ML20066C788
| ML20066C788 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20066C787 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8211100450 | |
| Download: ML20066C788 (3) | |
Text
.
pun \\
UNITED STATES E\\
Q NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
.t j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 82 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-29 AMENDMENT N0.76 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-30 COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPANY AND IOWA-ILLIN0IS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY QUAD CITIES STATION UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-254 AND 50-265 I.
2NTRODUCTION By letter dated April 13, 1981 and supplement dated December 2, 1981 Common-wealth Edison Company (licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifi-cations for Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 to: revise t_he primary containment integrated leak rate test requirements and schedules to conform with the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50; modify the associrted Limiting Condition for Operation to include the definitions of the nomenclature used and identify specific leakage limitations as re-quired by Appendix J; and modify tha surveillance requirements to provide direct references to Appendix J methodology and terminology.
II.
BACKGROUND Beginning in August 1975, the hnC staff requested licensees to review their containment leakage testing programs and the associated Technical Specifi-cations for compliance with the requirements of Appendix J. to 10 CFR Part
- 50. Recognizing at that time that there were already many operating plants and a number more in advanced stages of design or construction, we requested licensees to propose design modifications and Technical Specifications changes and, as necessary, request exemptions to attain conformance with the regulations. As part.of that response, the licensee requested a number of exemptions to the provisions of Appendix J.
Those requests are under review arid are not addressed in this Safety Evaluation.
III EVALUATION By letter dated April 13, 1981 and supplement dated December 2, 1981 the
, licensee proposed amending the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (TS) to modify the primary containment inte-grated leakage testing requirements and schedules to conform with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J requirements. The proposed changes also provided for direct references and use of Appendix J methodology and terminology.
8211100450 821102 PDR ADOCK 05000254 P
Specifically the proposed changes better define the Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO) for primary containment (PC) leakage rates by specifying:
- 1) an overall integrated leakage rate for the PC,
- 2) a combined leakage rate for all penetrations and valves, except main steam isolation valves (MSIV),
- 3) an acceptable leakage rate for any one MSIV, and
- 4) an acceptable leakage rate for any one air lock.
The proposed LCOs also describe actions to be taken when the m asured leakage rates are not.within specifications. Finally the p'roposed changes delete the prescriptive surveillance requirements for dem6nstrating con-tainment leakage rates, and replace these with the. criteria specified in Appendix J of 10 CFR 50, using the methods and provisions of ANSI N45.4 (1972).
In reviewing the licensee's proposed changes submitted April 13 and December 2, 1981 we find that they are consistent with the.BWR Standard Technical Specifications, NUREG-0123, Revision 3, which served as the basis in assessing the conformance of the licensee's proposed Technical Specification changes to Appendix J requirements. The Standard Technical Specifications, pages 3/4 6-2 through 3/4 6-4, pertaining to primary containment leakage testing re-quirements (and the associated Bases) are recognized by the staff as an ac-ceptable implementation of the applicable requirements of Appendix J.
There-fore, we conclude that the Technical Specification changes pertaining to.
containment integrated leakage testing meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, and are acceptable.
IV ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 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 si~gnificant 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 51.5(d)(4)'that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
V 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
1
. 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:
November 2,1982 Principal Contributor: P.oby Bevan e