ML20062B368
| ML20062B368 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 07/23/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062B361 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8208040461 | |
| Download: ML20062B368 (2) | |
Text
. ps,e oro
+
UNITED STATES
[
k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20566
%'..../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 45 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-70 AfiD AllENDMENT NO. 10 TO FACILITY OPERATIf1G LICENSE NO. DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY, PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPA.4Y, DEU4ARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPAl4Y, AND
~
ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATION STATION, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 Introduction By letters dated June 2,1977 and July 30, 1979 the staff advised Public Service Electric and Gas Company (the licensee) of our review of onsite emergercy power systems for all operating reactors. The purpose of this review was to assess the susceptibility of safety related electrical equipment to sustain degraded voltage conditions. Each licensee was requested to compare the design of emergency power systems at their l
plants with the staff positions. The licensee responded by letters dated August 1,1977, September 13, 1979, and March 3,1980.
The staff reviewed the licersee's responses and approved the design l
l modifications that were proposed to achieve an acceptable level of protection l
against degraded grid voltages. Our Safety Evaluation to this effect was j
transmitted to the licensee by letter dated January 19, 1981.
Subsequently, by letter of June 16, 1981, the licensee transmitted proposed changes to the Technical Specifications of Unit 1 and Unit 2 that implement l
the approved modifications. The proposed Technical Specifications are consistent with the approved undervoltage protection designs and acceptable.
I itll
?
h l
8208040461 820723 i
PDR ADOCK 05000272
~
P PDR
t,
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in 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 wnich is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR j51.5(d)(4), that an environnental impact statement or negative declaration and enviren-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
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 an accident previously evaluated, do not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, and do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendments do not involve 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 the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: July 23,1982 l
l l
1 I
t l