ML20211P315
| ML20211P315 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211P303 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9710200161 | |
| Download: ML20211P315 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ -
l 9 Ci!
'[
UNITED STATES j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
WASHINGTON, D.C. 30666-0001
\\,.....j PAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NVCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 178 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-29 AND AMENDMENT NO. 176 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-30 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY AND MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY OVAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-254 AND 50-265
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated May 1,1997, Commonwealth Edison Company-(Comed, the licensee) proposed several changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2.
Specifically, the proposed changes would revise the load to be equal to or greater than the largest single load and revise the frequency and voltage requirements following the guidance of Revision 3 to Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.9, " Selection, Design, and Qualification of Diesel-Generator Units Used as Standby (Onsite) Electric Power Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," for the emergency diesel generator (EDG) largest single load rejection test.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee proposed to delete Surveillance Requirement 4.9.A.8.b:
b.
Verify the diesel generator capability to reject its largest single emergency load (;t725 kW) while maintaining frequency 566.73 Hz and voltage at 4160 1 420 volts, and substitute the following:
b.
Verify the diesel generator rejects a load greater than or equal to its largest single emergency load, and:
1)
Following load rejection, the frequency is s 66.73 Hz.
2)
Within 3 seconds following load rejection, the voltage is 41601420 volts.
9710200161 971007 PDR ADOCK 05000254 P
3)
Within 4 seconds following load rejection, the frequency is 60 i 1.2 Hz.
A :omparison of the existing surveillance requirement with the new proposed requirement reveals that the specific load value "2725 kW" has been deleted.
This value was originally rounded up for the TS from the nameplate horsepower rating of the largest single emergency load. This change is consistent with current Standard Technical Specifications for BWR/4 plants (NVREG-1433, Revision 1). This is considered an editorial change and is, therefore, acceptable. Also the proposed surveillance requirement contains specific frequency and voltage limits for specified time periods calculated per the guidance contained in Section 1.4 of RG 1.9, Revision 3, with a format following NUREG-1433, Revision 1; it is, therefore, acceptable.
The licensee also proposed to change Bases Section 3/4.9.A. After the first paragraph on Page B 3/4.9-3, add the following new paragraph:
Surveillance Requirement 4.9.A.8.b demonstrates the diesel l
generator load response characteristics and capability to reject the largest single emergency load while maintaining a specified margin to the overspeed trip.
Each diesel generator is provided with an engine overspeed trip to prev.ent damage to the engine.
Recovery from the transient caused by the loss of a large load could cause diesel engine overspeed, which, if excessive, might result in a trip of the engine. The recovery response of the diesel generator will be demonstrated by verification of the steady-state voltage and frequency following the load rejection.
The largest single emergency load associated with each diesel generator is the residual heat removal service water (RHRSW) pump (900 horsepower nameplate). This Surveillance can be accomplished by one of two methods. One method is to simultaneously trip loads supplied by the diesel generator, which have a minimum combined load equal to or greater than the RHRSW pump. The other method is to trip the RHRSW pump.
I' This change adds an appropriate discussion of the largest single emergency load rejection test to the Bases. This change is editorial in nature, snd is, therefore, acceptable.
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.
O
- l.,
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
l The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a f acility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and change surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has deteroined 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 si occupational radiation exposure.gnificant increase in individual or cumulative The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendmints involve no significant hazards consider-ation, and there has been no public coment on such finding (62 FR 33121).
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(S).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental im.=ct statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
5.0 faEltli108 The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussea 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 ' nuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public,.
Principal Contributor: F. Burrows Date:
retober 7,1997 9
=
+3
=
- =A.
.--=e,%.,ww.www..-
,+
,m
,.._,u
_