ML20037B448
| ML20037B448 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden, Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20037B438 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009260730 | |
| Download: ML20037B448 (4) | |
Text
j[
UNITED STATES
).
't NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION M
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\.,...+/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING CHANGES TO ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION OF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS DRESDEN AND QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPANY DOCKET NOS. 50-10, 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 AND 50-265 Introduction By application dated December 6,1977, Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications for Dresden and Quad Cities Nuclear Power Stations.
By our letter dated August 12, 1977, we advised CECO of our intention to delete the Technical Specification requirements for a Respiratory Protection Program. Therefore, the Technical Specifications for Dresden and Quad Cities Stations would be modified to:
1.
delete the requirement for an Annual Operating Repert, while retaining the specific requirement for an Annual Report of Occupational Exposure, 2.
modify the submittal date for the Monthly Operating Report to the 15th instead of the 10th of the month following the calendar month covered by the report, and 3.
delete the Respiratory Protection.'rogram based on CECO compliance with 10 CFR 20.103, and our letter dated August-12, 1977.
Our review of the CECO application dated December 6,1977, resulted in minor modifications to CECO's proposals. The changes have been discussed with and agreed to by the CECO staff.
Discussion and Evaluation 1.
Annual and Monthly Operatino Reports Regulatory Guide 1.16, " Reporting of Operating Information '- Appendix A Technical Specifications", is the basis for reporting requirements found in Technical Specifications today.
When these Technical 80092eo 7 3 o
. Specifications were issued, we requested that licensees use the formats in the guide for the Licensee Event Report (LER) and Monthly Operating Report. After two years of experience with the existing reporting requirements, we reviewed the scope of information that licensees are required to-subnit in the LER, Annual Operating Report, Monthly ' Operating Report and Startup Report.
Based on our review of LER's we developed a modified format for the LER to make the document more useful for evaluation purposes.
By letter dated August 12, 1977, we informed CECO of the new LER format and requested that they use it.
From our review of the various licensee reports, we determined that much of the information found in the Annual Operating Report either is addressed in the LER's or Monthly Operating Reports, which are submitted in a more timely manner, or could be included in these reports with only a slight augmentation of the information already supplied.
Therefore, we concluded that the Annual Operating Report could be deleted as a Technical Specifi-cation requirenent if certain additional information were provided in the Monthly Operating Reports. As a result, we advised CECO by letter dated September 19, 1977, that a revised, improved format for the Monthly Operating Reports was available and requested that they use it.
In addition, CECO was informed that if they agreed to use the revised format they snould submit a change request to delete the requirement for an Annual Operating Report except that occupational exposure data must still be su bmitted.
By letter dated December 6,1977, CECO proposed deleting the Annual Operating Report, continuing the annual occupational exposure data report, and modifying the Monthly Operating Report. The report which tabulates occupational exposure on an annual basis is needed and has been retained in the CECO proposal.
The information concerning forced reductions in power and outages will be supplied in the revised Monthly Operating Reports and the narrative summary of operating experience will be provided on a monthly basis in the Monthly Operating Report rather than annually.
CECO has cccmitted to use of the revised Monthly Operating Report format as we requested. We agree that all needed information will be provided and deletion of the Annual Operating Report is acceptable.
We l
also believe that an additional five days would be needed for compilation and submittal of the more detailed Monthly Report.
We have modified the specifications accordingly. CECO staff agrees to this change.
i 4
=2 g.
3-2.
Respiratory protection Fr_ocram By letter dated August 12,-1977, we advised Ceco of an amendment to 10 CFR 20.103 published by the Commission on November 29,1976 to become effective on December 29, 1976.
One effect of this is that in order to receive credit for lim'iting thi inhalition of airb,orne radio-active material, respiratory protection equipment must be used as stipulated in Regulatory Guide'8.15. Another requirement of the amended' regulation is that licensees authorized to make allowance for use of respiratory protective equipment prior to December 29, 1976, must bring the use of their respiratory protective equipnent into conformance with Regulatory Guide 8.15 by December 29, 1977.
The respiratory protectife program described in Se: tion 6.2 of the Dresden and Quad Cities Technical Specifications differs from that stipulated in Regulatory Guide 8.15.
In ' view of the provisions of Section 6.2 of the Technical Specifications, which require conformance with 10 CFR 20, the fact that 10 CFR 20.103 no longer requires specific authorization to employ respiratory protective equipnent, and the revocation provisions of Technical Specification 6.2, we conclude that merely deleting those portions of Section 6.2 which relate to the respiratory protection program is appropriate.
The CECO staff is in agreement.
Accordingly, pursuant to 10 CFR 20.103(c) and (f), if CECO desires to receive credit for use of respiratory protective equipment at Dresden and Quad Cities after December 28, 1977, such use must be as stipulated in Regulatory Guide 8.15 rather than as was specified in deleted Technical Specification 6.2.
Based on the revocation provision of the specification on respiratory protection noted above and in the absence of prior written objection from CECO, we have deleted Specification 6.2 in its entirety from the Technical Specifications for the facilities.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change ir effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact
~
and pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4) thct an environmental impact. statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
i e
n n
.,---,---,-e,----,.
,m,-
--g n
-. Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the ' amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do not involva a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) 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.
Date:
March 1,1978 e
h
+
b.
S O
e a
4 b
f d
L i