ML20137Z008
| ML20137Z008 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 10/01/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137Y991 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510080138 | |
| Download: ML20137Z008 (3) | |
Text
o UNITED STATES
~,,
['
p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 E
o SAFETY EVALUA110N AMENDMENT N0. 25 TO NPF-11 AND AMENDMENT N0. 13 TO NPF-18 LA SALLE COUNTY STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET h3. 50-373 Introduction By letter dated September 23, 1985, Commonwealth Edison Company (the licensee) recuested erergency changes to the La Salle, Units I and 2 Technical Specificaticri.
The proposed changes would revise the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes would revise the Technical Specifications to temporarily extend additional Specifications which were inadverter.tly cmitted from the original submittui catc6 July 15, 1985 and supplemented by letters dated August 9 and IE, 1965.
In the original submittal, the licensee requested a one-tine-cnly extension of a limited number of 18-trenth intcrval surveillance requirements which required a unit st utc'cvr fer La Salle, Unit 1 for first refuel cycle. This would u ta:d the 18-month surveillances 36 days beyond the maximum authorized 25 percent extension and wculd pernit the licensee to delay performing this testine until the refueling c.utagc, currently scheduled to corm:ence on or before October 27, 1985.
In conjunction with its efforts to prepare for the upcoming outage, the licensee determined that while all the surveillances which needec to be deferred were included in the originei subr:ittils two of the corresponding Technical Specificatien references were inadvertently cnitted. This was discovered on September 18, 1985 by the licensee and discussed in person with the staff on September 20, 1985. Although the license amendment associated with the originhl request was issued on September 20, 1985, it was cetermined at that time that the tyc additional changes in the instant request did not qualify as "administri-tive" changes and could not be included with the original amendment issued on September 20, 1985.
Evaluation In the original submittal, the request was made (and approved by Amendment 24 to La Salle, Unit 1) that Specification 4.3.3.2 pertaining to testing of thc low pressure coolant injection systen logic would be waived for 36 days. However, Specification 4.5.1.c was not included because it was inadvertly omitted. The surveillance requirement of Specification 4.3.3.2 is ccoducted along with Speci-fication 4.5.1.c for the low pressure coolant injection system function. The logic system functional test for the low pressure coolant injection system is performed by surveillence procedure LES-RH-01 which setisfies both Speci4 cations 4.3.3.2 and 4.5.1.c.
Therefore, delaying perfomance of Specification..u.1.c has no additicrcl significance for plant safety beyond that evaluated in Amendrrent 24.
8510000138 85 373 PDR ADOCK O PDH P
" Technical Specificatico 4.E.1.1.2.d requires testing at 16 nienth intervals to demcnstrate the ability of the diesel genereter system to supply sufficient emergthcy power to the unit to which it is assigred. The testing requirerrent of diesel generator 1A was deferred for Unit 1 by Amendment 24 to La Salle, Unit 1.
However, diesel generator 1A 18 month testing is also required by the Unit 2 Technical Specifications because diesel 1A is shared by the two units. The Unit 2 Specification 4.8.1.1.E.c was inadvertently omitted frcm the original sub-mittel reouesting a waiver of the 18 nonth surveillance. Therefore, since the diesel generator will be operable for Unit 1 cperation during the extension period granted, it should be operable for Unit 2 operation for the serre period since the Unit 2 surveillance reouirerreris are identical to those of Unit 1.
Therefore, since the san.e diesel generator is affected, no additional impact will occur.
{
, Emergency Circumstances The proposed changes fall into the category of er.ergency changes since La Salle, Unit 1 will have to be shutdewr cricss the f;RC takes the acticn to approve the i
propose changes. Without the proposed enendments the following will occur:
(1) Lc Salle, Unit I cannot continue operation past September 27, 1985, cue to surveillance requircr:cr.t 4.5.1.c for the low pressure ccchnt injection system, which recuircs testing during a unit shutcown; W Lc halle, Unit 1 will be terced tc shttccwn no later than Septer.ier Li, 1985, to perform the surveillance tests required by specification t.C...i.E.o f or the shared diesel ger. crater lA.
