ML17324B260
| ML17324B260 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17324B259 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703060266 | |
| Download: ML17324B260 (5) | |
Text
~pa RECp c<
P
~4 0
Cy
">>*+>>
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY TME OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.los TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-58 AND AMENDMENT NO.
87 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-74 INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY DONALD C.
COOK NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1
AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-315 AND 50-316 INTRODUCTION By license amendments numbers 93 and 79 issued February 24, 1986 to the Indiana and Michigan Electric Company for the Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 respectively, the NRC approved a provision to limit crane travel over the spent fuel pool until February 28, 1987.
The provision required that the auxiliary building crane main hoist be deenergized and the load blocks unloaded whenever the crane is moved over the spent fuel pool assemblies.
The February 28, 1987 expiration date was to allow sufficient time for the licensee to submit a heavy load analysis to support deletion of the provision or Technical Specification changes where appropriate.
The analysis was submitted on January 9,
1987.
On January 13, 1987, the licensee requested that the expiration date of the provision be deleted, and the remaining conditions of the provision be maintained pending staff's review of the load analysis and that upon NRC approval of the analysis, that the entire provision be deleted.
Both aspects of the January 13, 1987 request were covered in the January 28, 1987 Federal Register notice (52 FR 2883).
This licensing action concerns only the deletion of the February 28, 1987 expiration date.
EVALUATION Upon issuance of license amendments 93 and 79, it was recognized that the provision of limiting crane travel with the main hoist deenergized and the load block unloaded was acceptable for a period of time to permit the licensee to properly submit a load analysis.
The analysis would show that the provision could be removed in its entir ety or that the provision was proper and should be maintained.
The licensee has submitted the load analysis by their January 9,
1987 letter, but the staff has not had sufficient time to complete the review by the February 28, 1987 expiration date.
We have reviewed the safety evaluation supporting license amendments 93 and 79 and conclude that the basis for the provision is still acceptable and that the provision, without the expiration date, should be maintained until the staff can conclude the review of the January 9,
1987 load analysis.
Except for the deletion of the February 28, 1987 expiration date, the limiting provision on the Technical Specifications for crane travel should remain unchanged.
Therefore, we find the licensee's proposal to delete the expiration date acceptable.
87030bpzbb 870PP8 PDR ADOCK 05ppppy5 P
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of the facilities'omponents located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFR 20.
The staff has determined that these amendments involve 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 these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accord-ingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environ-mental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLUS ION 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
D. Wigginton Dated.
February 28, 1987
~
~
p d
February 28, 1987 AMENDMENT NO. 101TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR DONALD C.
COOK, UNIT 1 AEMEDMENT NO.
87TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR DONALD C.
COOK, UNIT 2 DISTRIBUTION: w/encl osures IltWHTtl,,I NRC PDR Local PDR PWR84 Reading M. Duncan
'. Wigginton B. J.
OGC - Bethesda J.
Partlow B. Grimes E. Jordan R. Diggs T. Barnhart (8)
W. Jones
'E. Butcher L. Harmon OPA LFMB
0 N
I I
Ai k