ML20211E974
| ML20211E974 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 06/09/1986 |
| From: | Robey R COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Case E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RAR-86-15, NUDOCS 8606170078 | |
| Download: ML20211E974 (4) | |
Text
r 1
Commonwealth Edison Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station 22710 206 Avenue North Cordova, filinois 61242 Telephone 309/654-2241 RAR-86-15 June 9, 1986 Mr. Edson G. Case, Deputy Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Mr. Case:
Enclosed please find a listing of those changes, tests, and experiments completed during the month of May, 1986, for Quad-Cities Station Units 1 and 2, DPR-29 and DPR-30.
A summary of the safety evaluation is being reported in compliance with 10 CFR 50.59.
Thirth-nine copies are provided for your use.
Respectfully, COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION
-h.L I
R. A.
Robey Services Superintendent bb Enclosure cc J. Wojnarowski l
l
$$061700706$$o S4 ADOCK O PDR i
g R
A col ll (
Fu*
Modification M-4-1-85-68 Description This modification consisted of replacing the HPCI Steam Exhaust Isolation Check Valve with a like-for-like, or better design version..
The original Check Valve design.has proved inefficient. The replacement valve incorporates a different seating design and material which will provide for longer valve life than presently observed.
Evaluation The purpose of this change is to reduce the leakage of the HPCI Turbine exhaust containment isolation boundary to an acceptable limit.
This fact, along with-the fact that HPCI System operation will not be affected, maintains the margin of safety as defined in the Technical Specifications.
l'.
i SPECIAL TEST 2-56 On May 29, 1986, Special Test 2-56 was completed. This test performed the routine quarterly flow rate test utilizing all three-pump combinations with the minimum flow valves (M0 2-1001-18A & B) failed open, to see if the required flow rate of 14,500 gpm could be reached.
Safety Evaluation 1.
The probability of an occurrence or the consequence of an accident, or malfunction of equipment important to safety as previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report is not increased because this test is performed with normal system valve line-ups except for the minimum flow valves. This test does not involve any modification to the RHR pumps, piping, or valves. No adverse safety concerns are introduced.
2.
The possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report is not created because the design, function, and intent of the LPCI System is in no way changed; this is only a test to verify flow. The system remains operable and capable of injecting water into the vessel.
3.
The margin of safety, as defined in the basis for any Technical Specifi-cation, is not reduced because LPCI initiation will not be prohibited in the event it is needed. No setpoints are altered for initiation nor are any performance requirements changed.
-e SPECIAL TEST.1-91 On May 29, 1986, Special Test 1-91 was completed. This test performed the routine quarterly flow rate test utilizing all three-pump combinations
-with the minimum flow valves (M0 1-1001-18A & B) fa.', led open, to see if the required flow rate of 14,500 gpm could be reached.
Safety Evaluation 1.
The probability.of an occurrence or the consequence of an accident, or malfunction of equipment important to safety as previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report is not increased because this test is performed with normal system valve line-ups except for the minimum flow valves. This test does not involve any modification to the RHR pumps, piping, or valves. No adverse safety concerns are introduced.
2.
The possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report is not created because the design, function, and. intent of the LPCI System is in no way changed; this is only a test to verify. flow. The system remains operable and capable of injecting water into the vessel.
3.
The margin of safety, as defined in the basis for any Technical Specifi-cation, is not reduced because LPCI initiation will not be prohibited in the event it is needed. No setpoints are altered for initiation nor are any performance requirements changed.
.