20136B445 SNRC-1211, Forwards Application to Amend License NPF-36,consisting of License Change Application 2,increasing & Relocating Fire Detectors & Modifying Reactor Coolant Leakage Detection Sys Surveillance Requirement.Fee Paid
References
NUDOCS 8511200207
Download: ML20136B425 (5)

Text

{, .

Long Island Lighting Company Operating License NPF-36 Docket 50-322 License Change Application 2 The License Change Application requests modifications to Operating License NPF-36 for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station to increase and relocate plant fire detectors and to modify the reactor coolant leakage detection system surveillance requirement.

Long Island Lighting Company

')

By 4 -

Jo in D. Le'onard,_Jrf.

Vice President Nuhiear Operations Subscribed and sworn to before me this /d day of November 1985.

LINDA A. CRAITY

' 'I ab i : ns k ,

h*No 1 ExP'rn Mmh 30, Igg, Notary Public of Kew' York My Commission Expires: N7trl 00, /9PG fDA12$#ocI c U P

y . .,

4y l'. 0 : - LICENSE CHANGE APPLICATION 2 The followiEg'twofchanges to'the Facility Operating License NPF-36'are requested.-(Proposed replacement pages are

- provided as Attachment I. The text is_ circled to indicate-location of the changes. The circled references are for the convenience.of'the'NRC and will not be included when the replacement _pagesLare issued.)

2.0' ~ ! DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES 2.1 Containment Surveillance Revise footnote to' Technical Specification 4.4.3.1.C, page 3/4 4-9 from "*Not required if containment is closed and inerted." tx) *Not required if containment is closed."

2.2 . Fire Detectors

.1 Revise Technical Specification 3/4.3.7.9 to reflect 1

changes in the number and type of plant fire detectors. .

The modification in fire detectors is-in response to

. the findings of Inspection 84-46.

. 3.0 REASON-FOR CHANGES 3.1 Containment Surveillance The Technical Specification change clarifies the restrictions imposed for performing surveillance tests-on a reactor coolant.. leakage detection system, using primary containment air cooler condensate flow indication, while operating'at conditions 1, 2, and 3.

The surveillance tests of the system are not required

- when the containment is closed to personnel because the system is inaccessible. This: statement agrees with section 6.1 of Calibration and Functional Test Procedure SP 44.403.04 Rev. 2,- "DW Cooler Drain Flow

' Rate Calibration and Functional". .Furthermore, if the performance of the primary containment air ccoler drain flow indication does not meet the criteria for accepta-bility, ther the limiting condition for operations of Technical Specification. 3.4.3.1.C will apply.

3.2 Fire' Detectors-

- NRC Inspection Report 84-46-05 (A) required the re-l- working of-the fire detectors in all safety-related -

L areas to comply with NFPA Nos. 72D and 72E.  :

L i

-,- n re-- ,s-,, n,-.-,- -r, e--,, -r- , re-,- -

m-. , - - , - , - . _ - , - . - -re n ne-------,ven.-w-~. ~ n. ,. - . , . , . ,e- - - ,wm-- + , , --

c 4.0 SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS ANALYSIS 4.1 Containment Surveillance 01: Does the change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident?

A1: This change incorporates administrative changes to the technical specification and clarifies the containment conditions under which the functional and calibration tests are required to be performed on the drywell air coolers condensate flow indica-tion system. The change does not affect any parameters or plant conditions. Therefore, it does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

02: Does the change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

A2: This change does not affect any plant operating condition or parameter. Therefore, it does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

Q3: Does the change involve a significant reduction in margin of safety?

A3: The margin of safety is not reduced by this change. There is no significant hazard. The change merely clarified both administrative controls and limitations for performing certain instrument channel functional and calibration tests of the primary containment air cooler condensate flow indication system while the plant is in operating conditions 1, 2, and 3.

4.2 Fire Detectors Q1: Does the change involve a significant increase'in the probability or consequences of an accident?

A1: The addition and relocation of fire detectors in the Q.A. Category I or II fire detection and protection systems will not affect safety-related systems. The additional duct detectors in safety-related ventilation systems will be seismically mounted and will not affect the system's ability to perform its function as designed.

The addition and relocation of detectors in the Q.A.: Category I portion of the fire protection system will not affect the operations of the system. The change will enhance the system's ability to perform its intended function.

The fire detection equipment and its associated raceway will be seismically supported in safety-related areas of the plant. Therefore, no addi-tional increase in probability of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety has been created.

02: Does the change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

A2: This modification entails the installation of additional fire detectors to an existing system.

Since the function and design basis of the system is unchanged, the possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously has not been created. The duct detec- ,

tors mounted in safety-related ventilation systems will be seismically mounted.

03: Does the change involve a significant reduction in margin of safety?

A3: This modification will not reduce the capacity, method of operation, or design basis of 'any cate-gory I equipment for any postulated accidents as it improves the ability to detect a fire in any safety-related areas.

The conclusion is there is no significant hazard.

5.0 Timing of Change The revised Technical Specifications should be issued as soon as they are approved.

5.1 Containment Surveillance Since these are administrative changes, they will become effective upon issuance of the revised Technical Specifications.

5.2 Fire Detectors The coordination of the Technical Specifications change and the implementation of the physical mod-ifications are difficult due to the amount 'o f work involved. If the revised Technical Specification

- . . .-~ _ _ -_-_ _ - _. ._ - - _- _ ._ . _ . __ . _ .._. _ .

f- .

ls' i

- n.

s is. issued before completion of the work, LILCO ,

will declare any uninstalled detectors inoperable.

Fire watches will be established in accordance L. with the action statement.

F c

.a

~'

l.

I' f

I' I.

L i

a L

'-M vm w , -=--g- y . -.- -ae .m,+ y , - . ,99 ,..p.79, .wp_.,- -9 9., . , , ecg y ,

my_,,-_y yy7-,.p. -. pmq p m p - 9 -,-y_g wegygg,,.rq e,- w wq-w==rr