ML20059J540
| ML20059J540 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059J538 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9009200053 | |
| Download: ML20059J540 (2) | |
Text
- ,
.A
\\-
UNITED STATES -
2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
1 j
WAGHINGTON, D. C. 30005 i
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.126-TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-29 ~
AND AHENDMENT N0.122 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE-NO. DPR-30 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY LAND y
IOWA-ILLIN0IS GAS AND' ELECTRIC COMPANY
,i QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNITS 1 RAND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-254 AND 50-265
^
.1.0-INTRODUCTION 1
By' letter dsted July 16, 1990, Commonwealth Edison Com
. proposed a change to the Technical Specifications (TS)pany (the licensee) for Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed change reflects a High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI)- area fire protection modification ;
which replaces spot-type heat detectors with,a linear heat-detector.
2.0 EVALUATION.
1 The heat detectors that are currently-installed in the HPCI room are spot-type-heat detectors. As.a result of twoLinadvertent actuationsLof th i
HPCI sprinkler system, the licensee has removed the: systems from-service and initiated the required compensatory measures.
1 1 The licensee is proposing to replace the spot-type heat detectors with a' 1
linear heat detector. The licensee-believes:this change will reduce the-number of inadvertent actuations of the system. lFurthermore,- the111censee believes that:the modification wil1 ~ provide more coverage than the existing i
system since the heat sensitive material lw!11 also be'1 outed between the existing. heat detectors.
We have reviewed the licensee's' proposal. :We-conclude that the proposed-a modification is at least as good as, and is-probably better than, the existing 1
design and is, therefore, acceptable. The proposed TS changes: reflect this:
modification and.are also acceptable, i
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a -change to a requirement with respect to the instal-lation or use-of a facility component located within the restricted area as:
defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff-has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in:the 9009200053 900913 PDR ADOCK 05000254 s
P PDC I
_f
~
u
- gg, m
- s.,
[^( w
.2 types, of any effluents that say be' released offsite and that there is no
-significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation J
- exposure. The Commission has previously; issued a proposed finding that this-anendment involves no~ significant hazards consideration and there has been-na public comment on such finding.. Accordingly, this ar-ndment meets!the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth.n:10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
. Pursuant'to10CFR51.22(b)noenvironmentalimpactstatement:norenvironmental.
j assessment need be. prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
l l
4.0 CONCLUSION
.The staff has. concluded, based on the considsrations discussed above,'that:i
.(1):there-is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of: the.public
-will'not-be endangered by operation in the pro >csed manner, (2) such 1
= activities.will be conducted in compliance witt the Commission's regulations,-'
1 and:(3) the issuance of this amendment will;not be inimical to the! common defense and security nor to the health' and: safety of the public.
L
.i Principal Contributor: Leonard 01shan:
1 Dated:
September 13, 1990 l
i d
t j
i
\\
?
1 ic 1
'l I
1 2