ML13303B154
| ML13303B154 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13303B153 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8911070113 | |
| Download: ML13303B154 (2) | |
Text
~0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA DOCKET NOS. 50-361 AND 50-362 SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 INTRODUCTION In the early 1980's, Southern California Edison Company, et al. (the licensee),
submitted to the Commission several revisions to the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, (SONGS 2 & 3) Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (00CM). These were reviewed and comments transmitted informally back to the licensee. Subsequent revisions were submitted to the Commission with the SONGS 2 & 3 monthly report in accordance with their Technical Specifications.
However, there has never been a formal letter of acceptance of a particular revision of the ODCM sent to the licensee, even though these units have been operating for a number of years.
On July 15, 1988, the licensee submitted a complete revision 19 to the SONGS 2
& 3 ODCM. This revision 19 has been reviewed in its entirety by the NRC's contractor EG&G Idaho, Inc. Their discussion and comments are contained in the attached Technical Evaluation Report, EGG-PHY-8282.
DISCUSSION A complete discussion is included in the attached Technical Evaluation Report (EGG-PHY-8282) prepared by EG&G Idaho, Inc.
CONCLUSION The staff agrees with the contractor's conclusions that the SONGS 2 & 3 ODCM revision 19 uses methods that are, in general, consistent with NRC guidelines, and is an acceptable interim reference.
However, the report lists a number of discrepancies and suggestions, some typographical in nature and some dealing with technical issues. While most deficiencies dre relatively minor, it is recommended that the 00CM be revised 89110701 89107
'DR ADOCK 050:00361 P
-PDC
-2 to require that the gaseous effluencts from Unit 1 be considered when gaseous setpoints and dose rates are calculated for Units 2 and 3.
Therefore, the licensee is required to address the points raised in the Conclusions section of the report within nine month in revision 21 to the ODCM.
Principal Contributor:
Lawrence E. Kokajko Dated: