ML20138F288
| ML20138F288 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 05/01/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138F275 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9705050326 | |
| Download: ML20138F288 (2) | |
Text
_._
pM4 p* -
-4 UNITED STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565 0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 176 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-29 AND AMENDMENT NO. 172 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-30 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY 8!!D MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY OUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-254 AND 50-265
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In letter dated February 17, 1997, Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed, the licensee) requested a Technical Specification (TS) change for Qud Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2.
This amendment requested that the emergency diesel generator (EDG) load during the initial two hours of the 18 month 24-hour endurance run in Surveillance Requirement 4.9.A.8.h be changed from between 2625 kW and 2750 kW to 2730 kW and 2860 kW. This change was initially requested in a letter from Comed on June 25, 1996; however, it was not carried over to the new TS pages as submitted that were issued in Amendment Nos. 171 and 167 for Units 1 and 2, respectively, on June 28, 1996.
2.0 EVALUATION In letter dated June 25, 1996, Comed requested to change the required load range for the EDG surveillances. These changes were requested after a review by the licensee of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) resulted in the loadings being changed to clarify a discrepancy between the UFSAR and the actual plant configuration.
The safety evaluation enclosed with Amendment Nos. 171 and 167 for Units 1 and 2, respectively, dated June 28, 1996, addressed all loading changes except the change for Surveillance Requirement 4.9.A.8.h for the first 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of the endurance test.
The applicable TS page 3/4.9-7 was not updated in the new TS pages submitted in the June 25, 1996, letter and this error was carried over to the issued TS pages in the amendments.
However, the change was reflected in the markup of the old TS pages and discussed in the cover letter dated June 25, 1996.
The first 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of the performance of the 24-hour endurance run should reflect 110 percent of the design load.
Therefore, the loading requirements need to be changed from between 2625 kW and 2750 kW to 2730 kW and 2860 kW.
To assure consistency between the TS and the UFSAR requirements, this change is acceptable.
9705050326 970501 PDR ADOCK 05000254 P
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a surveillance requirement. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (62 FR 14460).
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for Cdtegorical 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 amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, 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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Robert M. Pulsifer I
Date: May 1, 1997