ML19338C244
| ML19338C244 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 08/06/1980 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338C243 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8008140254 | |
| Download: ML19338C244 (2) | |
Text
.
O
((
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WASHING TON, D. C. 20555 s
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR RE SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 57 AND 52 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY AND IOWA-ILLIN0IS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-254 AND 50-265 Description of Proposed Action By letter dated February 2, 1978, Commonwealth Edison (licensee) requested changes to Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications, to the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos.1 and 2, licenses. The proposed change to Specification El.2.C would eliminate the 2 F per hour temperature change requirement during changes in the mode of condenser cooling.
Specification E1.2.C and the present temperature monitoring system were required prior to the construciton of the closed cycle cooling system.
Monitoring for Specification El.2.C is conducted with four sensors located 600 ft. downstream from the diffuser pipes used during once through cooling.
With construction of the closed spray-cooling system, a blowdown diffuser pipe was installed at a location within 100 feet of two of the downstream According to the licensee, tne proxinity of the new temperature sensors.
diffuser to these sensors results in occasional violation of the 2 F limit when the station changes from once-through coolirg to the spray canal or vice The licensee's proposed change would relax this limitation during the During all remaining versa.
change over period from one mode of cooling to the other.
periods of operation, the limitation shall apply.
Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action Our review of reports indicates that changes in mode of cooling occur about 34 times per year and require a period of 2-3 hours for each changeover.
This changing of the mode of condenser cooling was not considered in develop-ing the present specification.
In addition, the placement of the new blowdown diffuser near the sensors was not anticipated.
The 2 F limit 600 feet from the main diffuser was chosen to prevent " cold shock" to organisms residing in the thermal plume during once-through Use of the closed system diminishes the possibility of such cold cooling.
8008140 2 %
E l
~
I i,
shocks. Thus, the environmental impact resulting from this Technical Spec-ification change will be negligible since the licensee's annual reports have 1
not noted any problens from cold shock even during full once-through operation.
i Conclusion and Basis for Negative Declaration On the basis of the foregoing analysis, we conclude that there will be no r
environmental impact attributable to the proposed action other than has already been predicted and described in the Commission's FES for Quad Cities Station, Units 1 and 2.
On the basis and in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51.5(c), the Commission concludes that no environmental impact statement-for the proposed action need be prepared and a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.
Dated: ~ August 6,1980 l
[
5
/.
a i'
?
t I
i
,