ML20118B173
| ML20118B173 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1992 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20118B171 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9209300283 | |
| Download: ML20118B173 (2) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.f '
f> %
UNITED STATES 3
'1M i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- [g'.v$
f WASHINGTON. D.C 20656 j
SAFETY EVALUATION BY ThE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATFD TO AMENDMENT N0. 87 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-11 AND AMEN 0 MENT NQ. 71 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-1B COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY LASALLE COUNTY STATIQL UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET.NOS. 50-373 AND 50-374
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated June 17, 1992, Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO, the licensee) requested an amendmcN. to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-il and NPF-18 for LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed amendment would remove the technical specification (TS) table that lists components referenced in specification 3.8.3.2.
In addition, the ' *equirements have been modified such that all references to these tables I.
e been removed and to state requirements in general terms that include the components listed in the tables removed from the TS. Guidance on the proposed TS change was provided by Generic letter (GL) 91-08, dated May 1, 1991.
2.0 EVALUATION i
The licensee has proposed the removal of Table 3.8.3.2-1, " Primary Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices" that is referenced in TS 3/4.8.3.2.
With the removal of this table, the licensee has proposed to include the following statement for the LC0 under TS 3.8.3.2:
Primary and backup primary containment penetration conductor overcurrent protective devices associated with each primary containment medium and high voltage (6.9 kV, 4.15 kV, and 480 volt) electrical penetration circuit shall be OPERABLE.
The scope of these protective devices excludes those circuits for which credible fault currents would not exceed the electrical penetration design rating.
In addition, the licensee has proposed to revise TS 4.8.3.2 to remove the reference to Table 3.8.3.?-1.
The surveillance requirement has been revised to state the following:
Each of the primary containment penetration conductor overcurrent protective devices shall be demonstrated OPERABLE:
On the basis of its review of this matter, the sta'f finds that the proposed changes to the TS for LaSalle Units 1 and 2 are primarily administrative and 1
9209300283 920922 PDR ADOCK 05000373 p
PDR l
do not alter the requirements set forth in the existing TS.
Overall, these changes will allow licensee to make corrections and updates to the list of componu.ts for which these TS requirements apply, under the provisions that control changes to plant procedures are specified in the Administrative Controls Section of the TS.
Therefore, the staff finds that the proposed TS changes are acceptable.
i 3.0 STATE CONSbtTATION I:; accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL. CONSIDERATION The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of
+
a facility component lccated within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes sJrveillance requirements.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significt.nt increase in the amounts and no significant cnange in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative i
occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (57 FR 34581). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
i The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, i
that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the commor, defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
C. Phillips Dated:
September 22, 1992
.