We have revicwed the facts concerning this request and conclude that the licensee has made a tinely submittal, that reactor shutdown will occur without NRC action and that althctch the licensee was remiss in that he filed en inconplete i
request in the initial submittal, that was inedvertent and not for the purpcst of avcidirg the normal notice requirerrents.
Final No Significant Hazaros Consiceration Determination The Corcission has provided certain examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve no significant hazards considerations. Based on the review of the licensee's submittal as described herein, the staff has made a final determination that the licensee's amenoment requests do not involve a significant hazards consideration since the operation of La Salle County Station, Units 1 and 2 with the requested changes would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because the operability of the equiptcr.t is still maintained by o.ther Technical Specifications and based on the type of surveillances extended, no significant increase in the prchability of equipment failure is postulated; (2) create the possibility cf a
I i* !
i l
new or diffcrent kind uf, accident from any accident previously evaluated 1
because these amendrents du not remove or add any equipment nor do they
~
eliminate tests rcquired at refueling outages; and (3) involve a significant reduction in the cargin of safety because the increased surveillance interval (30 days) does not significently increase the possibility that an undetected failure will occur in any of the related equipment covered by these Technical Specifications. Accordingly, the staff has made a final determination that 4
j these license amendments involve no significant hazards censideration.
Staff Consultation i
In accordance with the Consission's regulation, consultation was held with the State of Illinois by telepher.e on September 23, 1985. The State had no connents cn this action.
I Environmental Consideration l
These amendments extend the interval for some surveillance requirements on a one-time-only basis. We hate determined that the amendments involve no significant i
incresse in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be rcittsed offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individctl or cumulative occupctional' radiation exposure.
The Cennission has made a final deternination that these amendments irvcive no significant hazards considerations.
Accorcingly, these emencuents meet the eligibility criteria f cr categorical exclusion set fcrth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental irpact statement or environnental assessraent need be prepared in ccnncction with the issuance of this encr.dncht.
Conclusion The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
l (1) these license. amendments involve no significant hazards considerations; (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and sefety of the will not-be endangered by operation in the proposed manner; and (3) reblic such t
activities will be cer.ducteo in compliance with the Commission's regulations l
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.
l Dated: October 1, 1985 i
i l
1 i
DISTRIBUTION FOClet File, NRC'PDR' Local PDR PRC Systera NSIC LB#2 Reading EHylton ("J ABeurnial4)
TNovak JSaltzman, SAB GELD, Wocdhead Chiles HDEnton JRutberg ATealston WMiller, LFNB JPortlow BGrimes EJordan LHarmon TBarnhart$)
_z_
3.
This amendment is effective as of September 26, 1985.
FOR THE fiUCLEAR REGULATORY C0l41ISSION Walter R. Butler, Chiet Licensing Branch ho. 2 Division of Licensing Er. closure:
Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of Issuance:
October 1,1985
'h h h
LBt
/LA LB#2/DL/PM IN LB#2/DL/BC
/IT/[f-9F
~
~
on ABournia:1b CWoodread WRButler TM46(ak 094(p/85 09/$/85 09/1}/85 09gyB5 09/
85
l l 3.
This amendment is effective as of September 26, 1985.
FOR TiiE fiUCLEAR PEGULATORY C0f411SS10f4 Walter R. Butler, Chief Licensing Branch flo. 2 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Changes to the Technical Specifications Date of Issuance:
October 1,1985 b
)
h y
LBf#/DL/LA LB#2/DL/PM OELh LB#2/DL/BC
."/
Ehylton ABournia:lb Clloodhead WRBut er Tf,ovak 09/'jV/85 09/ N 85 09/9%CE 09/ 2. 85 09 85